Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:10 PM   #1
SomeDudeAsking
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Samsung Sues Apple for Copying Android Notifications

Samsung Sues Apple in Korea over iOS Notifications Feature

Quote:
According to BrightWire, a business-to-business resource for portfolio managers, the Korean online news site iNews24 is reported today that "Samsung Electronics has brought a lawsuit against Apple in a court in South Korea over its 'Notification Center' patent infringement." No other details were made available at this time.

The delay in launching the lawsuit may have been due to Google's patent pending notification patents not being officially granted. However, that changed last month when one of their notification patents was indeed granted under the title "Priority inbox notifications and synchronization for mobile-messaging application." This may have been enough for Samsung to get the lawsuit rolling.

One of Google's key patents on this matter that was filed under the names of Google engineers titled "Notification of Mobile Device Events," is still pending.
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patentl...s-feature.html

It's payback time for all the bully lawsuits you made against Android manufacturers, Apple. Your bad karma is coming back to bite you. I hope Samsung and Google will bring this lawsuit worldwide and force Apple to use alert boxes again for all iOS notifications.
SomeDudeAsking is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:12 PM   #2
Yujenisis
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2002
Send a message via AIM to Yujenisis
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeDudeAsking View Post
Samsung Sues Apple in Korea over iOS Notifications Feature



http://www.patentlyapple.com/patentl...s-feature.html

It's payback time for all the bully lawsuits you made against Android manufacturers, Apple. Your bad karma is coming back to bite you. I hope Samsung and Google will bring this lawsuit worldwide and force Apple to use alert boxes again for all iOS notifications.
What is the goal of this proxy war via Samsung? If these are Google patents, why isn't Google suing Apple?

I wonder what they're playing at...
Yujenisis is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:26 PM   #3
SomeDudeAsking
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yujenisis View Post
What is the goal of this proxy war via Samsung? If these are Google patents, why isn't Google suing Apple?

I wonder what they're playing at...
The goal is revenge and it's Korea so that's probably why Samsung is doing the suing for Google there.
SomeDudeAsking is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:27 PM   #4
Bahroo
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
How are they suing Apple if thats not even their technology...its Google's technology
Bahroo is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:30 PM   #5
SomeDudeAsking
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahroo View Post
How are they suing Apple if thats not even their technology...its Google's technology
It's probably something to doing with being part of the Android Alliance.
SomeDudeAsking is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:31 PM   #6
Yujenisis
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2002
Send a message via AIM to Yujenisis
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeDudeAsking View Post
The goal is revenge and it's Korea so that's probably why Samsung is doing the suing for Google there.
Ah, so you suspect they may be attempting to leverage their favored status (or brazen corruption depending on whom you speak to), that Samsung clearly enjoys in their home country.

Say what you will of Apple's lawsuits, but it looks like Samsung/Google are playing Apple's game - only dirtier...between this and the abuse of FRAND patents they are certainly not making themselves out to be 'the good guys'.
Yujenisis is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:33 PM   #7
blackhand1001
macrumors 68030
 
blackhand1001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yujenisis View Post
Ah, so you suspect they may be attempting to leverage their favored status (or brazen corruption depending on whom you speak to), that Samsung clearly enjoys in their home country.

Say what you will of Apple's lawsuits, but it looks like Samsung/Google are playing Apple's game - only dirtier...between this and the abuse of FRAND patents they are certainly not making themselves out to be 'the good guys'.
How is it dirtier, atleast google notification patent actually reflects something they actually invented and isn't mega broad like apples patents. Apple is the one that went on the offensive. All of the lawsuits filed by android manufacturers against them have been to get leverage on Apple to make them back down and settle with reasonable terms and not outrageous ones like 30 dollars per device. In fact most of apples key patents are now being invalidated.
__________________
Macbook 2008
HP Dv7t - 2.53 ghz, 9600m GT, WSXGA+, 120gb ssd, 250 gb 7200rpm
Core i7 3770k, 8gb ram, 2x 120gb sdd raid0, 500gb hdd, GTX 460
Moto X Dev Edition (VZW) Nexus 7
blackhand1001 is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:33 PM   #8
SomeDudeAsking
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yujenisis View Post
Ah, so you suspect they may be attempting to leverage their favored status (or brazen corruption depending on whom you speak to), that Samsung clearly enjoys in their home country.

