Apple / Samsung Court Ruling

[JHBThree]

I do not have it backwards Google files a lawsuit in the middle of the Samsung/Apple lawsuit. Samsung just filed another lawsuit if Apple uses LTE in the next iPhone.Samsung to sue Apple over LTE patents, partner with Microsoft to avoid Android lawsuits




Samsung to sue Apple over LTE patents, partner with Microsoft to avoid Android lawsuits

Samsung has not, and will not, file a lawsuit over LTE.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[JHBThree]

I'm not going in circles at all. You're just using faulty reasoning and extrapolating conclusions from Samsung's hesitation to litigate about the soundness of any possible legal claim they may bring.

"Samsung owns less than an eight (or about 12%) of the patents related to LTE, with Nokia, Qualcomm and Ericsson controlling around 43 percent. It?s not so much how many patents Samsung owns, than the quality of them, and one or two standards essential patents could easily be utilized by the company as leverage."

Tech patents are complex things. You don't just source/license patents from a company that happens to own some in the said category and call it a day.

Samsung will not file a lawsuit over LTE. First of all, any components apple buys from Qualcomm would already be licensed. Second, Samsung has already violated FRAND obligations related to apple and is under antitrust investigation in the EU and US because of it. Adding a high profile lawsuit over LTE would certainly accelerate those investigations to a level Samsung does not need. Third, LTE patents are SEPs and are encumbered by FRAND terms. Samsung has made previous offers that violated their commitments, and has been slapped in court because of it. Fourth, apple acquired quite a few high level LTE patents in the Nortel auction. Any action by Samsung would be met at with more counteraction from apple.

Learn about FRAND and samsungs history of violating it, and you'll understand why any threat of lawsuits is pure saber rattling.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Ry]

I'm not going in circles at all. You're just using faulty reasoning and extrapolating conclusions from Samsung's hesitation to litigate about the soundness of any possible legal claim they may bring.

"Samsung owns less than an eight (or about 12%) of the patents related to LTE, with Nokia, Qualcomm and Ericsson controlling around 43 percent. It?s not so much how many patents Samsung owns, than the quality of them, and one or two standards essential patents could easily be utilized by the company as leverage."

Tech patents are complex things. You don't just source/license patents from a company that happens to own some in the said category and call it a day.

Again, no one knows what the patents actually are. Samsung hasn't filed anything so know one knows how good their supposed patents are.

Please tell me what the actual patents are and how Apple is currently infringing on those patents on the LTE iPad.

Apple will likely be using tech from Qualcomm. Licensed tech.

Posturing.

Circles.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[RichardRight]

good grief, who left all of the Apple fanboys in here? As the original poster, let me point out that this is a Nexus 7 forum. That means all of this defense of Apple and praise for Apple is totally off topic. The topic is what a lawsuit may or may not mean for the nexus 7.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[seriyb]

I love this video
Steve Jobs: “We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas” - The Next Web
Not a God after all, heh?

Really sick of hearing how Apple is genius.
Well, they are genius all right with patenting everything remotely possible that they """invent""".

Now Apple wants Galaxy S3 and Note banned. Basically, they want to shut down Samsung phone division.

 

[ManBearPig618]

Again, no one knows what the patents actually are. Samsung hasn't filed anything so know one knows how good their supposed patents are.

Please tell me what the actual patents are and how Apple is currently infringing on those patents on the LTE iPad.

Apple will likely be using tech from Qualcomm. Licensed tech.

Posturing.

Circles.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

They own 12% of the world's LTE patents. That's a pretty significant piece of the pie. You are fundamentally mistaking how this process works - an LTE enabled phone doesn't just implicate one LTE patent - it probably implicates tens, if not hundreds. Samsung only has to demonstrate a likelihood that one of their patents was infringed for a TRO or prelim.

 

[Ry]

They own 12% of the world's LTE patents. That's a pretty significant piece of the pie. You are fundamentally mistaking how this process works - an LTE enabled phone doesn't just implicate one LTE patent - it probably implicates tens, if not hundreds. Samsung only has to demonstrate a likelihood that one of their patents was infringed for a TRO or prelim.

But if Apple is using tech from say Qualcomm, Qualcomm would be licensed to use and sell that tech.

Again, you don't know what the actual patents are.

Does every LTE phone require individual patent agreements with every single LTE patent holder or would buying an LTE modem from someone like Qualcomm or Ericsson, or Nortel include all the required licenses?



Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[Ry]

good grief, who left all of the Apple fanboys in here? As the original poster, let me point out that this is a Nexus 7 forum. That means all of this defense of Apple and praise for Apple is totally off topic. The topic is what a lawsuit may or may not mean for the nexus 7.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

LOL.


