Apple / Samsung Court Ruling

[Ry]

You've got it backwards. Apple is in no danger. Google wants to negotiate to make sure none of its manufacturing partners have to pay any more billion dollar fines.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

It appears people here tend to dismiss the profits vs. market share discussion. Apple is losing market share in the smartphone space and suddenly they're "scared" and "afraid" of Android. Yet Apple remains a financially healthy company, raking in more revenue and profits than everyone else.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[ManBearPig618]

You've got it backwards. Apple is in no danger. Google wants to negotiate to make sure none of its manufacturing partners have to pay any more billion dollar fines.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Do you realize some of the pending patents that are about to be granted for Google? Like the drop-down notification center? Do you realize how severely that could cripple iOS 5/6 moving forward?

Google has a lot of weapons and ammo in its arsenal. Anyone who thinks the Google/Apple talks are simply Google trying to mitigate damages needs to think again.

 

[anon(41073)]

You've got it backwards. Apple is in no danger. Google wants to negotiate to make sure none of its manufacturing partners have to pay any more billion dollar fines.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

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

 

[Ry]

Do you realize some of the pending patents that are about to be granted for Google? Like the drop-down notification center? Do you realize how severely that could cripple iOS 5/6 moving forward?

Google has a lot of weapons and ammo in its arsenal. Anyone who thinks the Google/Apple talks are simply Google trying to mitigate damages needs to think again.

Historically, has which summarizes Google more in litigation: aggressor or defender?


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[Ry]

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

That articles says "plans to sue" over LTE, not that anything's been filed yet.


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[anon(41073)]

That articles says "plans to sue" over LTE, not that anything's been filed yet.


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

You get my point.

 

[Ry]

You get my point.

I get that it's an empty threat. I get that it's a rumor. Samsung hasn't done anything yet. Nothing has been filed.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[ManBearPig618]

Historically, has which summarizes Google more in litigation: aggressor or defender?


Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

And now that Apple has started to attack OEMs, you best believe Google is going to be willing to pursue an aggressive litigation strategy to rein in Apple. They didn't apply for patents on these features to make themselves feel better. They did it because they know iOS has borrowed a lot from stock Android in the past two years.

 

[ManBearPig618]

I get that it's an empty threat. I get that it's a rumor. Samsung hasn't done anything yet. Nothing has been filed.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

They can't file anything until the phone is actually released. The suit would be dismissed for lack of ripeness. It has nothing to do with it being an empty threat.

 

[Ry]

They can't file anything until the phone is actually released. The suit would be dismissed for lack of ripeness. It has nothing to do with it being an empty threat.

But Apple already released an iPad with LTE months ago. No reason for Samsung to wait, especially if they wanted to disrupt the launch of the next iPhone.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[ManBearPig618]

But Apple already released an iPad with LTE months ago. No reason for Samsung to wait, especially if they wanted to disrupt the launch of the next iPhone.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

Because legally, attacking iPhone is going to be a much bigger blow to Apple. Look at sales figures - in X v. Apple, X wants to go after the heart of Apple, which is their phone.

 

[pauldroidr2d2]

We should also keep in mind that Google and Apple are talking (finally). Let's hope the talks include ways of reaching agreements with each other outside of the courts.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm fed up with all the lawsuits.

Sent using my Verizon Galaxy Nexus

 

[mzanette]

Hey anyone want to talk religion? I think it'll bring the arguments down.

 

[Ry]

Because legally, attacking iPhone is going to be a much bigger blow to Apple. Look at sales figures - in X v. Apple, X wants to go after the heart of Apple, which is their phone.

Again, my point is that by not going after the LTE iPad, Samsung won't disrupt the launch of the next iPhone.

Not sure if simply having LTE means you're paying a license to Samsung when there are other players involved, like Qualcomm. If Apple sources from someone that has their own license or patent, Samsung won't really have a leg to stand on here.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[ManBearPig618]

Again, my point is that by not going after the LTE iPad, Samsung won't disrupt the launch of the next iPhone.

Not sure if simply having LTE means you're paying a license to Samsung when there are other players involved, like Qualcomm. If Apple sources from someone that has their own license or patent, Samsung won't really have a leg to stand on here.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

But that doesn't make any sense. Samsung made a strategic decision to not file suit over the iPad and instead wait for an LTE iPhone to drop. They didn't try to disrupt the LTE iPad, why why would that have any effect or bearing on an attempt to sue once the LTE iPhone comes out? And again, it's not necessarily an attempt to enjoin the sales, but rather to hit back for damages and PR.

 

[Ry]

But that doesn't make any sense. Samsung made a strategic decision to not file suit over the iPad and instead wait for an LTE iPhone to drop. They didn't try to disrupt the LTE iPad, why why would that have any effect or bearing on an attempt to sue once the LTE iPhone comes out? And again, it's not necessarily an attempt to enjoin the sales, but rather to hit back for damages and PR.

But again, SEP and FRAND. Samsung could make themselves look even worse if they're shown to try and overcharge for something that may be FRAND.

And for the record, the iPad with LTE uses a Broadcomm baseband and a Qualcomm 9600 modem for 3G and 4G. Do you know which essential LTE patents are owned by Samsung?

Logically, I would think using these Broadcomm and Qualcomm components for connectivity would keep Apple away from a lawsuit regarding cellular data.

If Samsung actually had a case against Apple on LTE, they should have already done something about it.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[ManBearPig618]

But again, SEP and FRAND. Samsung could make themselves look even worse if they're shown to try and overcharge for something that may be FRAND.

And for the record, the iPad with LTE uses a Broadcomm baseband and a Qualcomm 9600 modem for 3G and 4G. Do you know which essential LTE patents are owned by Samsung?

Logically, I would think using these Broadcomm and Qualcomm components for connectivity would keep Apple away from a lawsuit regarding cellular data.

If Samsung actually had a case against Apple on LTE, they should have already done something about it.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

Why? It's much more effective to wait for the bigger target.

 

[Ry]

Why? It's much more effective to wait for the bigger target.

It could be more effective to wait for the "bigger target" if there was a case.

Seems like you like to go around in circles.

If Samsung sues over LTE, it'll probably be six months to two years before anything comes of it.

Questions to ask -

- What patents relating to LTE does Samsung own?

- How is Apple infringing on those LTE-related patents now on the iPad?

- Apple sources the LTE iPad's hardware components for network and cellular components from Broadcomm and Qualcomm. Broadcomm and Qualcomm probably own patents on their stuff, right? Assume Apple uses the same components in the supposed next iPhone with LTE. Anyone they're selling those components to probably won't get sued- depending on implementation, Apple would probably be indemnified.


Sounds like this is all posturing by Samsung because they're butt hurt about losing big in the US case.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[ManBearPig618]

It could be more effective to wait for the "bigger target" if there was a case.

Seems like you like to go around in circles.

If Samsung sues over LTE, it'll probably be six months to two years before anything comes of it.

Questions to ask -

- What patents relating to LTE does Samsung own?

- How is Apple infringing on those LTE-related patents now on the iPad?

- Apple sources the LTE iPad's hardware components for network and cellular components from Broadcomm and Qualcomm. Broadcomm and Qualcomm probably own patents on their stuff, right? Assume Apple uses the same components in the supposed next iPhone with LTE. Anyone they're selling those components to probably won't get sued- depending on implementation, Apple would probably be indemnified.


Sounds like this is all posturing by Samsung because they're butt hurt about losing big in the US case.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

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.

 

[JHBThree]

Do you realize some of the pending patents that are about to be granted for Google? Like the drop-down notification center? Do you realize how severely that could cripple iOS 5/6 moving forward?

Google has a lot of weapons and ammo in its arsenal. Anyone who thinks the Google/Apple talks are simply Google trying to mitigate damages needs to think again.

Google has been denied the notification patent at least three times already due to issues with it, so no it is not about to be granted. (And apples implementation is likely different enough to avoid infringement)

If Google had any ammo they thought they could use against apple, they already would have. Fact is that the FTC and justice department told Google point blank it needed to be very careful with its patent litigation, or risk billions in fines and a related antitrust investigation over Motorola.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2