Say what you will of Apple's lawsuits, but it looks like Samsung/Google are playing Apple's game - only dirtier...between this and the abuse of FRAND patents they are certainly not making themselves out to be 'the good guys'.
Dirtier than Apple's rounded corners? I don't think so.
SomeDudeAsking is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:42 PM   #9
Brazuca
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Ha. The most corrupt company in tech files a lawsuit in the country it owns, with judges it owns, using a patent it doesn't own...

Justice!!
__________________
Brazuca is offline   8 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:43 PM   #10
dotme
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Iowa
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeDudeAsking View Post
It's payback time for all the bully lawsuits you made against Android manufacturers, Apple.
A lawsuit to defent intellectual property isn't bullying. It's protecting R&D investments. It's logical, not emotional.
dotme is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:48 PM   #11
irDigital0l
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Surely Apple could make notification center...because it sucks.
irDigital0l is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 01:53 PM   #12
SomeDudeAsking
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazuca View Post
Ha. The most corrupt company in tech files a lawsuit in the country it owns, with judges it owns, using a patent it doesn't own...

Justice!!
Which means we may actually get swift justice with competent judges unlike what happens for Apple lawsuits in the USA with frivolous invalidated patents.
SomeDudeAsking is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 02:33 PM   #13
Yujenisis
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2002
Send a message via AIM to Yujenisis
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeDudeAsking View Post
Dirtier than Apple's rounded corners? I don't think so.
I'm not going to give this argument any time after this, as clearly you are here to troll. But for the purposes of those interested in this topic I'll bite.

Apple's patent claims against Samsung, Motorola, et al are their own inventions and are legally granted patents.

Apple is completely within their rights, legally and morally, to use the legal system to redress their complaints of illegal use patents. Any "dirtiness" you perceive, is because of Apple's refusal to license, and instead force their competition to find alternatives. If you have issue with anything more than this your problem is with the broken patent system that says everything Apple is doing is fine.

You anti-Apple folks should really have issue with U.S Patent law, and specifically the USPTO itself. Understandably, following Apple's legal aggression there is a lot of scrutiny within the USPTO to review Apple's existing patents. Even as someone who likes Apple, I think this is a good thing, as I don't think most patents are given due diligence to investigate "prior art" or "obviousness". We can expect more than a few of Apple's patents will be declared invalid and this is probably a good thing.

Now why is Google's side being more "dirty"? Well, I'm guessing your world view won't accept facts in this area because it's complex and goes against your belief that Apple is somehow the villain (Hint: the villain is the broken pay-to-play patent system):

Apple's patents are all mushy "look and feel" and "experiential", both of which can easily be designed around by competitors even if the patents themselves are questionable (again the problem is with the patent system that granted the damn patents in the first place).

FRAND patents aren't like "normal" patents that Apple is using. Their enforcement is strictly controlled because they are essential to standards-based technology. Samsung, Motorola, etc offered their patents to the entire industry in good faith in order to make them standards-essential patents. In return for accepting them as standards, the competition asked that FRAND patents be offered in a "fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory" fashion. Everyone agreed and the industry accepted their technology, standardized it, and licensed it in good faith. This is how all of our crap works together and is fundamental and essential part of innovation.

What you have now, is a renegade company like Samsung, desperate for anything against Apple, trying and failing to use their FRAND patents against Apple in a discriminatory way. So far they are being slammed down every time, and even being investigated by the U.S and EU, because to allow Samsung to proceed with FRAND cases against Apple, threatens the whole industry and has a chilling effect on innovation on a fundamental level that Apple's touchy-feelie patents (questionable though they are) cannot touch.