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[Sailor1962]

As I said earlier in this discussion Apple were in trouble in the 80's and made accusation against Microsoft for copying their icon driven system. At that time Apple were into deep and could not keep up with advances that other computer makers were making. So they went the litigation route to boost their R&D department. Microsoft bought shares in Apple to stop them going to the wall.

I feel Apple is again struggling to keep up with the advances that Android phones have. Hence delay in iPhone 5. So in an attempt to slow down the competition they rattling their cage and frightening the opposition away so they rule the roost again

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Android Central Forums

 

[Ry]

As I said earlier in this discussion Apple were in trouble in the 80's and made accusation against Microsoft for copying their icon driven system. At that time Apple were into deep and could not keep up with advances that other computer makers were making. So they went the litigation route to boost their R&D department. Microsoft bought shares in Apple to stop them going to the wall.

I feel Apple is again struggling to keep up with the advances that Android phones have. Hence delay in iPhone 5. So in an attempt to slow down the competition they rattling their cage and frightening the opposition away so they rule the roost again

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Android Central Forums

The iPhone has never been about the specs. It's been about the overall experience. Spec wars are for the Android fanboys.

And lol "delay in the iPhone 5"?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[ManBearPig618]

But if Apple is using tech from say Qualcomm, Qualcomm would be licensed to use and sell that tech.

Again, you don't know what the actual patents are.

Does every LTE phone require individual patent agreements with every single LTE patent holder or would buying an LTE modem from someone like Qualcomm or Ericsson, or Nortel include all the required licenses?



Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

Well, ideally for Apple, yes, any tech used from Qualcomm would be 'safe' patent-wise. But that isn't the way the real world, especially the world of TRO/prelims, works. We have no idea what products Samsung has 'passed' litigating on to wait for an LTE-enabled iPhone. Almost every report on issue indicates this has been Samsung's strategy.

So, no, you have absolutely no evidence that it's an 'empty threat' or simply posturing.

The iPhone has never been about the specs. It's been about the overall experience. Spec wars are for the Android fanboys.

And lol "delay in the iPhone 5"?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you don't actually own use a Bionic, or any Android phone for that matter, as your primary device. You seem eerily defensive of Apple for someone in an Android-focused forum.

And no, 'spec wars' are not for Android fanboys. It's simply that some of us have a problem with companies like Apple releasing old tech and premium+ prices.

And before you start some diatribe about the iOS "experience", I used an iPhone 4 for a little over a year, as well as several iPads. iOS is an app launcher and nothing more. It's great for people that don't want to be bothered with an actual OS, but for a lot of people, it's far too closed-off and ridiculously featureless.

 

[Ry]

Well, ideally for Apple, yes, any tech used from Qualcomm would be 'safe' patent-wise. But that isn't the way the real world, especially the world of TRO/prelims, works. We have no idea what products Samsung has 'passed' litigating on to wait for an LTE-enabled iPhone. Almost every report on issue indicates this has been Samsung's strategy.

So, no, you have absolutely no evidence that it's an 'empty threat' or simply posturing.

And you have no evidence that Apple is potentially infringing on anything related to LTE.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[Ry]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you don't actually own use a Bionic, or any Android phone for that matter, as your primary device. You seem eerily defensive of Apple for someone in an Android-focused forum.

And no, 'spec wars' are not for Android fanboys. It's simply that some of us have a problem with companies like Apple releasing old tech and premium+ prices.

And before you start some diatribe about the iOS "experience", I used an iPhone 4 for a little over a year, as well as several iPads. iOS is an app launcher and nothing more. It's great for people that don't want to be bothered with an actual OS, but for a lot of people, it's far too closed-off and ridiculously featureless.

Of course you're going to assume that.

http://forums.androidcentral.com/showthread.php?t=181203

I've never purchased an Apple device for myself. I now own one Apple product (a third generation iPod touch) only because a former employer gave it to me - which I'm considering trading in at Gamestop to get a Nexus 7. The only thing holding me back is the fact that I actually use a Motorola Lapdock with my DROID Bionic which I've upgraded to ICS via a leaked test build. Webtop 3.0 now turns my Lapdock into an ICS laptop.

Spec wars certainly aren't for fans of Apple. They don't care how fast their CPU is. They don't care how fast their GPU is. They don't care how many megapixels their camera is. As long as it works. And the simplicity of iOS- the very thing Android fans knock- is the beauty of iOS. It does what it needs to do in a simple way. It's not complicated. That's why I recommend iPhones and iPads to my parents. That's why my wife has an iPhone and iPad. That's why my 4 year old nephew has an iPod touch.

I'm not going to blindly support Samsung when I believe they were wrong. It was clear they went out of their way to mimic Apple especially in design and trade dress. HTC, Motorola- they make phones and tablets that look nothing like the iPhone and iPad. Samsung went too far with their copying and got dinged for it. I mean really Samsung, a yellow flower for the photo gallery and a CD like the iTunes icon for the music player? Those weren't necessary at all.

