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

[nikaru]

LTE es a technolgy by itself. If Samsung has the patent for it, they should sell it to other manufactures for a non-discriminatory price. A price which is equal for RIM, Apple and Nokia. But they cant say for Apple it will cost 6$ per device and for Nokia 0,50 cents.

What apple demanded from Samsung are design patents, funcionality patents, how things work, which can be seen by the eye and which makes the overall apperance of a product. Those patents should be selled or not from the patent holder if he wants to do it, but he is not obligated to do so.

I like how Microsoft do it. The windows phone does not feel or look anything like the iPhone, so yes, you can make a phone and not be sued by apple. Look theire Surface Tablet. Adding a samll stand to it makes entirely new product, which does not look like the iPad. The Galaxy tablet, come on! When I see someone in the subway reading from it, I cant say if it is a samsung or apple product, if I dont see the logo.

 

[Oletros]

Nokia is no threat to Apple. They clearly decided it was a better decision to pay them off then play that game.

Ah, because Nokia is not a threat Apple paid them instead of winning the trial? Really?

 

[the read]

Apple invented a new phone, publicly announced that they Patented the hell out of it. Samsung didn't care and copied it. Apple sued. Apple won, because Samsung did, indeed, copy their phone.

Now Samsung is the crying baby trying to go after ONLY APPLE for FRAND patents.

And you back Samsung? Why?

Competition is great. Its what makes life amazing and the driving force behind how man could walk on the moon. (That, a few Russians and billions of $)

Honestly, Samsung are using Android which in my opinion has recently taken the lead on mobile OS. I've used Apple for the past 4 years and feel its progress has been disappointing, manipulative and I'm often stuck with not being able to achieve basic tasks on my phone. ( like recieving an attachment, manipulating it and attaching to other emails.) iOS is just to restrictive.

Modern Apple seams obsessed with world domination and have developed an inability to collaborate with any other company. I honestly feel their products are becoming sterile and boring.

But it's a personal choice.

Cheers,

Ps: I need to dash, Samsung just called and asked if I could bring them some tissues.

 

[Cryptan]

This is going to make for a great TV show one day. Mad Men, Apple style.

 

[KnightWRX]

Samsung DID copy, the documents presented at the trial clearly showed that they compared their phones to the iPhone and replicated as much as they could.

The problem is the documents not showed at trial. Judge Grewal refused that Samsung show a lot of evidence that would have went towards showing their non-intent in copying design patents to the outright invalidation of these patents through prior art.

Then there's the whole case of the jury foreman that seems to have no clue how prior art actually works, used evidence not provided at trial to form his verdict and convince the other members to side with him, and all the other tidbits he's leaked getting his 15 minutes of fame.

All this could result in successful appeals or 50 (b) motions by Samsung overturning parts of the verdict or forcing retrial of certain claims.

As I said : It's not as simple as you make it. You wish it was simple, Apple won, it's over. But it's really not.

 

[Dwalls90]

Ah, because Nokia is not a threat Apple paid them instead of winning the trial? Really?

Correct. Does anyone who considers buying a smartphone really even look at Nokia? Their Windows smartphones are all they have at present, and they instantly took a plummet in the subsidized pricing because they weren't moving.

Nokia is no threat or major player on the playing field at present. Definitely not in terms of profits either.

Actually, they've won every case I know of in the end except the one that happened to be near Apple HQ. It also happened to be the only one with a fine that matters.

Apple has actually lost most of the cases around the world. I would say...politically, it looks like Apple paid someone off, even if that isn't quite what happened. What's the rest of the world to think? If Apple bans the Galaxy in the US somehow, I can see Samsung pulling all their operations out of the US, selling their stuff that services the US to other companies, and to stop supplying Apple with components, and then using those components to take over other markets like Europe and Japan. It would be a really bad move on Apple's part to drive Samsung out of the US, which I'm not sure they're not trying to do. Also, to handle the temporary production problems, Samsung will close their US plants to boot if they stop doing business here over massive legal liabilities for things like "bounce back"-

So I really think this patent war needs to end with a sense of reality. Apple is in really good space and I'm not sure what they're trying to accomplish. Saying a product with good battery life, NFC and a much bigger screen and LTE is a ripoff of your product because a few fashion choices is really pushing it. The Galaxy Nexus is not an iPhone, nor is it supposed to be. I still have iOS, but I just don't think Apple has a reasonable case, I never have, I still don't, and I don't think Samsung has a case (although for some strange reason the US courts decided Apple didn't have to pay Samsung for the technology it cribbed...though all other courts around the world again disagree).