Apple's patents can always be declared invalid, and if not, competition can design around them. On the other hand, if Samsung succeeds in utilizing their FRAND patents against Apple it threatens the legal basis for companies to share their intellectual property in a manner fundamental to the advancement of technology.

I'm an abashed obsessive reader of http://www.fosspatents.com which is utterly fantastic if you find the broken patent system as interesting as I do.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackhand1001 View Post
How is it dirtier, atleast google notification patent actually reflects something they actually invented and isn't mega broad like apples patents. Apple is the one that went on the offensive. All of the lawsuits filed by android manufacturers against them have been to get leverage on Apple to make them back down and settle with reasonable terms and not outrageous ones like 30 dollars per device. In fact most of apples key patents are now being invalidated.
Tell me, is "mega broad" a legal term since you are apparently such an expert on Apple's patent portfolio?

Apple has plenty of famously ridiculous patents, but even more that are incredibly specific.

Last edited by Yujenisis; Dec 21, 2012 at 02:37 PM. Reason: Deleted unnecessary supporting paragraphs.
Yujenisis is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:03 PM   #14
SomeDudeAsking
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Apple stealing the Android notification system has nothing to do with FRAND patents. The Android notification system is not a FRAND patent. Apple can go back to using popup alerts that take over your whole screen.

And you've warped the meaning of FRAND. FRAND does not mean that you can just willy nilly use someone else's FRAND patent. You have to negotiate and license it just like any other patent. Apple is using all these FRAND patents from Samsung and Motorola without even having a license or evening paying anything. Apple is stealing. It is in Samsung's every right to seek an injunction against Apple for refusing to pay.
SomeDudeAsking is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:10 PM   #15
cyks
macrumors 68020
 
cyks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Westchester County, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeDudeAsking View Post
And you've warped the meaning of FRAND. FRAND does not mean that you can just willy nilly use someone else's FRAND patent. You have to negotiate and license it just like any other patent. Apple is using all these FRAND patents from Samsung and Motorola without even having a license or evening paying anything. Apple is stealing. It is in Samsung's every right to seek an injunction against Apple for refusing to pay.
In each case brought against them, Apple has stated that they're willing to pay the same licensing fees that everyone else pays, but, instead, Samsung has either denied licensing altogether or requested absurdly high fees...completely against everything that FRAND is.
cyks is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:15 PM   #16
zbarvian
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
They had this coming. They hired the dude who came up with the brilliant WebOS notifications and the best they could give us was a crappy Android rip-off.
zbarvian is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:27 PM   #17
SomeDudeAsking
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyks View Post
In each case brought against them, Apple has stated that they're willing to pay the same licensing fees that everyone else pays, but, instead, Samsung has either denied licensing altogether or requested absurdly high fees...completely against everything that FRAND is.
Absurdly high fees like the $30+ Apple wants for every Samsung phone for just a few measly patents that are being invalidated? FRAND doesn't mean you pay the exact same amount everyone pays. You pay a percentage that has to be negotiated and Apple plainly stated in it's court case that it refuses to pay anything more than $1 and the judge told Apple to get lost.
SomeDudeAsking is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:42 PM   #18
cyks
macrumors 68020
 
cyks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Westchester County, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeDudeAsking View Post
Absurdly high fees like the $30+ Apple wants for every Samsung phone for just a few measly patents that are being invalidated? FRAND doesn't mean you pay the exact same amount everyone pays. You pay a percentage that has to be negotiated and Apple plainly stated in it's court case that it refuses to pay anything more than $1 and the judge told Apple to get lost.
Apple's patents aren't FRAND so Apple has the right to charge whatever they see fit. If a company doesn't want to, they are free to find their own solution to the problem.

Yes, different companies can pay different amounts under FRAND due to quantities or other licensing deals, but, due to the 'nondiscriminatory' part, a company can not charge it's competitors more than it would charge it's allies in a similar situation.
cyks is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 03:44 PM   #19
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
For anyone that cares, the primary claim in this patent is about displaying notifications for "important" messages and not displaying notifications for other messages. They are apparently going after Apple's VIP feature in the Mail app.

