ITC Rules Apple Infringed on Samsung Patents, Issues Cease and Desist Order for Older Apple Devices

[sir1963nz]

I never said the kid being bullied was little quite the contrary, and now Apple is paying the price for their own frivolousness of law suits past.



If it makes you feel any better, I'm a current Apple user and think Apple brought this onto themselves and it was deserved. I like their products but hate their politics.

They were not frivolous, would you like it if I started posting as 2IS ..... oh did you not see the leading space, and what are you going to do now, claim ownership of the alphabet ?

That is what Samsung did, they deliberately made products to look as close as they could to Apples, including the packaging, power supplies, icons on the screen, everything, and I am sure if they thought they could have got away with putting an Apple logo on their products they would have done that too.

And just as you would object to someone making posting using a name that deliberately looks like yours, Apple objected to what Samsung was doing. Other manufacturers were more honest.

 

[vvswarup]

Getting a kick outta watching all the ifans get up in arms over this. Apple made their bed now it's time to lie in it.

What bed did Apple make? Apple has never sued using a Standards-Essential Patent. And for all the stink about Apple being anticompetitive with their patent litigation, there is yet to be an investigation by a regulatory authority to this effect. Meanwhile, Google has been investigated over antitrust implications of patent litigation using SEPs.

 

[pirg]

I for one am getting a kick out of all the android users cheering an injunction being granted on essential patents.

It's like they don't know what they're doing....

If this decision stands, it sets a pretty dangerous stage for companies to abuse the hell out of their patents. It's amazing that the android users are excited about this, but then, they really don't care about competition like they claim, it's always been this unhealthy hate of apple that they possess and they're putting on the silly backdrop of "karma". This decision is good for no one.

 

[Oletros]

I for one am getting a kick out of all the android users cheering an injunction being granted on essential patents.

It's like they don't know what they're doing....

If this decision stands, it sets a pretty dangerous stage for companies to abuse the hell out of their patents. It's amazing that the android users are excited about this, but then, they really don't care about competition like they claim, it's always been this unhealthy hate of apple that they possess and they're putting on the silly backdrop of "karma". This decision is good for no one.

I'm against those trials and injunctions but can you explain how makes any precedent when have been granted injunctions regarding FRAND patents since decades?

 

[vmistery]

A victory for Samsung is only going to intensify the patent 'war' even if it is on out dated Models. Whether or not this was a valid patent I have to admit I am not comfortable with it all, how will any small company ever be able to compete if they are at risk of a patent breach over something pointless?

 

[fpsBeaTt]

Getting a kick outta watching all the ifans get up in arms over this. Apple made their bed now it's time to lie in it.

Isn't that cute. You up-vote your own comments. d'awwwwwwwwwwwwwww

 

[MacDav]

Well the only one of these still being sold is the iPhone 4, but that won't be much longer. Is this really going to affect anything?

By the time the appeal is finished, none of the products will be affected, as none will be sold anymore.

----------

On the other hand, one might decide as a matter of principle to buy none of the Chinese-made goods from the fruit company that refuses to license and pay for the technology that it uses.

My home is Apple-free, and has a 60" Samsung TV and several Android devices from Samsung.

Well... Whoop dee do!

----------

Getting a kick outta watching all the ifans get up in arms over this. Apple made their bed now it's time to lie in it.

Sure thing. I'm really excited. By the time the appeal is done, this will affect zero Apple products. Way to go Samsung.

 

[MacBram]

Is that sentence badly worded? To me it reads that Samsung argued that the patent is a FRAND patent (i.e. essential to UMTS 3G), but Apple denied it, yet claimed that Samsung has a FRAND obligation

Does it really mean Samsung argued against the claim that '348 is FRAND?

Basically, Samsung is guilty of abusing Standard Essential patents, as usual. What Samsung invariably claims is that their patent(s) are not part of the pool of "Standards Essential" patents subject to FRAND terms despite all the evidence and declarations upheld elsewhere; but Samsung nevertheless claims their patent is essential to the technology that Apple is evidently using in certain products (allegedly "by definition" if an Apple product is claimed to do x,y,z), and therefore Samsung claims Apple must be infringing on the patent.

Apple is disputing that Samsung has a patent that is "essential" to the technology, and yet is somehow not an internationally recognized Standards Essential patent subject to FRAND terms. IF this is even remotely the case, then Apple has done its own work and implemented its own technology to accomplish the same job. Likely, the patent in question has already been declared a Standards Essential Patent subject to FRAND terms elsewhere and for other companies who already license it.

Any patent on specific technology absolutely required by everyone in the business would be/should be deemed a Standards Essential patent that is licensable under FRAND terms. It's just that Samsung/Korea, etc. recognize their international obligations only when it suits them, but are happy to both apply their own rules cavalierly in their own country and play upon bodies like the ITC in other countries. It's shameful. Here we have the ITC looking out for the interests of a cavalier Korean company who has no regard for international declarations, obligations or the rule of law anywhere, including in its own country. It's like dealing with terrorists -- the ITC should have no dealings with them whatsoever. Apple follows all the rules but has to compete with those who follow none.

 

[Oletros]

Sure thing. I'm really excited. By the time the appeal is done, this will affect zero Apple products. Way to go Samsung.

Like in the other trials involving Apple and Samsung

----------

Basically, Samsung is guilty of abusing Standard Essential patents, as usual.

Can you ppint me to that sentence?

 

[MrWillie]

Just got a Galaxy S4 and in all honesty it makes the iPhone look like a kids toy.

If you haven't tried one then you really should. It genuinely is a far superior product and doesn't need to rely on smart marketing for features similar to Siri which frankly don't even work.

Korea > USA

I feel for you, I just an HTC One and that walks all over the cheap plasticky S4. But hey, now you're a popular kid again right ???