Also, if Samsung is willing to stop the iPhone 5 from coming to market, that means they don't care much about the Apple contracts anymore, since they'd have little to keep selling. Just a thought-Samsung is basically declaring "We don't need Apple"-and do you really want to risk an iPhone without Samsung components?

Didn't think so.

You are crazy and have things way backwards.

Samsung NEEDS Apple more than Apple NEEDS Samsung.

Apple accounts for 10% of Samsung's annual revenue through component supply. Samsung has already cost their company $1 Billion by leading with their emotions in court. If they continue down that path, their image will be tarnished even more, and their stock will plummet further.

Apple doesn't need Samsung. Samsung isn't Apple's only supplier and they have been continuously moving away from Samsung in recent years, and there was an article released very recently supporting this.

Get real, Samsung isn't pulling out of the USA. Apple isn't going to stop using Samsung altogether, at least yet.

Apple has more money, more resources and more innovations. Samsung doesn't trump Apple in any of these categories.

Has anyone gone to war with Apple and crushed Apple to the point of not coming out on top?

 

[Swift]

1) You don't have to implement LTE. You can have slower phones. Just like you can create a phone that doesn't have rounded corners (as an example)

2) depends on what the licensing agreements say

The rounded corners thing marks you as an angry angry Android fan pounding the stupid talking point.

The rounded corners thing came as one detail of the many, many ways that Samsung was copying the iPhone. It's a design patent. So if you make a phone that copies MANY things from Apple's design that make it look very much like an iPhone; including the alterations that Samsung made from straight Android to look more like that iPhone. So, you can make a phone with rounded corners, and you can make a phone with icons; if your phone with rounded corners can't be confused with an iPhone, and it isn't deliberately styled so that a sales clerk can say, "It's just LIKE an iPhone," then it's okay. Design, see? If you remember, Apple produced a Samsung document that pretty well demonstrated that, like the jury said, they copied the iPhone deliberately. Almost like a cheap clothing manufacturer might make a bogus "Yves St. Laurent" shirt.

I think design patents last 14 years, but I could be wrong. So about 12 years from now, Samsung would be allowed to copy the iPhone. Just not right now,

Doesn't matter. They don't have to sue before or at launch. They can wait until several product infringe just like Apple did.

That's probably true. Though if they thought they would need it later, they would have registered their complaint at that time. The crucial thing is, I'm quite sure Apple will say, "We're entirely in favor of paying for that patent just like anybody else. What does LG pay for those patents? Samsung is willing to blow up the FRAND system to block Apple from the high-speed network? I don't think any court in the world will support that business practice. If the patents aren't FRAND, then they will be.

 

[uknowimright]

Correct. Does anyone who considers buying a smartphone really even look at Nokia? Their Windows smartphones are all they have at present, and they instantly took a plummet in the subsidized pricing because they weren't moving.

Nokia is no threat or major player on the playing field at present. Definitely not in terms of profits either.



You are crazy and have things way backwards.

Samsung NEEDS Apple more than Apple NEEDS Samsung.

Apple accounts for 10% of Samsung's annual revenue through component supply. Samsung has already cost their company $1 Billion by leading with their emotions in court. If they continue down that path, their image will be tarnished even more, and their stock will plummet further.

Apple doesn't need Samsung. Samsung isn't Apple's only supplier and they have been continuously moving away from Samsung in recent years, and there was an article released very recently supporting this.

Get real, Samsung isn't pulling out of the USA. Apple isn't going to stop using Samsung altogether, at least yet.

Apple has more money, more resources and more innovations. Samsung doesn't trump Apple in any of these categories.