Of course, I've been doing the same thing for a decade or so. Not sure what's original here.
BaldiMac is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2012, 04:55 PM   #20
BlueParadox
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yujenisis View Post
I'm not going to give this argument any time after this, as clearly you are here to troll. But for the purposes of those interested in this topic I'll bite.

Apple's patent claims against Samsung, Motorola, et al are their own inventions and are legally granted patents.

Apple is completely within their rights, legally and morally, to use the legal system to redress their complaints of illegal use patents. Any "dirtiness" you perceive, is because of Apple's refusal to license, and instead force their competition to find alternatives. If you have issue with anything more than this your problem is with the broken patent system that says everything Apple is doing is fine.

You anti-Apple folks should really have issue with U.S Patent law, and specifically the USPTO itself. Understandably, following Apple's legal aggression there is a lot of scrutiny within the USPTO to review Apple's existing patents. Even as someone who likes Apple, I think this is a good thing, as I don't think most patents are given due diligence to investigate "prior art" or "obviousness". We can expect more than a few of Apple's patents will be declared invalid and this is probably a good thing.

Now why is Google's side being more "dirty"? Well, I'm guessing your world view won't accept facts in this area because it's complex and goes against your belief that Apple is somehow the villain (Hint: the villain is the broken pay-to-play patent system):

Apple's patents are all mushy "look and feel" and "experiential", both of which can easily be designed around by competitors even if the patents themselves are questionable (again the problem is with the patent system that granted the damn patents in the first place).

FRAND patents aren't like "normal" patents that Apple is using. Their enforcement is strictly controlled because they are essential to standards-based technology. Samsung, Motorola, etc offered their patents to the entire industry in good faith in order to make them standards-essential patents. In return for accepting them as standards, the competition asked that FRAND patents be offered in a "fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory" fashion. Everyone agreed and the industry accepted their technology, standardized it, and licensed it in good faith. This is how all of our crap works together and is fundamental and essential part of innovation.

What you have now, is a renegade company like Samsung, desperate for anything against Apple, trying and failing to use their FRAND patents against Apple in a discriminatory way. So far they are being slammed down every time, and even being investigated by the U.S and EU, because to allow Samsung to proceed with FRAND cases against Apple, threatens the whole industry and has a chilling effect on innovation on a fundamental level that Apple's touchy-feelie patents (questionable though they are) cannot touch.

Apple's patents can always be declared invalid, and if not, competition can design around them. On the other hand, if Samsung succeeds in utilizing their FRAND patents against Apple it threatens the legal basis for companies to share their intellectual property in a manner fundamental to the advancement of technology.

I'm an abashed obsessive reader of http://www.fosspatents.com which is utterly fantastic if you find the broken patent system as interesting as I do.

----------



Tell me, is "mega broad" a legal term since you are apparently such an expert on Apple's patent portfolio?

Apple has plenty of famously ridiculous patents, but even more that are incredibly specific.

Well said, Yujenisis. And completely agree with you: this SomeDudAsking is simply trolling, and clearly has no idea what they're talking about. Trolls gotta troll!

Last edited by BlueParadox; Dec 21, 2012 at 06:51 PM.
BlueParadox is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 10:23 PM   #21
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyks View Post
In each case brought against them, Apple has stated that they're willing to pay the same licensing fees that everyone else pays, but, instead, Samsung has either denied licensing altogether or requested absurdly high fees...completely against everything that FRAND is.
Actually, Apple never stated that they want to pay what everyone else pays, quite the contrary. They tried exhaustion through deals with 3rd party chip manufacturers and they even tried to ask a judge to set a tarif, but no more than 1$ per device. This got their case swiftly thrown out of court if you remember (and yes, this was in the us0.

They also tried to argue that royalties should be a percentage on a per-part basis and not per device (as other players pay) and have refused cross-licensing which other players offer.

