Apple and Samsung Seek to Extend Infringement Claims in Second U.S. Patent Lawsuit

[theanimaster]

Originally Posted by 2IS

Yes, Apple is. Samsung is simply going on the offensive now and it's directly due to Apple actions. It's like the bully that keeps picking on someone day in and day out. The other guy tries to turn the other cheek but the bully keeps coming. Eventually the other guy's going to snap.

You have any idea how huge Samsung really is? Who's bullying who, really?

[xofruitcake]

Originally Posted by Rogifan

Apple's not the only guilty party here, no matter how much Samsung wants to play the victim. They added the iPhone 5, 4th gen iPad and iPad mini to this lawsuit. And I believe some of what they claim Apple is infringing on are FRAND patents which would be covered between Qualcomm and Samsung, no? How can Apple be infringing if its Qualcomm technology and Qualcomm is paying royalties to Samsung?

Samsung tried that the tactic in the San Jose trial. They claimed Apple used an Intel chip and hence infringe on Samsung patent. The interchange between Apple lawyer and the expert witness is interesting (given the same witness has testified against Apple before, Samsung lawyers should have known how Apple is going to destroy the testimony). The way Apple rebut the claim is even more bizarre. Samsung lawyer should have known that the receipt exist in the discovery phase. So the legal team that represent Samsung are making some really strange decision on the case against Apple that end up hurting their defensive case as well..

http://www.forbes.com/sites/conniegu...e-for-peace/2/

The following is a play-by-play of what happened in court today. (Times noted are California time).