Has anyone gone to war with Apple and crushed Apple to the point of not coming out on top?

funny post

 

[Fukui]

Do they really think that Apple would take any chances by not properly licensing LTE patents? If they intend to allege that Apple needs to pay an additional license on top of what they already pay to component manufacturers (who are licensed themselves), which is what they alleged for the 3G patents, then Samsung really has no case here.

Not necessarily.... They can probably just as easily revoke those downstream rights in apples specific case, thereby making them infringe. This is how, I believe it was that Motorola is proving apples infringement as wel... (in terms of 3G essential patents anyways)

 

[unlinked]

Apple invented a new phone, publicly announced that they Patented the hell out of it. Samsung didn't care and copied it. Apple sued. Apple won, because Samsung did, indeed, copy their phone.

Now Samsung is the crying baby trying to go after ONLY APPLE for FRAND patents.

And you back Samsung? Why?

Why do people care whether Samsung are only going after Apple or not?
You are obliged to defend a trademark or you lose it. That doesn't apply to patents afaik. Samsung going after more or less companies doesn't change the strength of their case. Maybe other companies negotiated the rights or maybe Samsung and Apple have some massive legal vendetta going on. Possibly both.

 

[lukarak]

Any patents that use the government appointed spectrum must be FRAND. Anything else is just an invitation for limiting competition.

 

[fSHAD]

Mobile Wars : Return of the SAMAI
Can the sammy win a light saber war against the darth apple ?

Lord of the SmartPhones : Return of the SAMMY !
Who will get the ring ? my precious >>>

 

[k995]

Someone is having a little fit.

How is 3G different than 4G. Samesung needs to realized that when you are caught red-handed than you get in trouble.

20 votes for such a fanboy post incredible.

The only thing that is happening here is lawyers getting rich and consumers paying more to pay them.

Apples copied, samsung copied, LG,sony dell everybody copies.

 

[Mr Hill]

Suing over LTE patents? Samsung is just grasping for straws now. Bitter about losing the case for copying the iPhone.

 

[YesILoveTech]

Samsung will eventually bankrupt themselves by putting their emotions in front of their cases. I bet Apple is not even tickled by this threat.

----------

You Sir are an idiot blinded by your loyalty to Apple. Samsung as a whole is a HUGE multi-national company that has its hands into so many industries that they will not become bankrupt over this. The $1Billion they lost is a drop in the bucket actually. Samsung has a semi-conductor arm, an LCD/LED arm, a weapons manufacturing arm, they are the worlds second largest shipbuilder, not to mention many other aspects in their portfolio. But I bet you never even knew that, which is evident by your asinine statement.

I appreciate Apple products as well as Samsung products, I have an SIII and it's great, but I also have bought 4 MacBook Pros in the last 5 years as well as 2 3rd Gen iPads for me and wife, and 3 iPad 2's for my children. I appreciate good technology and know how to separate fanboyism from consumerism.

 

[AustinIllini]

Apple and Samsung suing each other will not suddenly send us back to the dark ages.

It's all fun and games until Samsung, HTC, or Google gets the iPhone off the shelf for any period of time. If I'm waiting until December for my upgrade to come up, I'm a little nervous.

 

[Dwalls90]

----------

You Sir are an idiot blinded by your loyalty to Apple. Samsung as a whole is a HUGE multi-national company that has its hands into so many industries that they will not become bankrupt over this. The $1Billion they lost is a drop in the bucket actually. Samsung has a semi-conductor arm, an LCD/LED arm, a weapons manufacturing arm, they are the worlds second largest shipbuilder, not to mention many other aspects in their portfolio. But I bet you never even knew that, which is evident by your asinine statement.

I appreciate Apple products as well as Samsung products, I have an SIII and it's great, but I also have bought 4 MacBook Pros in the last 5 years as well as 2 3rd Gen iPads for me and wife, and 3 iPad 2's for my children. I appreciate good technology and know how to separate fanboyism from consumerism.

Having your hands in multiple industries isn't an on-paper advantage.

$1 Billion isn't really a drop in the bucket, when they only posted a profit of under $11 Billion for an annual profit in FY 2011. So yea, they just lost about 9% of their annual profit.

