Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

chrmjenkins

macrumors 603
Oct 29, 2007
5,325
158
MD
1) You don't have to implement LTE. You can have slower phones. Just like you can create a phone that doesn't have rounded corners (as an example)

Yes, you could do that, but being able to function on a network is more essential to having a product than an issue of trade dress, and I'm sure the jury would see that. And it's still a standard.

2) depends on what the licensing agreements say

Yes, but I'm fairly confident they'll make this argument for this issue because they've already made it before based on broadcom chips they used.
 

archurban

macrumors 6502a
Aug 4, 2004
918
0
San Francisco, CA
Apple already had LTE in the New iPad before Samsung even touched it, so this couldn't be more pathetic. Shame on Samsung.

well, that was under permission from Samsung license. the time when new ipad was released, other companies including Samsung already used 4G LTE. so your claim is funny. please, shut up if you have no idea.
 

BigZ243

macrumors regular
Aug 25, 2008
130
112
gotta love lawyers...they sure find ways to keep themselves employed. And once again it will be the public who pays :mad:

To quote Back to the Future 2 "The justice system works swiftly in the future now that they've abolished all lawyers."

I was hoping something like this would be the actual future, but they did travel to 2015...There is still hope.
 

BC2009

macrumors 68020
Jul 1, 2009
2,237
1,393
Someone is having a little fit.

How is 3G different than 4G. Samesung needs to realized that when you are caught red-handed than you get in trouble.

Yes! Arguing that LTE-related patents are not standards essential because they are new is very amusing. LTE is a standard as well -- and once again we fall into the realm of patent exhaustion because Apple buys its LTE technology from Qualcomm who has a license to use the LTE-related patents.

Samesung/Samsuck is grasping at straws here. They should negotiate for a license to Apple patents and then move on.
 

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,779
41,982
USA
Perspective is a funny thing. One might argue the opposite. That Apple doesn't want anyone else to succeed in their space now.

I think what is most frustrating as an outsider watching all of this, is that it seems as if it is less about companies not wanting other companies to make money - it is that companies don't want APPLE making money. It almost seems as if all of these phone manufacturers are saying "Hey, they make computers, they have no business here in the phone world! We've been doing this for Years! What makes them think they can just step in and..." you fill in the blanks there.

It's completely ridiculous. Stop and think about this for a moment. If any of these were successful, do these companies think that just because they "put Apple out of the game" that consumers will just automatically go and buy their devices? Sure - they would be the only ones out there, but when you have to decide which is the better junk stock to buy... you get my drift.

This all harkens back to 2007 when both RIM and Nokia went onstage and BOTH said "We aren't worried about Apple's entrance into this field. They are not telecom people. We are." - Now look at them. It's almost like watching a bunch of children in a school yard. One group picking on another group. It just looks ridiculous. If these other companies would just spend the money and time (and that is really the biggy here - the time factor - cause it takes TIME to innovate) and actually make something lust-worthy, none of this would be going on. I hate to say it, but Asia, for the most part, is just one gigantic photocopier. That is why all of Sony's, Panasonic's, HTC's, Samsung's stuff looks almost identical. Someone comes up with a good idea and the rest of them just follow suit. What the real problem comes down to is an American company who just isn't going to stand for that. Now they are pissed and wanting to retaliate any way they can. Stop being LAZY! OWN YOUR PROBLEMS!!!


----------

Yes! Arguing that LTE-related patents are not standards essential because they are new is very amusing. LTE is a standard as well -- and once again we fall into the realm of patent exhaustion because Apple buys its LTE technology from Qualcomm who has a license to use the LTE-related patents.

Samesung/Samsuck is grasping at straws here. They should negotiate for a license to Apple patents and then move on.

Who says they haven't tried? And oh yes - using samesung/samsuck as a moniker cheapens your discussion point and only makes you look juvenile. Well done.
 

iEvolution

macrumors 65816
Jul 11, 2008
1,432
2
I think what is most frustrating as an outsider watching all of this, is that it seems as if it is less about companies not wanting other companies to make money - it is that companies don't want APPLE making money. It almost seems as if all of these phone manufacturers are saying "Hey, they make computers, they have no business here in the phone world! We've been doing this for Years! What makes them think they can just step in and..." you fill in the blanks there.

It's completely ridiculous. Stop and think about this for a moment. If any of these were successful, do these companies think that just because they "put Apple out of the game" that consumers will just automatically go and buy their devices? Sure - they would be the only ones out there, but when you have to decide which is the better junk stock to buy... you get my drift.