9:10: Samsung is focusing on defending its patents and calling witnesses to show how Apple is infringing on those patents.
Samsung calls its next witness via video deposition. Markus Paltian works in Intel’s Mobile Communications group and has developed firmware that implements the 3GPP standard that Samsung says takes advantage of its patented technology for helping to reduce the number of dropped calls. Samsung says Apple is using that technology in its devices.
Next witness, also via video, is Andre Zorn, who also works in Intel Mobile Communications and was responsible for implementing technology to support the 3GPP standard.
9:34: Samsung now calls Dr. Tim Williams, a longtime mobile technologies developer who worked at Motorola and has sold companies to Intel and Qualcomm, as an expert witness to talk about Samsung’s high-speed data patents. He says he now helps startups. He has 27 issued U.S. patents in the area of wireless communications systems. He’s being paid $550 an hour to testify on behalf of Samsung. Says he doesn’t need the money, but that he is testifying to help support a “strong U.S. patent system for my children.”
Williams is now being asked to comment on Samsung’s on high-speed data Patent 516 (again, patent numbers refer to the last three numbers of each patent). He says it’s concerned with “uplink service” – sending information from a mobile phone to the network and how much power is required to do that data transfer. He’s going through a discussion now of how the patent creators came up with a way to allocate a budgeted amount of power to the voice-data channel in order for users to be able to make call. He says the patent is important because it came up with a way to reducs the amount of power that mobile devices need to use to transmit voice calls over a wireless network, extending battery life, and also improves call quality.
He now says that Apple is using an Intel broadband processor in the iPhone 4 and iPad that allows them to gain access to the cellular network. Williams is now talking about what’s built in to those Intel processors used by Apple. They include the 3GPP technical specification (3rd Generation Partnership Project), and he’s asked to talk about the part of the spec that talks about how mobile devices access a wireless network and the power requirements for doing that.
Williams says that Apple infringes on Samsung’s patent because Intel’s chip was written to support the 3GPP standard, as Intel’s employees acknowledged via their video depositions. He’s giving a technical review of how Apple’s products are infringing. (Hard to say if all of the nine-member jury is following along — some yawns, some head scratching).
10:15: Discussion now turns to Samsung Patent 941, which Williams says deals with efficient transmission of information from mobile phone to the network (reducing the number of packets, or containers of information, from the mobile phone to the wireless network. Now he goes into another technical discussion of how “the alternative e-bit interpretation” covered in the patent works.
Williams says that he looked at the iPhone 4 and iPad 2 3G, which contain an Intel baseband processor. He says the baseband processors rely on the methodology in the Samsung patents, which leads him to conclude that Apple’s products do infringe on Samsung’s patents. He’s now launching into another technical discussion (3GPP is involved) of how he came to that conclusion.
10:30: Court is taking a 15-minute break.
10:52: Williams returns to the stand, picking up on his technical discussion of Samsung’s patent 941 as it applies to Apple’s iPhone 4 and iPad 2 (talk of re-assemblers, packets, transmitters). More yawns by some members of the jury. The Samsung lawyer is having Williams comment on Intel source code, which the courtroom is not allowed to view because of confidentiality.
Apple’s lawyer, Bill Lee, now gets to cross examine Williams. He asks Williams whether he had ever heard about the alternative e-bit interpretation before Samsung’s lawyers called him. Williams said no.
Lee is now asking Williams about the Intel chip and that his assertion that Apple’s infringement is based completely on the Samsung technology being implemented in the Intel baseband processor.
Q: Has Apple implemented the standard in anything other than the Intel processors? A: No.
Q: Are these processors made by Intel? A: Yes.
Q: Does Intel sell those baseband processors to Apple? A: Yes.
Q: Apple engineers don’t have anything to do with designing the Intel chips? A: Correct.
Q: Do you have any evidence that Intel engineers knew anything about the Samsung patents? A: No.
Lee says that no one has accused Intel executives of copying Samsung’s patent 914. Williams said he’s not aware of that.
Do you know if Samsung has accused Intel of infringing its patent? Williams said he didn’t know.
Intel and Samsung have a cross license, Apple’s lawyer says. Q: Were you aware of that? A: No. Q: Did you ask? A: It’s not important to my analysis. I’m looking at the accused products, now what Intel has done.
Apple purchases the Intel chips for $10 a chip, Lee says. Samsung is requesting $350 million in damages. Did you know that? William says he did not know that.
Apple’s lawyer is now talking about Intel’s standards engineers and what their jobs are (to go to standards meetings and to try to get Intel patents into standards because that’s part of how they get their compensation.) Williams says he doesn’t know how it works.
Lee is now asking Williams about his background and how many times he’s been an expert witness in court. He says about 28 times in the past four years. How many hours has he worked on this case? Williams says he doesn’t know. But Apple’s lawyer says he does know that he made $1 million last year and $1 million the year before testifying in court. Williams says yes He also acknowledges that he has testified several times in cases against Apple.
Lee is asking Williams, who has been involved in standard settings processes, if participants in standards setting are required to disclose IP rights that might be important to the standard so that others may know and be aware if any patents might be involved.
Now looking at Samsung’s patent 516 and noting that the first patent was filed on June 9, 2004. Apple’s lawyer Lee is asking about the development of the 3GPP standard and timing for it and whether Williams studied it. Williams says yes. He brings up a document by Samsung dated Aug. 2004 about the standard. Judge says he can’t go into detail at this point about what Samsung did/didn’t do in the standards setting process for 3GPP.
Now looking at the Samsung patent and the claims that Williams says Apple is infringing. Discussion is getting somewhat technical, with talks about the power used by various channels. This again all goes back to the 3GPP standard and how Intel has implemented it. There seems to be a dispute between how many channels are included in the 3GPP specification and how many channels are discussed in the Samsung patent. Williams says he doesn’t agree with the number of channels that Apple’s expert from Carnegie Mellon says are in the standard. More arguments over Williams interpretation of the standard, versus Apple’s expert (who is being called up via a printed deposition transcript).
Lee has brought up a document from the patent office about Samsung’s patent. Williams and Lee disagree about what it says. Williams is excused.

http://www.ipnav.com/blog/why-samsun...ents/?printPDF


Samsung claimed up to $399 million in royalties for two patents related to 3G wireless technology that it claimed Apple infringed. One
claim involved the baseband chip in the iPhone and the 3G version of the iPad.
Just one little huge, glaring problem: Apple bought those “infringing” chips from Intel. And Intel made them under a license from
Samsung that included Samsung’s agreement not to sue companies that bought those Intel chips – including Apple.
Samsung’s lawyers made a technical legal argument that the chips were designed and built in Germany and shipped to China, and
the law requires that chips be “sold” in the US for the doctrine of patent exhaustion (and those license terms) to apply. So, Samsung’s
lawyers argued, the agreement not to sue turned on where the chips were “sold.”
But Intel wouldn’t have taken a license from Samsung under those terms – i.e., knowing its customers (including Apple) would get
sued for infringing Samsung technology.
So Samsung’s lawyers seemed to be suggesting the company was trying to pull a fast one on Intel – agreeing not to sue its
customers and then repudiating that agreement based on a technicality.
The lawyers thus made their own client look sneaky – and it seems unlikely that Samsung had any such skullduggery in mind when it
licensed its technology to Intel.
In any case, Apple introduced the receipts from Intel for the chips, showing that they were “sold” to Apple in California and Chicago --
regardless of where they were made and delivered.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the jurors easily rejected Samsung’s lawyers’ argument about Apple’s alleged patent
infringement, citing that oh-so-obvious license.
We figure that this weak argument probably trashed Samsung’s credibility for the rest of the trial.
So why did the lawyers choose to litigate those two patents when they undoubtedly had numerous others to pick

[wikus]

Originally Posted by turtlez

Gimped? It does what it is supposed to do, how is that Gimped? Do you need your mobile phone to be able to make a sandwich for you? I would prefer the iPhone looks over the Sandwich Maker SIV

Yes, gimped. I shouldn't be forced to use iTunes to transfer media. I should have options on what keyboard I can use. I should have options to show what notifications are shown in widgets or in a notifications pull down menu. I should be able to connect and transfer files back and forth between any device on any platform.

Yeah, iOS is gimped. If you have no desire to use the phone beyond what Apple wants you to, iOS is fine. But it's still limiting and gimped.

----------

Originally Posted by theanimaster

You have any idea how huge Samsung really is? Who's bullying who, really?

Well considering apple's sales, worth, etc. its painfully obvious that Apple's done the 'bullying'

[thatoneguy82]

Originally Posted by krravi

Patent for rounded rectangles is absurd. I understand Apple's obsession with it since their GUI days with the early mac's but that was again inspired by the windows and furnitures in their office.

So I guess the furniture makers of those days have to file a lawsuit against Apple to begin with.

Well they have lot of cash to burn. Might as well file these endless lawsuits just to scare the other players away.

Windows Phone has a great future if these lawsuits keep piling up.

Inspiration is different from copying. Most innovators require inspiration to create something new, not copy.

[MacDav]

Okay...Now they're just suing each other for existing. Thermonuclear patent armageddon has arrived. After the dust has settled it will be fun to see who's still standing.

[MacDav]

Originally Posted by wikus

Yes, gimped. I shouldn't be forced to use iTunes to transfer media. I should have options on what keyboard I can use. I should have options to show what notifications are shown in widgets or in a notifications pull down menu. I should be able to connect and transfer files back and forth between any device on any platform'

I see...Which court ruling specifies this? Or is it just your personal opinion?

[MH01]

Originally Posted by spyguy10709

Yes, because Jony Ive is in the courtroom, every day, preparing legal documents. These kinds of comments are foolish.

----------



Again like I said earlier, It's obvious that Jony Ive is in the courtroom every day preparing legal documents and court evidence... not making products. :/

Come on people, Apple employes thousands of people, the legal team is just some people working in a completely separate environment from the product guys.

Ummm so why are you stating that design/innovation is jony ive? The direction or focus of a company is not one bloke. And the point your missing entirely is the fact that recent products have been lacking innovation, and all we hear about is lawsuits. It's not rocket science to why people are fed up with these lawsuits. From a hardware perspective the apple designs are awesome, your missing the fact iOS needs some major innovation, it's stuck in 2007... Hate to say it but android has improved in leaps and bounds, I remembered it being slow, lacking ui design, and a farce compared to ios, times have changed big time

[2IS]

Originally Posted by theanimaster

You have any idea how huge Samsung really is? Who's bullying who, really?

Yes I do... Apples the one trying, and failing as of late. With their law suits and innovation.

[MH01]

Originally Posted by theanimaster

You have any idea how huge Samsung really is? Who's bullying who, really?

Samsung is bullying Apple.... Lol, cheers for the laugh )

Samsung is big enough to stand up to the bullying.

[2IS]

Originally Posted by theanimaster

What makes you think they aren't focusing on new products? Apple's product team etc. etc. and legal department are two different things.

How about that nothing terribly exciting has come from Apple in some time? I'd say that is a pretty large hint.

What makes you think they are?

[MH01]

Originally Posted by 2IS

How about that nothing terribly exciting has come from Apple in some time? I'd say that is a pretty large hint.

What makes you think they are?

Exactly


Seems we all wanted thinner iMacs , god knows why we needed a thinner desktop

Or the iPad 4, which looks just like the iPad 2...

Lest we not forget the mac pros also, let's hope they are thinner instead of giving us faster CPUs ..

[MacDav]

Originally Posted by 2IS

How about that nothing terribly exciting has come from Apple in some time? I'd say that is a pretty large hint.

What makes you think they are?

The original iPod was released in 2001. Nothing terribly exciting came out until 6 years later when the iPhone was released in 2007. Six years added to 2007 gives us 2013. Lets see if anything terribly exciting happens in 2013. I know if the stock goes up, that will be terribly exciting for me.

[flameproof]

Originally Posted by MacDav

Lets see if anything terribly exciting happens in 2013.

Could be the iPhone becomes 0.2mm thinner.... making it the best iPhone ever....

[the8thark]

Originally Posted by Switchback666

Nope.

Feel free to correct me with what happened. Nope on it's own really helps no one learn from their supposed mistakes.

[MH01]

Originally Posted by MacDav

The original iPod was released in 2001. Nothing terribly exciting came out until 6 years later when the iPhone was released in 2007. Six years added to 2007 gives us 2013. Lets see if anything terribly exciting happens in 2013. I know if the stock goes up, that will be terribly exciting for me.

My 12" PowerBook says otherwise


Don't forget in 2001 apple was near going under, in 2012 it has the biggest war chest, apple had an excuse in 2001+ to tread carefully and rebuild , today...... All I read about a new lawsuits.

If apple stocks go down, they are more likely to stop cruising.

[MacDav]

Originally Posted by MH01

My 12" PowerBook says otherwise


Don't forget in 2001 apple was near going under, in 2012 it has the biggest war chest, apple had an excuse in 2001+ to tread carefully and rebuild , today...... All I read about a new lawsuits.

If apple stocks go down, they are more likely to stop cruising.

That's funny, I wanted a 12 inch Powerbook back then, but I couldn't afford it. Of course I don't think that it would be considered a major new innovation, but I guess it's a matter of personal opinion. Also, thinking they will innovate better if they are losing money is questionable. Apple lost money for years and almost went bankrupt without any real innovation. When Steve came back to Apple he jump started innovating again. No one knows the future, so I'll wait and see what the new year brings.

[theanimaster]

Originally Posted by 2IS

How about that nothing terribly exciting has come from Apple in some time? I'd say that is a pretty large hint.

What makes you think they are?

It's called MARKETING. Or didn't you figure that out from the release of the iPad Mini? Or how the iPhone never got as big enough storage as the iPod Touch did in the beginning?

There's no way Apple CANNOT put retina in the iPad mini. They're obviously holding back just the way they did years ago with the iPhone storage (vs the iPod Touch's), camera and 'exclusive' iOS features etc. They are good at playing consumers. They know the competition is just throwing around their money, putting 'the latest stuff' in everything. Apple on the other hand knows what exactly to hold back.

Apple knows how to play its cards. They never play catch-up. Everyone else does.

[Mactendo]

Originally Posted by rjohnstone

What "core technologies" did Apple invent?

Multi touch? Nope
Capacitive screens? Nope
Mobile radio tech? None at all

Name one piece of actual tech, not software, that Apple "invented" that is in the iPhone.

Software patents are a different beast and many would agree that some patents that have been granted are a joke at best.
Copyright law should be sufficient in most of these cases.

Apple assembled these technologies together in one great device.

[RichardI]

This is a sham as are all these cases. It's like two little brats in the play yard arguing over who hit who. Grow up Apple! Grow up Samsung!
It's the courts that are really at the heart of this absurdity. They should throw out this case and any pending cases and fine both companies a billion dollars each - to be distributed to the NEEDY!
And then tell them to play nice or go home.........

[Rogifan]

Originally Posted by 2IS

Yes, Apple is. Samsung is simply going on the offensive now and it's directly due to Apple actions. It's like the bully that keeps picking on someone day in and day out. The other guy tries to turn the other cheek but the bully keeps coming. Eventually the other guy's going to snap.

How is Apple picking on Samsung day and and day out? Do you work for Samsung or something?

----------

Originally Posted by krravi

Patent for rounded rectangles is absurd. I understand Apple's obsession with it since their GUI days with the early mac's but that was again inspired by the windows and furnitures in their office.

So I guess the furniture makers of those days have to file a lawsuit against Apple to begin with.

Well they have lot of cash to burn. Might as well file these endless lawsuits just to scare the other players away.

Windows Phone has a great future if these lawsuits keep piling up.

Just curious what in this particular lawsuit pertains to "rounded rectangles"?

[mchoffa]

Originally Posted by theanimaster

What makes you think they aren't focusing on new products? Apple's product team etc. etc. and legal department are two different things.

they are making new products, but at a corporate level it seems that this fight is all that matters... would love for them to just come to an agreement and be done with it... I love both Apple and Samsung products...

I know it's very complex and have been watching it play out for quite some time now, but from a purely consumer standpoint, this looks very ridiculous

[Rogifan]

Originally Posted by MH01

Samsung is bullying Apple.... Lol, cheers for the laugh )

Samsung is big enough to stand up to the bullying.

How exactly is Apple a bully in this case? Plus it's not Apple on TV making fun of Samsung fanboys. It's not Apple putting out misleading newspaper ads claiming the iPhone 5 is superior to the S3. Samsung is clearly obsessed with Apple in every way, shape and form.

----------

Originally Posted by mchoffa

they are making new products, but at a corporate level it seems that this fight is all that matters... would love for them to just come to an agreement and be done with it... I love both Apple and Samsung products...

I know it's very complex and have been watching it play out for quite some time now, but from a purely consumer standpoint, this looks very ridiculous

Samsung already publicly stated they would not settle, so good luck with that wish.

[HarryKNN21]

Apple will never beat Samsung up. Samsung Galaxy line grows up this quickly because of market demands. Apple can't stop the market of Android or any other OS.

[apolloa]

Originally Posted by Switchback666

Who throw the first stone and continued till these day ?

Who copied Apple to such an extent with it's interface that Google warned them not to do it??

This is nothing but the next useless round of the ride that nobody wins at, it should have begun and ended with the Samsung Galaxy 1 smartphone. Seriously, The Note 2 and Note 10.1 and iPhone 5 and iPad 4?? Reads as though the lawyers just came up with nothing more then an excuse to make more millions for themselves...

[rmwebs]

Originally Posted by spyguy10709

Everyone, even I, has been hating on Apple for all these lawsuits recently.

But think about it for a second. Apple invented the core technologies behind these devices, it doesn't matter if it's "old news" or a "tired story"... It's Apple fighting for innovation.

Whilst that may be the official spin, we all know it's only happening because Apple's sales are taking a hit - despite what the biggest fanboy will tell you, the Samsung android devices that are being made these days are actually pretty damn good devices - the S3 for example always gets a much more favorable review than the iPhone 5.

I say this as a person who owns an iPhone, and who is not pathetically supporting one company or the other - both have crap products, both have good products.