Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Seeks Sanctions Against Samsung for Unlawful Use of Apple-Nokia Patent License Terms
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm not an attorney, but I would think the blame is going to fall on Samsung's firm, not Samsung directly. And thinking through how this played out, it might have been done this way on purpose to remove Samsung from blame, but provide them with some monetary benefit in negotiations with Nokia.
Things like this don't happen by accident. I would bet that there are no innocent parties - Samsung or their attorneys.
Things like this don't happen by accident. I would bet that there are no innocent parties - Samsung or their attorneys.
So you think it's perfectly fine for Samsung's legal councel to share competitors confidential licensing agreements with senior executives?
And can we please quit with the 'innovate, don't litigate' nonsense. What Apple's legal department does is not stopping their designers and engineers from innovating.
Did not say it was okay. Just tired of hearing about Apple & Samsung arguing like children. Samsung is always going to play dirty. Why give them credit by constantly spotlighting it in the media. Would it not be better for Apple to take all the millions the lawyers are making and put it into producing a better product. Not that Apple doesn't have a good product already. I just think Apple would be smarter staying a step ahead of Samsung instead of wasting time and money in the courts. Should not be hard for Apple to do, as they have some of the smartest people around working for them.
It isn't hearsay as the Order states that the Nokia employee recounts what the Samsung negotiator said while Samsung says their negotiator is unavailable for questioning and never mind we will handle an internal investigation on this without oversight and get back to the court whenever. Hearsay would be "the Nokia negotiator told me that the Samsung negotiator said..."
----------
Good point. I may also re-read it when I have the time and inclination.
I agree, this could get really messy. The law firm really fd-up. However, I think this is designed to create tensions between Samsung and their firm, because I don't think Samsung is on the hook for this unless they can show that they engaged in something unethical with the firm. But the firm might just provide this to get themselves off the hook. Interdasting!
Right. My mistake. Not hearsay. But one word against another. As someone who enjoys a good court case I'll be interested in how this plays out.
Most Samsung TVs are not that great. Samsung uses tricks to sell its TVs as well. For instance, the panels found in display units are always made by Samsung and the quality is good. The units they sell, however, have displays of varying quality for the same model number. There are plenty of forums complaining about this practice.
Sharp is the only maker that actually makes all its own panels, and the quality is noticeably better especially for TVs under $2500. Sharp also us the oldest makers of such panels.
This isn't really a story about a patent suit, though. It's a story about material non-public information about a licensing agreement between Nokia and Apple being shared with one of Apple's biggest competitors.
Yes it is common because companies like Apple and Nokia do not want to be put at a competitive disadvantage when negotiating licenses from Samsung. If Samsung knows what Apple and Nokia pay each other that sets the floor for which Samsung is willing to pay and it does not have to work at negotiating.
The firm will be subject to sanctions if they improperly shared the information. However, there may well be consequences to the company of acting on information they did not have the right to see.
I once went to a product presentation for a Web analytic tool that scans social networks and forums to aggregate positive or negative comments about a product, company, political party or event.
The guy giving the presentation talked pretty candidly about using this tool to send people to do "damage control" and post counterpoints to those negative comments. Of course if they do it through an officially labelled account from this organisation I guess it's "ok", but it did give me the feeling that it's not always the case and that it's becoming a common practice among some unscrupulous companies.
No Samsung is on the hook. It authorized its attorneys to obtain the documents, and knew they were supposed to be sealed. They used them anyway. Both it and its lawyers are culpable.
It is my experience that leakers are braggers and if they tell one, they will tell many. Add in the established email traces and server postings, it looks bad. Finally, as this is a civil case, you only need preponderance of the evidence and not beyond a reasonable doubt but I'm not an attorney nor do I play one on tv so take my analysis with a grain of salt.
Samsung also uses a lot of dirty tricks commonly used in cheap consumer electronics, for example many of their cheapest TV models don't even include an audio output of any sort and you're forced to use those tiny bad sounding built-in speakers. To get the model that has an audio output you have to pay $50-$100 extra to get a more expensive model. How much do they really save by not including the 2 RCA plugs on the back? One or two dollars?
Do you have any idea of the repercussions of Samsung going away. Not just for Apple but many industries and a country? Seriously? Try and control your hate.
That's an overgeneralization. Define "Asia" first of all.
Anyway, if your post was "Standard Operating Procedure at Samsung" I would 100% agree with you. Don't lump all of "Asia" based on a single firm in South Korea that happens to be run by a crime family trying to look like a legitimate business.
We just need Samsung manufacturing to stay. They make complicated things in bulk very well. Just give them a schematic and a few months later, 50 million pieces are ready to use.
This is not clear to me. It's pretty clear that the law firm will be liable but I'm not sure about Samsung itself. what exactly is the US law on the matter?
if the company knew the documents are for attorneys' eyes only...they were not supposed to 'distribute' it...thats common sense. but u never know...common sense makes little sense in courtroom
Samsung will probably treat this as the cost of doing business and then write off the penalty on their taxes as a business loss. I don't think there is any sort of monetary sanction that will deter this type of illegal activity that Samsung has engaged in. Now product Sanction would be the better sanction but unfortunately that won't happen in this case.
Why do people continue to support this scummy company?
Because most people (and companies) are willing to take the good with the bad; especially when the bad doesn't affect them that much. Apple takes the same approach with Samsung: good cheap reliable components vs. bad ethical behavior.
Good affects Apple's profit margins. Bad irks the bejeebus out of Apple's sense of decorum.
Good wins.
As long as I get an rMini and an eventual less expensive curved 4K TV I don't care either way. What they do behind the scenes has little to no relevance to me personally.