I read more than just the headlines. Apple doesn't have a patent on a rectangle with rounded corners.

These supposed LTE patents would likely be standards essential. If Samsung shows that they were trying to negotiate unfair terms with Apple, they'll look even worse. It'll open Samsung up to anti-trust investigations. Samsung probably doesn't want that.

Using SEPs to negotiate deals on non-essential software patents looks like a slippery slope that Samsung probably doesn't want to go through


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[JHBThree]

They own 12% of the world's LTE patents. That's a pretty significant piece of the pie. You are fundamentally mistaking how this process works - an LTE enabled phone doesn't just implicate one LTE patent - it probably implicates tens, if not hundreds. Samsung only has to demonstrate a likelihood that one of their patents was infringed for a TRO or prelim.

Heres the thing though. Any component that has a license for LTE would be licensed to use ALL of the related parents for the standard. Thats how standards and components work. Further, if Samsung tries to pull the same thing they did with the trial (holding back patents that were added at the last minute) they'll get slapped down as they just did.

Samsung will not get anything, based on their past litigation involving SEPs, and the fact that they're under antitrust investigation for violating frand agreements. The likelihood of Samsung filing any lawsuit, based on those investigations as well as apples components being covered by licenses from suppliers, is slim to none. Also, US courts have shown zero flexibility with granting any temporary injunctions for SEPs. European courts have as well. Samsung would be pissing in the wind if they tried.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[seriyb]

I'm not going to blindly support Samsung when I believe they were wrong. It was clear they went out of their way to mimic Apple especially in design and trade dress. HTC, Motorola- they make phones and tablets that look nothing like the iPhone and iPad. Samsung went too far with their copying and got dinged for it. I mean really Samsung, a yellow flower for the photo gallery and a CD like the iTunes icon for the music player? Those weren't necessary at all.

I read more than just the headlines. Apple doesn't have a patent on a rectangle with rounded corners.

Ok, I can kinda see why someone would agree with the latest Apple win and their request to ban Galaxy S2 (and the family). You say they look too much alike... ok.

So why go against Galaxy S3 and Note while not going against all other Android manufacturers? The patents Apple claims to have been "violated" have been "violated" by Motorola that you brought up and frankly by many others (swype to unlock is on every android).

'647 (Data detector)
'721 (Slide-to-unlock)
172 (Word completion)
'604 (Universal search)

I can tell you why. Because Apple is scared of Samsung. That's all it's about. This is not about seeking justice, it's about taming your competition.
Now please tell me this is not scummy.

I can see myself respect a company that is fighting hard (without discrimination) to defend its patents. But this is not even close.

Hopefully Samsung can "fix" this with minor SW changes to shut the F up Apple. Not even worth going to court over IMO. (Google already took care of the Universal Search it seems).

 

[dmmarck]

I'm not sure if they're scared or if because Samsung has (1) the most to lose, (2) the deepest pockets, and right now they are (3) the hardware face of Android.

 

[JHBThree]

Ok, I can kinda see why someone would agree with the latest Apple win and their request to ban Galaxy S2 (and the family). You say they look too much alike... ok.

So why go against Galaxy S3 and Note while not going against all other Android manufacturers? The patents Apple claims to have been "violated" have been "violated" by Motorola that you brought up and frankly by many others (swype to unlock is on every android).

'647 (Data detector)
'721 (Slide-to-unlock)
172 (Word completion)
'604 (Universal search)

I can tell you why. Because Apple is scared of Samsung. That's all it's about. This is not about seeking justice, it's about taming your competition.
Now please tell me this is not scummy.

I can see myself respect a company that is fighting hard (without discrimination) to defend its patents. But this is not even close.

Hopefully Samsung can "fix" this with minor SW changes to shut the F up Apple. Not even worth going to court over IMO. (Google already took care of the Universal Search it seems).

Apple is not scared of Samsung. Not in the slightest.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[mzanette]

Of course you're going to assume that.

http://forums.androidcentral.com/showthread.php?t=181203


I'm not going to blindly support Samsung when I believe they were wrong. It was clear they went out of their way to mimic Apple especially in design and trade dress. HTC, Motorola- they make phones and tablets that look nothing like the iPhone and iPad. Samsung went too far with their copying and got dinged for it. I mean really Samsung, a yellow flower for the photo gallery and a CD like the iTunes icon for the music player? Those weren't necessary at all.


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

So why is apple suing HTC?

 

[mzanette]

Can someone explain to me how Apple was able to patent "universal search"? Wouldn't Google's desktop search from 2004 constitute prior art? I'm not trying to knock Apple I'm just curious how this can be legal? Desktop search by google is essentially the same thing.

 

[Ry]

So why is apple suing HTC?

Apple won a case against HTC. IIRC, it was over a contextual menu patent. Nothing to do with trade-dress.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums