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

Apple's Chief Patent Litigator Profiled as Samsung Threatens Lawsuits over iPhone 5

Why is it that at MacRumors you have to be a Mac fanatic who says nothing critical of Apple? Some of my posts were even disappeared. Feels like a fascist dictatorship here.
 
PracticalMac said:
LTE owned by Samsung??

Wiki does not mention Samsung involvement with LTE
Click to expand...

Oh WIKI doesn't mention it? Then Samsung must not have a leg to stand on! I mean if the Samsung lawyers can't go to a Wikipedia page and print out their opening arguments, they may as well not begin......

/s
 
Bendrix said:
Actually, you Apple guys are even worse than maniacal sports fans. You're like the angry mobs of girls that defend Justin Bieber's reputation.
Click to expand...

I watched a Youtube clip the other day where it showed Bill Gates rescuing Apple (i.e. giving them money so they don't go bankrupt) and what do the fanboys in the audience do? Boo and laugh at him. Nothing's changed, sad really.
 
Nortel Patents

From http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/ "In the big picture, I don't thing that Samsung's case against Apple will be a slam dunk as they think it will be considering that Apple has amassed 434 LTE based patents of their own, with the vast majority of them coming from Nortel and Freescale. Nortel was a leader in developing LTE and if Apple's iPhone is based on patents that were legitimately granted to Nortel (and Freescale), it's difficult to understand how Samsung thinks that they have a strong enough case to easily win. Then again it's a complicated issue. A 2011 report conducted by Thomson Reuters sheds some need light on the matter." 434 LTE patents, apple's solutions I bet my left hanging sphere is that they based ALL of there 4G tech on Nortel's(now apple's) patents NOT on Samsung's.
 
samcraig said:
Thank you for missing my point and bringing in irrelevant information.
Click to expand...

Then explain to me how the situation applies to LTE but not 3G, both are which are completely optional and the latter of which is covered under the FRAND agreement.

Because, your argument is that since no one is forcing apple to use LTE and that it is 'new', that it shouldn't be covered as 3G patents are under FRAND. Your first point of voluntary inclusion is destroyed by the fact that 3G is voluntary and covered, and your second point is vague and incoherent.
 
BigZ243 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Heh, but the alternative is a future with Windows 8. Would rather enter a swallow my own head up my anus competition with Apple than endure that.
 
pgyanke said:
That's a funny answer to the prior poster. He noted that Nokia and the others weren't worried about Apple's entry into the handset market... until Apple did it better. Apple had to sue because these other firms (who had seemingly stalled in innovation) decided the only way to compete with Apple was to copy Apple.

You'd better pretty ticked too if your competitors took that approach with whatever product you developed.
Click to expand...

When did Nokia copied Apple?
 
samcraig said:
Right now it's not a requirement from carriers. It's a competitive differentiator. So I don't think that argument holds much water. When/if it become MANDATORY - then that's a different matter. Until then - it's not much of a leg to stand on.
Click to expand...

At least one carrier in the US already is requiring LTE if you want new handsets on their network, while existing ones are grandfathered in to give OEMs time to get on the horse.

The term "standards essential" doesn't mean the same thing as an "essential standard". It means that the patent in question cannot be worked around while implementing the standard, and thus you can't license the standard without licensing that patent. So it doesn't really matter if the standard is a requirement of the whole industry or not. It matters if it is offered up as an industry standard (regardless of market penetration) for anyone to license.

Imagine if Motorola got patent happy over H.264 while it was still trying to bloom. It'd kill the standard. FRAND is there to protect the standard from goofy people undermining a standard with their patents, which would prevent that standard from being useful.

samcraig said:
I guess the question then becomes - at what point does LTE become a requirement. Meaning - just because one carrier in the world requires it - does that mean it is a standard? Fair, perhaps not. But that would be the argument, wouldn't it.
Click to expand...

It is a standard when the LTE standards body is formed and offers up licenses for it. Which happened years ago. Market penetration != standard. IEEE is a standards body. IEEE 802.11ac is a standard, despite being early in the adoption phase.
 
I own Apple products. I like, but am not completely infatuated with, Apple. I have both positive and negative things to say about the company. I have mostly negative things to say about the crazy Apple fanatics who act as if they are defending their family's honor.

I know this is a privately run website and the moderators/masters can do as they please. But it speaks volumes that you guys can dish it out but not take it when it comes to your beloved Apple. Sorry, but I just have a more sober view of the company.
 
Macboy Pro said:
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!
Click to expand...

That's just ignorance. If you knew anything about the details of the lawsuit, you will find that it was not a lawsuit for a rectangular phone with rounded corners.
 
shartypants said:
Right, that's the way I thought it should work also, how can Samsung be suing someone when they are using a chip that should have already secured the rights? Anyone know what is going on here?

Edit: Ah, maybe deals with antenna design?
Click to expand...

no, it deals with the chips. Samsung 'supposedly' tried to terminate it's agreement with Qualcomm when the third-party was Apple. The details are in Samsung/Qualcomm contract but I don't think the contract details have been release to the public.
 
Oletros said:
When did Nokia copied Apple?
Click to expand...

At least try to keep up...

From Dec 12, 2009 article in BloombergBusinessWeek: "In the suit filed today in federal court in Wilmington, Delaware, Apple claimed Nokia is wrongfully using 13 of its patents. The claim seeks an order barring Nokia from infringing and for unspecified damages.

"Other companies must compete with us by inventing their own technologies, not just by stealing ours," Bruce Sewell, Cupertino, California-based Apple's general counsel, said in a statement. "
 
This is when the revenge gets won I guess. HTC are also said to be readying lawsuits to see Apple in court for breaching two of it's LTE patents, it's also going to have them on the iPad too:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-09-06/htc-patents-challenged-by-apple-probably-valid-judge-say

So if Samsung also tries to have them on LTE patents this could be interesting. Does Apple deserve it? Of course it does, it started this whole playground sandpit tit for tat, and for a company do dead against 'stealing' as it calls it, it will have to stand accused of the same thing if it isn't paying for those patent licenses.
 
bonaccij said:
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!!!
Click to expand...

I guess when you fail you fail hard.:rolleyes:
 
HTC had the first LTE smartphone, so something doesn't really add up.

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

Are you sure? There were LTE Samsung phones in 2011...
 
pure3d2 said:
That's just ignorance. If you knew anything about the details of the lawsuit, you will find that it was not a lawsuit for a rectangular phone with rounded corners.
Click to expand...

Erm? Actually part of the lawsuit that won Apple that billion dollars was the patents covering the shape of the iPhone. No matter how you word it, the patent covered it's shape and even it's colour as I understand.
 
pgyanke said:
At least try to keep up...

From Dec 12, 2009 article in BloombergBusinessWeek: "In the suit filed today in federal court in Wilmington, Delaware, Apple claimed Nokia is wrongfully using 13 of its patents. The claim seeks an order barring Nokia from infringing and for unspecified damages.

"Other companies must compete with us by inventing their own technologies, not just by stealing ours," Bruce Sewell, Cupertino, California-based Apple's general counsel, said in a statement. "
Click to expand...

Perhaps the one that have to keep up is you. Now you can search how all it ended because you know that suing it is not the same as winning the trial don't you?
 
iPhone 5 not even released yet... Samsung already wants to sue them over it!
What has this world come to?
 
gibbo132 said:
iPhone 5 not even released yet... Samsung already wants to sue them over it!
What has this world come to?
Click to expand...

Well, there is the Chinese company that's already released a clone of the leaked iPhone 5, patented the design and will sue Apple when the iPhone 5 is released in China.
 
NotABlindiSheep said:
I watched a Youtube clip the other day where it showed Bill Gates rescuing Apple (i.e. giving them money so they don't go bankrupt) and what do the fanboys in the audience do? Boo and laugh at him. Nothing's changed, sad really.
Click to expand...

Microsoft didn't give Apple money. They bought $150 million worth of Apple stock.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back