Apple posted a $26 Billion profit in FY 2011.

 

[YesILoveTech]

Having your hands in multiple industries isn't an on-paper advantage.

$1 Billion isn't really a drop in the bucket, when they only posted a profit of under $11 Billion for an annual profit in FY 2011. So yea, they just lost about 9% of their annual profit.

Apple posted a $26 Billion profit in FY 2011.

What has Apple done to you guys? It's really really amazing seeing the mindless drones they have created. I give Apple a lot of credit for this phenomenon.

And they aren't going anywhere...they are too important to the world's economy for things much more important that mobile devices. Trust and believe that.

 

[aerok]

Any patents that use the government appointed spectrum must be FRAND. Anything else is just an invitation for limiting competition.

Huh? The government didn't appoint LTE chips... And mind you, Samsung is independant from the American government.

----------

What has Apple done to you guys? It's really really amazing seeing the mindless drones they have created. I give Apple a lot of credit for this phenomenon.

Yup SJ did a great job creating the Apple cult. Even Onion News had a crack at it

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...-YHwDg&usg=AFQjCNHSBTxeLQxuNS1nvf38XBDMxTa9FA

 

[apolloa]

1) You don't have to implement LTE. You can have slower phones. Just like you can create a phone that doesn't have rounded corners (as an example)

Can't believe I missed this utterly ridiculous comment! If Apple launched an iPhone 5 with no LTE it would literally be laughed out of the market! I mean you would be paying in some cases MORE then other top end phones that do have LTE and other features like NFC for the iPhone. But it's all right because it's Apple?

Anyway the sheer fact that the iPad 3 has LTE makes your entire comment invalid really anyway.

 

[Glideslope]

Samsung

It's over. You build nice Container Ships. Refocus.

 

[bbeagle]

Invented you mean the pinch to zoom?tap to zoom?apple took existing ideas that all ready was in use and patent it and then sued others for using them...

Pinch to zoom was NOWHERE before the iPhone.

There were touch screen phones, but only phones where you could press your finger down somewhere on the screen and get a response, or phones where you could move a mouse pointer across the screen and click icons or buttons by tapping, similar to a desktop.

There were NO phones prior to the iPhone that had a pinch to zoom, or even phones that allowed more than 1 finger to touch the screen at one time (multitouch).

(Apple bought the company Fingerworks, which created this technology. Thus through reciprocity, Apple CREATED this technology)

 

[aerok]

Anyway the sheer fact that the iPad 3 has LTE makes your entire comment invalid really anyway.

Umh... no? Do you really think patent cases work that way?

''You can't sue me for product B because you didn't sue for my product A that came out before''

----------

Pinch to zoom was NOWHERE before the iPhone.

There were touch screen phones, but only phones where you could press your finger down somewhere on the screen and get a response, or phones where you could move a mouse pointer across the screen and click icons or buttons by tapping, similar to a desktop.

There were NO phones prior to the iPhone that had a pinch to zoom.

And there were no LTE phones before the Samsung one that came out last year.

 

[Swift]

What has Apple done to you guys? It's really really amazing seeing the mindless drones they have created. I give Apple a lot of credit for this phenomenon.

And they aren't going anywhere...they are too important to the world's economy for things much more important that mobile devices. Trust and believe that.

The mindlessness is on the other side, sticking up for a company that violated every kind of IP. Now, you may want to change the legal framework of international business, fine; but this is the law now. But a technology without which you are precluded from participating in the market is the very definition of FRAND. Compulsory, reasonable licensing.

 

[aerok]

The mindlessness is on the other side, sticking up for a company that violated every kind of IP. Now, you may want to change the legal framework of international business, fine; but this is the law now. But a technology without which you are precluded from participating in the market is the very definition of FRAND. Compulsory, reasonable licensing.

You're straying away from facts. Google Apple drones and you will links to many articles explaining this fact. Search for Samsung drones and you won't even have 1/10 of what you this get with Apple.

Edit: My bad, searching for drones won't get you anywhere. Try searching Apple cult and Samsung Cult. Notice the difference.