Quite the contrary, Apple has done everything but agree to pay the same thing other players do.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyks View Post
Apple's patents aren't FRAND so Apple has the right to charge whatever they see fit. If a company doesn't want to, they are free to find their own solution to the problem.

Yes, different companies can pay different amounts under FRAND due to quantities or other licensing deals, but, due to the 'nondiscriminatory' part, a company can not charge it's competitors more than it would charge it's allies in a similar situation.
Non discriminatory only means that you can't refuse licensing, not that you can't charge more. That would be the "Fair and reasonable" part.

The problem is Apple is fighting the FRAND licensing all together, trying to argue exhaustion through the acquisition of the parts (basically, trying to ride out Qualcomm's or Broadcom's license rather than get one of their own).
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 11:18 PM   #22
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
They also tried to argue that royalties should be a percentage on a per-part basis and not per device (as other players pay)
This seems reasonable to me. If Apple has a more expensive device, the have to pay more than their competitors. If you build LTE into a house or car, should you have to pay a percentage of the whole value of these items? (Yes, this is an exaggerated example to make a point.)
BaldiMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2012, 10:30 AM   #23
bembol
macrumors 6502a
 
bembol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: iCloud
I love both and I get why Apple filed all those lawsuits. I really believe if Apple didn't release the iPhone companies like Samsung, hTc will be copying/following RIM and their QWERTY design. Back in the day before the iPhone, I thought Sony Ericsson's W series was the best. LOL

I was surprised Google/Samsung took this long to fire back. Notification IMO is THE MOST AMAZING feature on Super Phones today.
__________________
SHIFT_
27" iMac Late-2012 Base w/32GB RAM & 3TB Fusion | 16GB iPhone 5S Gold 32GB Black LG G3 64GB Space Grey iPad Air LTE
bembol is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 02:06 PM   #24
Brazuca
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueParadox View Post
Well said, Yujenisis. And completely agree with you: this SomeDudAsking is simply trolling, and clearly has no idea what they're talking about. Trolls gotta troll!


Took that picture in Argentina, in hope to use it someday....

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
Actually, Apple never stated that they want to pay what everyone else pays, quite the contrary. They tried exhaustion through deals with 3rd party chip manufacturers and ...
Patent exhaustion is a very desirable feature of the system. If Qualcomm has licensed some Samsung patents in the chip it sells to manufacturers, and if that license permits Qualcomm to do so, the license is transferred to the manufacturer who is using the chip.

Qualcomm will have paid the license fee per chip, and passed the cost on to the manufacturer. So that Samsung already got paid. Makes perfect sense.
__________________
Brazuca is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2012, 05:18 PM   #25
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazuca View Post
Patent exhaustion is a very desirable feature of the system. If Qualcomm has licensed some Samsung patents in the chip it sells to manufacturers, and if that license permits Qualcomm to do so, the license is transferred to the manufacturer who is using the chip.

Qualcomm will have paid the license fee per chip, and passed the cost on to the manufacturer. So that Samsung already got paid. Makes perfect sense.
It does, except that Samsung stated that their licensing to Qualcomm was not transferable. Also, it doesn't make perfect sense in scenarios where you have chips that implement multiple standards.

Are you really going to pay a licensing fee for radio protocols you're not going to be using ? No, if it's disabled on the chip, your device doesn't infringe and you don't need a license. So instead of paying a flat "license everything in the chip", Qualcomm sells chips without patent licenses and you get only those you need for the hardware you'll be using.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   0 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dyson sues Samsung TheMacPotato Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 1 Sep 12, 2013 10:33 AM
Apple Accuses Samsung's Version of Android and the Galaxy Note 10.1 of Infringing Patents MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 392 Nov 9, 2012 05:07 AM
Samsung Sues Apple Over iPhone 5 jlake02 iPhone 35 Oct 2, 2012 08:41 AM
Google Looks to Distance Android from Apple vs. Samsung Ruling MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 422 Aug 29, 2012 05:24 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:58 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC