Samsung Not Interested in Settlement with Apple over Patent Issues

[sdsvtdriver]

Originally Posted by Mattie Num Nums

FYI the "washing machine manufacturer" also built this:

Image

Actually, Hazama Corporation built the first one. Samsung copied them and built the 2nd tower.

[hchung]

Originally Posted by Marcus-k

He's not talking about the design, but the invention of digital MP3-players.

Creative didn't invent portable MP3 players either.
This was apparently where it started.

----------

Originally Posted by samcraig

Really? the lines comment? Wow.

Well guess what. My best friend's cousin's brother's nephews great aunt once had pizza with the VP of Samsung marketing and he called the Director of Samsung in London a bit fat liar liar pants on fire.

Again - people need to use less tin foil hats. The truth is scarier to you than this fiction - which is - people can own and enjoy Apple products but also br critical of them. OH NOZ!

The truth is scarier to you than fiction, isn't it?

http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/0...eatened-leave/

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by hchung

Creative didn't invest portable MP3 players either.

Creative held patents over a method of designing navigation UIs that were unheard of in the PMP world prior to the advent of MP3 (or digital file based) players. Apple infringed on it, got taken to court and tried to fight it but eventually lost.

Really guys, it's not different than Apple's slide to unlock, bounce on end of document, or other interface patents. No sillier, no smarter. In my own view, both the Apple stuff and Creative's stuff is bad and shows how much software patents need to die. There was nothing non-obvious to Creative's approach, just like there's nothing non-obvious to Apple's stuff.

But the fact is, if you're on Macrumors raging like a lunatic when Samsung infringes a utility patent of Apple's, you need to also be raging against Apple when it infringes the same type of patents. Otherwise, you're not being consistent, you're being biased. For a corporation. That doesn't care about you.

[steve119]

Originally Posted by G51989

0 dollars.

Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, LG, ect. Don't care about sites like this, the impact a place like this has on a companies sales is pretty much nothing. The average consumer does not come here.

....

Wrong, they do actually, I was speaking to a manager of a multinational glazing company, and he said that it was common practice to make up names and slate the opposition on consumer sites, as I was complaining about one of his employees that had been slated, so it wouldn't surprise me. Granted this is not a consumer site but it is still a site worth trying to tap into for new customers, if you can steal a couple of loyal customers from one post then totally worth it.

[Oletros]

Originally Posted by steve119

Wrong, they do actually, I was speaking to a manager of a multinational glazing company, and he said that it was common practice to make up names and slate the opposition on consumer sites, as I was complaining about one of his employees that had been slated, so it wouldn't surprise me. Granted this is not a consumer site but it is still a site worth trying to tap into for new customers, if you can steal a couple of loyal customers from one post then totally worth it.

So, you're saying that Samsung or Google pays people here to try to show Apple users as brainwashed zealots?

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by steve119

Wrong, they do actually, I was speaking to a manager of a multinational glazing company, and he said that it was common practice to make up names and slate the opposition on consumer sites, as I was complaining about one of his employees that had been slated, so it wouldn't surprise me.

Astroturfing, even on tech blogs, is not a new concept. Slashdot is riddled with Microsoft astroturfer, heck, self-admitted astroturfer Florian Mueller posts there sometimes.

However, I have no doubt in the many people on Macrumors that do posts in these lawsuit threads that they are not astroturfers. I for one often try to simply correct FUD. The problem is that the biggest part of the FUD comes from the people who think they're fighting a battle *FOR* Apple. So that places me in opposition to them in these debates.

However, I feel no allegiance to any entity in this. I'm a consumer, my only allegiance is to my own wallet in the end. It's sad that often, that results however in me getting called either a "Fandroid" or heck, an "Apple fanboy" (yes, it's happened to me, both) and people insulting me directly or my nationality or my avatar or my grammar/spelling instead of addressing the arguments I post.

That is the side part. People call you a shill after you've gone through the trouble of digging up patents, rulings, posted links, quotes, and built a proper debatable argument. What was gained ? Nothing, the conversation that you tried to elevate got dragged down back into the mud.

That always saddens me, that the people visiting this forum prefer insults to proper conversation about the real issues. They'd rather post "Samsuck copied the iPad!" then actually understand the issue, the patents involved, the IP raised by both sides and the reasons rulings are made.

----------

Originally Posted by Oletros

So, you're saying that Samsung or Google pays people here to try to show Apple users as brainwashed zealots?

As I said earlier, I'm starting to think the opposite. I'm starting to think that Samsung or Google pays users here to come and defend Apple no matter what and insult and drag the conversation level down. All those long posts where people like kdarling, gnasher and others do with tons of links, comparative images, etc.. do are worthy of good discussion... but then, lo' and behold, someone comes in and goes "You're a paid shill!" or "Fandroid, leave Macrumors, you have no place here".

I'm starting to think Google is paying those guys to make Apple look bad. To give us Apple users and customers the feeling that buying this stuff from this company is going to turn us into these mindless zombies. If you see someone that keeps defending Apple all the time through insulting posters rather than addressing facts and he's making you rethink that Apple purchase because you're getting tired of the "cult-like mentality", think back to what I've just said. Maybe he's not even an Apple user, he's just paid to make you disgusted with Apple's community.

[AlexisV]

Interesting that they publicly say they won't negotiate at all.

This won't go down well with the judge. Both parties are expected to negotiate to avoid court and wasting its time. Obviously it doesn't happen all that often in practice, but saying "we won't talk to them" in the open is shooting yourself in the foot.

[justperry]

Originally Posted by sdsvtdriver

Actually, Hazama Corporation built the first one. Samsung copied them and built the 2nd tower.

Lol

1. If they did copy how come Samsung finished Tower 2 first?

2. If they copied then why is it that it is not crooked as Tower 1?

Petronas towers.

[kdarling]

Originally Posted by AlexisV

Interesting that they publicly say they won't negotiate at all.

This won't go down well with the judge.

Which judge? I think it depends on the case.

Both Apple and Samsung have consistently failed to negotiate ahead of many patent and design trials, even though the judges have begged them to do so... even going to so far as to mandate executive meetings, as Judge Koh did.

Where failure to negotiate seems to be a problem, is with FRAND patents.

Total refusal by the licensee is grounds for allowing the patent holder to ask for an injunction in most of the world. Likewise, refusal by the patent holder to negotiate in good faith can result in losing the possibility to get an injunction against the licensee, which happened recently to Samsung in Europe.

Partial refusal to negotiate can get the trial dropped altogether, as happened recently in Wisconsin's Apple v. Motorola lawsuit, when Apple told the judge they would abide by her royalty decision as long as it wasn't more than $1 per unit. The judge reacted negatively to Apple's precondition and dismissed Apple's lawsuit against Motorola, with prejudice.

[peppi]

The patent system needs a shakeout, with an all you can eat free patent invalidation service, 99% of the problems may disappear.

[alfistas]

Originally Posted by Oletros

So, you're saying that Samsung or Google pays people here to try to show Apple users as brainwashed zealots?

Actually this wouldn't surprise me. I dunno how often this happens on MacRumors but I've seen really strange behaviors and repetitive posts across all sorts of different websites. Take GSMArena for example: If you dare support an Apple product there your posts get deleted almost immediately...

[chagla]

Originally Posted by StarTrek

I actually studied with a Director of Samsung in London who told me they pay people to go on to competitors websites and make negative comments, this would then draw an unhinged element to post comments favoring Sams**g on websites like this... a website for Mac, people are scared of Apple, because Apple has the best brand loyalty, hence the lines at a mac store hence they pay people to trash Apple. Scary stuff

i just received my paycheck from Samsung.

[JoshuaTurner]

Originally Posted by macfacts

An informed opinion can not be formed from those 2 pics cause they don't use the same scale on the vertical axis.

That is true, but it's not hard to see the scale in your mind - you don't NEED the exact same graph create a decision, I don't even know if Yahoo Finance can scale the Y axis but I did only select from the year 2000 as that would make the X axis relative.

[kdarling]

Originally Posted by alfistas

Actually this wouldn't surprise me. I dunno how often this happens on MacRumors but I've seen really strange behaviors and repetitive posts across all sorts of different websites.

I sometimes see repetitive posts across websites, but then again, sometimes I do the same thing... simply because it's easier to copy/paste a response that took a long time to research and write.

As for astroturfers, I think most of the wildly ignorant and/or fanboyish posts magically appear during times that schools are out on holiday somewhere in the world. It's as simple as that.

Also, almost always when a person cries out with the overused "troll" or "astroturfing" accusations, it's because they're run out of material to debate with. It says far more about them than it does anyone else.

Take GSMArena for example: If you dare support an Apple product there your posts get deleted almost immediately...

Heck, watch somebody say something negative about Apple on the official Apple website forum, and see how long their post lasts before it goes down the memory hole.

Anyway, we're way off topic again. If I were a moderator, I'd put anyone who uses "troll" in a post, in automatic timeout

[subsonix]

Originally Posted by kdarling

Also, almost always when a person cries out with the overused "troll" or "astroturfing" accusations, it's because they're run out of material to debate with. It says far more about them than it does anyone else.

Ditto for the use of "fanboy" or "sheep" as an epithet. Or is there perhaps a difference. Discrediting someone with a different view on something besides the arguments, may feel good, but no real victory is won.

[Mattie Num Nums]

Originally Posted by subsonix

Ditto for the use of "fanboy" or "sheep" as an epithet. Or is there perhaps a difference. Discrediting someone with a different view on something besides the arguments, may feel good, but no real victory is won.

Just like people pointing out grammatical errors on a response that is easily understood but contains grammatical errors. Doesn't take away from the point the person is making, nor does it make them any less intelligent.

The dumbest thing about all of this is that a lot of us that are mad at Apple use Apple products and Samsung products. My entire kitchen has Samsung appliances and I have an LG dryer but only own Apple computers and iDevices. I would venture to say I have more Apple gear than a lot of those "fanboys" have. Its OK to say you are mad at a company for business practices. Doesn't make you an "astroturfer" for Samsung.

[Kwill]

Originally Posted by MacRumors

"We have no such intention," J.K. Shin, the head of Samsung Electronics' mobile unit, told reporters on Wednesday when asked if Samsung would seek a similar settlement.

Copy that.

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by Mattie Num Nums

Its OK to say you are mad at a company for business practices. Doesn't make you an "astroturfer" for Samsung.

I don't know why after page 6 or 7 of a thread about these lawsuits, a few of us have to repeat this conversation after getting insulted and accused of shilling or astroturfing.

[Mattie Num Nums]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

I don't know why after page 6 or 7 of a thread about these lawsuits, a few of us have to repeat this conversation after getting insulted and accused of shilling or astroturfing.

Wish I knew!

[ConceptVBS]

Originally Posted by sdsvtdriver

Actually, Hazama Corporation built the first one. Samsung copied them and built the 2nd tower.

Your "washing machine manufacturer" also built this




Burj khalifa

Samsung was the main contractor for the project.
They were working 24 hours a day building a floor per day.

----------

Originally Posted by etrinh

Wow your tirade was quite exhausting to read. Stop being so emotional about something that really has no beating in your life. If you allow what companies do as a business to get you so upset you will always be an angry person. It's ok to express your dislike for something. Just keep it in perspective that in the end, it doesn't really matter.

You are only saying that because you have no rebuttal.

Instead of counter argument his main points, you attack the messenger behind it.

That just tells me that you have you fully agree with what he says, which is true.

----------

Originally Posted by Sora

[T]here is not one single product - not one - that Samsung makes that is an industry leader. There is no Samsung product that is the BMW of cars. The Rolex of watches. The iPods of portable music devices. The Titleist of golf clubs. These aren't just expensive items because of name. It's called quality. Quality in their products (not their manufacturing processes) is a foreign concept to Samsung. Yes they have amazing quality in how they manufacturing NAND, DRAM, OLED panels. Yes Samsung makes a lot of things. But none of them are leaders of their respective industry.
Just because you make sell 1,000,000 of something every second doesn't mean what you sell isn't crap.

LOL is this guy serious?

What is your definition of an "industry leader"?

Industry leader = largest market share

I can already name 2 things right off the top of my head: 1) Mobile phones 2) TVs 3)LCD screens.

[JackieTreehorn]

Originally Posted by ConceptVBS

Your "washing machine manufacturer" also built this

Image


Burj khalifa

Samsung was the main contractor for the project.
They were working 24 hours a day building a floor per day.[COLOR="#808080"]

They were the contractor. That's about the same as stating the Foxconn developed, designed, marketed and sells the iPhone.

[MacCurry]

Originally Posted by jrswizzle

Yes - you almighty "original Mac fans" are the real heroes. You aren't fooled by these petty useless devices we droves of mindless sheep use all day everyday for everything from reminding us its Grandma's birthday to running our small business through.

Yes, if only we could think for ourselves, we wouldn't be at the mercy of these "iToys" and Apple's devious marketing department.



Can you people grow up? This is beyond petty....

This isn't petty. Mac users supported Apple when it was in the dump. How many iOS users actually have a Mac mini, MacBook, iMac, or Mac Pro? Probably only 1 in 5. I can understand supporting iOS, but it isn't for everyone and certainly many of us Mac users are ticked off by a lack of support to the pro applications like FCP and Aperture.

----------

Originally Posted by JackieTreehorn

They were the contractor. That's about the same as stating the Foxconn developed, designed, marketed and sells the iPhone.

False analogy. Samsung designed and built it for the customer's need. The specification was developed with the customer. Designing and building skyscrapers is far more complex than building a mobile phone or tablet using components already available.

[hchung]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

Creative held patents over a method of designing navigation UIs that were unheard of in the PMP world prior to the advent of MP3 (or digital file based) players. Apple infringed on it, got taken to court and tried to fight it but eventually lost.

Really guys, it's not different than Apple's slide to unlock, bounce on end of document, or other interface patents. No sillier, no smarter. In my own view, both the Apple stuff and Creative's stuff is bad and shows how much software patents need to die. There was nothing non-obvious to Creative's approach, just like there's nothing non-obvious to Apple's stuff.

But the fact is, if you're on Macrumors raging like a lunatic when Samsung infringes a utility patent of Apple's, you need to also be raging against Apple when it infringes the same type of patents. Otherwise, you're not being consistent, you're being biased. For a corporation. That doesn't care about you.

Whoa whoa now, I was just answering that other guy who was wrongly talking about Creative inventing the MP3 player. Not sure why you'd call that "raging" when it's simply pointing out history.

[hchung]

Originally Posted by MacCurry

False analogy. Samsung designed and built it for the customer's need. The specification was developed with the customer. Designing and building skyscrapers is far more complex than building a mobile phone or tablet using components already available.

Actually, JackieTreehorn's analogy is pretty much correct.

A minute of googling would have served you well.

You can go to either of these two links to find out Samsung didn't design it.... the 2nd link being the tower's website's design page.

http://www.constructionweekonline.co...fa-burj-dubai/
http://www.burjkhalifa.ae/language/e...er/design.aspx

You'll also find that while Samsung C&T was a primary contractor, there were two other primary contractors. And there were over 30 other companies involved in construction as well. So it's not like Samsung built half of it or anything.

But hey, it is a cool-looking building.

[sdsvtdriver]

Originally Posted by justperry

Lol

1. If they did copy how come Samsung finished Tower 2 first?

2. If they copied then why is it that it is not crooked as Tower 1?

Petronas towers.

1. Timewarp!
2. They can't copy everything 100%!

Originally Posted by ConceptVBS

Your "washing machine manufacturer" also built this

I bought an LG set, thanks though.