This all harkens back to 2007 when both RIM and Nokia went onstage and BOTH said "We aren't worried about Apple's entrance into this field. They are not telecom people. We are." - Now look at them. It's almost like watching a bunch of children in a school yard. One group picking on another group. It just looks ridiculous. If these other companies would just spend the money and time (and that is really the biggy here - the time factor - cause it takes TIME to innovate) and actually make something lust-worthy, none of this would be going on. I hate to say it, but Asia, for the most part, is just one gigantic photocopier. That is why all of Sony's, Panasonic's, HTC's, Samsung's stuff looks almost identical. Someone comes up with a good idea and the rest of them just follow suit. What the real problem comes down to is an American company who just isn't going to stand for that. Now they are pissed and wanting to retaliate any way they can. Stop being LAZY! OWN YOUR PROBLEMS!!!

Funny you say this because Im pretty sure Apple was the one that decided to start suing competition with silly patent violations (grids with rounded icons. . )
 

Dwalls90

macrumors 603
Feb 5, 2009
5,427
4,412
Apple doesn't design the wireless chips. The fault doesn't fall onto them, but the manufacturer of the LTE chips.

As already said, Samsung should go after the LTE CHIP manufacturer.

Samsung is just pissed off and seeking retribution, and has no valid case, with Apple at least. They should be going after the chip manufacturers and impose their issues or licensing fees with them.

They lost once, and they will get served again.
 

BC2009

macrumors 68020
Jul 1, 2009
2,237
1,393
1) You don't have to implement LTE. You can have slower phones. Just like you can create a phone that doesn't have rounded corners (as an example)

2) depends on what the licensing agreements say

True enough, but LTE does not become a standard for 4G without the patent holders agreeing to FRAND licensing terms. The patent holders win in this because they get a broad audience of folks to license their patents at fair and reasonable rates. If a competing standard to LTE wins out then those LTE patents become worthless because the carriers never implement LTE.

Besides all that, we are likely looking at yet another case of patent exhaustion where Apple buys the chip from Qualcomm and Qualcomm is fully licensed.

So we will see the same defense as in the past:

1) Standards-essential FRAND patents

2) Patent exhaustion via Qualcomm license

End result, Samsuck needs to license the patents from Apple that were just upheld and forge a license-but-do-not-clone agreement with Apple and move on.
 

the read

macrumors regular
Nov 25, 2009
198
1
Correct.

Apple's LTE phone is not even announced yet, while other phones have had LTE in them for over a year, and have not been targeted by Samsung.

Why wouldn't they when you look at how the world has evolved.

The world has gone mental with the legal nonsense. Make's you wish Aliens would land on earth, judge, punish and remove the lawyers and legal teams from society to leave us friendly people to co exsist together in harmony.

I'm starting to think Apple care more about winning legal battles than the people buying their crap.... Oh hang on, I'm convinced they do.

I bet they spend more money on their legal teams than fixing the poor hires screen implementation for my retina display and mountain lion... I'm convinced again.

Getting very tired of apple. Samsung for the win!
 

chrmjenkins

macrumors 603
Oct 29, 2007
5,325
158
MD
Who says they haven't tried? And oh yes - using samesung/samsuck as a moniker cheapens your discussion point and only makes you look juvenile. Well done.

Actually, he made a mature, well-reasoned argument in one paragraph and then expressed frustration in a separate paragraph conveying a separate idea and tone, using a mockery of their company name to make light of it.
 

Piggie

macrumors G3
Feb 23, 2010
9,117
4,016
Am American court, with an American Judge and an American Jury.

The odds of having a loved & successful popular American brand product banned from sale?

Hmmmmmm, somewhat slim I would say regardless of any facts.
 

Macboy Pro

macrumors 6502a
Feb 16, 2011
730
52
The lawsuits are getting out of hand obviously but it is hard to blame Samsung. The precedent has be set that you can sue and win a patent for a rectangular phone with rounded corners. Samsung has as much right to protect their patents as Apple did theirs.

This goes back to the arrogance of Apple. You can only be a greedy bully for so long.

Maybe they can offset their patent disputes and move forward with competing for the best devices!
 

paul4339

macrumors 65816
Sep 14, 2009
1,448
732
Depends what the arrangement between Samsung and Qualcomm was (& whether it made a distinction between 3G and 4G). (From my understanding...) participants in 4G/LTE standards setting granted irrevocable FRAND licenses.
 

BigZ243

macrumors regular
Aug 25, 2008
130
112
Why wouldn't they when you look at how the world has evolved.

The world has gone mental with the legal nonsense. Make's you wish Aliens would land on earth, judge, punish and remove the lawyers and legal teams from society to leave us friendly people to co exsist together in harmony.

I'm starting to think Apple care more about winning legal battles than the people buying their crap.... Oh hang on, I'm convinced they do.

I bet they spend more money on their legal teams than fixing the poor hires screen implementation for my retina display and mountain lion... I'm convinced again.

Getting very tired of apple. Samsung for the win!

Lol, I find it hard to believe you would spend that kind of money on a Retina MacBook Pro if you have that kind of disdain for Apple.
 

Nebulance

macrumors 6502
Mar 11, 2010
412
150
The bigger question is do other LTE phone manufacturers have existing licenses with Samsung? If not I think it's clear why Samsung is doing this.

Apple already had LTE in the New iPad before Samsung even touched it, so this couldn't be more pathetic. Shame on Samsung.

These. This doesn't make sense to me, since LTE is clearly on a great number of phones/tablets already. Granted, I'm not terribly familiar with standard essential issues.
 

TMay

macrumors 68000
Dec 24, 2001
1,520
1
Carson City, NV
Perspective is a funny thing. One might argue the opposite. That Apple doesn't want anyone else to succeed in their space now.

Funny, seem like there haven't and aren't going to be any IP issues with Apple associated with MS's reentry into the market.

Perhaps Apple just wants to compete on a level playing field, something that Samsung doesn't aspire to.
 

lilo777

macrumors 603
Nov 25, 2009
5,144
0
The bigger question is do other LTE phone manufacturers have existing licenses with Samsung? If not I think it's clear why Samsung is doing this.

Other phone manufacturers also have many LTE patents just like Samsung and in general companies in this business domain seemingly lived pretty piecefully until Apple decided to sue the hell out of them (while having way fewer patents than any of them).
 

iEvolution

macrumors 65816
Jul 11, 2008
1,432
2
Apple doesn't design the wireless chips. The fault doesn't fall onto them, but the manufacturer of the LTE chips.

As already said, Samsung should go after the LTE CHIP manufacturer.

Samsung is just pissed off and seeking retribution, and has no valid case, with Apple at least. They should be going after the chip manufacturers and impose their issues or licensing fees with them.

They lost once, and they will get served again.

No valid case? Its not ANY less valid than the Apple lawsuit they just won with Samsung except Samsung would be doing it in a timely manner whereas Apple waited what 5 yrs to sue? You know after the company profited so they can rack in more money.

I don't like Samsung, they make crappy plastic devices (Ive owned 3 Samsung phones and all three of them ended up with something wrong with them)and the company thinks their devices are worth the same as Apple's products.

The fact is if Apple can bring ridiculous lawsuits, so can Samsung.
 

Krevnik

macrumors 601
Sep 8, 2003
4,100
1,309
1) You don't have to implement LTE. You can have slower phones. Just like you can create a phone that doesn't have rounded corners (as an example)

The difference is that I don't need rounded corners to inter-operate. If a carrier demands that all new devices on their network support LTE, then you get locked out of that carrier. And there's information floating around that at least one carrier already does this.

The courts are still a fair place to sort out if LTE should be under FRAND or not. That LTE is supposed to be a standard, I'm curious why companies with patents in the standard are even being allowed to sue like this outside the standards body that should be controlling that standard. I wonder the same about the H.264 patents that are being used as a bludgeon against multiple companies now by Motorola too (Microsoft was included for simply playing back H.264 on the XBox, despite being a licensee of the MPEG-4 standards, which includes H.264).

2) depends on what the licensing agreements say

License agreements are superseded by US common-law (exhaustion doctrine, aka first-sale doctrine). The general rule of thumb is: Patent owner licenses a patent for a product. Product is sold to another entity. That other entity cannot be sued for using the product.

In this example, it could probably mean that as long as Samsung is licensing to Qualcomm the appropriate patents for their chips, then Qualcomm's customers cannot be sued for using those chips.

However, it does get sticky since it isn't just US law involved with multinational corporations. Samsung may try suing under a different jurisdiction that may not have a doctrine of first sale like the US does.
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,546
1,196
Funny you say this because Im pretty sure Apple was the one that decided to start suing competition with silly patent violations (grids with rounded icons. . )

Apple certainly didn’t start the current patent environment. In fact, last we heard, they GET sued more than they sue others. Some people might like to think Apple is the only one using the courts, but in reality, they’re asking Apple to be the only one who is not! (And Apple’s patent is not for grids with rounded icons. Misstating Apple’s exact patents is a good start on making them sound unreasonable though! And some probably are... just like some of the patents Apple is being attacked with. Apple can’t choose not to fight this fight.)
 

TMay

macrumors 68000
Dec 24, 2001
1,520
1
Carson City, NV
No valid case? Its not ANY less valid than the Apple lawsuit they just won with Samsung except Samsung would be doing it in a timely manner whereas Apple waited what 5 yrs to sue? You know after the company profited so they can rack in more money.

You are aware that Apple notified and negotiated with Samsung with regard to the IP infringement prior to the lawsuit as far back as 2010.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.