 

[BertyBoy]

Someone please help me understand this,

Is it surely not just the US Government pushing the ruling against Apple as a gentle reminder than Obama wants Apple tax dollars.
To insist that the US Government could have no influence over the ruling would be naive.

I read the evidence in the case a few days ago over hte price-fixing on eBooks. A large part of the evidence seemed to be that Amazon raised the prices of it's eBooks for Kindle after the iPad came out. This appears to be another one of those "Only in America" stories.

Apple, dump the US, put your HQ in the UK, we'll happily take the tax dollars you're willing to pay. And it'll keep Johnny happy.

 

[Oletros]

A large part of the evidence seemed to be that Amazon raised the prices of it's eBooks for Kindle after the iPad came out.

Then you have to re read because that is not right

 

[pirg]

I'm against those trials and injunctions but can you explain how makes any precedent when have been granted injunctions regarding FRAND patents since decades?

I did not say it sets a precedent, I said it sets a stage for companies to abuse the hell out of their patents.

 

[roadbloc]

Samsung fans, tell me how "Apparatus and method for encoding/decoding transport format combination indicator in CDMA mobile communication system." is something you support going after anyone for.

If you say, 'But Apple started it', just makes Samsung as bad as you claim Apple to be, and no more taking the high-road with Samsung.

I don't anyone here was saying that Samsung has a morale high-ground. I think it was more pointing out that Apple is not right to start the lawsuit wars over vague patents.

As far as I'm concerned, Samsung do right by doing the same. At least "Apparatus and method for encoding/decoding transport format combination indicator in CDMA mobile communication system" is a little less vague than Apple's "Multimedia Synchronization Method and Device".

Either way, this will do nothing but hurt innovation and consumers.

 

[GoodWatch]

Samsung fans, tell me how "Apparatus and method for encoding/decoding transport format combination indicator in CDMA mobile communication system." is something you support going after anyone for.

If you say, 'But Apple started it', just makes Samsung as bad as you claim Apple to be, and no more taking the high-road with Samsung.

Really? If Apple goes to court it's OK but if some other company takes similar steps 'Samsung fans' need to give the answer why? *Cough* Rectangle with rounded corners *cough*. Tell me, is THAT worth going after?

 

[Oletros]

I did not say it sets a precedent, I said it sets a stage for companies to abuse the hell out of their patents.

What abuse?

 

[MacBram]

Someone please help me understand this,

Is it surely not just the US Government pushing the ruling against Apple as a gentle reminder than Obama wants Apple tax dollars.
To insist that the US Government could have no influence over the ruling would be naive.

I read the evidence in the case a few days ago over hte price-fixing on eBooks. A large part of the evidence seemed to be that Amazon raised the prices of it's eBooks for Kindle after the iPad came out. This appears to be another one of those "Only in America" stories.

Apple, dump the US, put your HQ in the UK, we'll happily take the tax dollars you're willing to pay. And it'll keep Johnny happy.

Tell me about it. Only in America. A large part of the evidence seems to be that Apple, as a new entrant into a market which one company had sewn up with a different model, talked to about 5 different publishers and told them all pretty much the same thing ("collusion" apparently, according to a lobbying monopolist). To each publisher Apple says:

"If you go with our Agency Model (which we use for all products we sell) then you can charge what you like, and we will take 30% of the transaction;

We won't devalue your product by using them as loss leaders in order to build our market share or control the market, etc.; The price you set is the price;

If you offer your products for sale on another platform which you are more than welcome to do, please offer them on ours for the same price or less..."

Go figure.

 

[pirg]

What abuse?

You can sugarcoat it anyway you want, Oletros....

 

[gnasher729]

Well, I am not a samsung fan, but Apple did go after a rectangle with rounded corners.

You probably don't realise that Samsung has patented "rectangle with rounded corner" themselves.

----------

Really? If Apple goes to court it's OK but if some other company takes similar steps 'Samsung fans' need to give the answer why? *Cough* Rectangle with rounded corners *cough*. Tell me, is THAT worth going after?

As I said before, "cough rectangle with rounded corners" marks anyone who says it as clueless. Apple has design patents for designs consisting of a long list of items, including "rectangle" and "rounded corners". Guess what: Samsung has design patents for designs consisting of a long list of items, including "rectangle" and "rounded corners". Apple sued Samsung for making phones that looked exactly like an iPhone 3GS, and tablets that looked exactly like an iPad. And if you look around, all those companies that didn't copy Apple don't sell much, and the one company that copied Apple does.

 

[Oletros]

You can sugarcoat it anyway you want, Oletros....

Sugarcoat? Do you have any sentence or are you doing the same you do, voonyx?

 

[pirg]

Sugarcoat? Do you have any sentence or are you doing the same you do, voonyx?

Again...you can sugarcoat it anyway you want, Oletros.

 

[nutjob]

Well what goes around comes around. Apple started this BS, I hope it's covered in it by the end.

 

[Winni]

You probably don't realise that Samsung has patented "rectangle with rounded corner" themselves.

----------



As I said before, "cough rectangle with rounded corners" marks anyone who says it as clueless. Apple has design patents for designs consisting of a long list of items, including "rectangle" and "rounded corners". Guess what: Samsung has design patents for designs consisting of a long list of items, including "rectangle" and "rounded corners". Apple sued Samsung for making phones that looked exactly like an iPhone 3GS, and tablets that looked exactly like an iPad. And if you look around, all those companies that didn't copy Apple don't sell much, and the one company that copied Apple does.

Well, European Courts in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands completely disagreed with that and found that Samsung did NOT copy Apple's "rectangle with rounded corners" design. The last ruling in this regard only happened a few days ago and was made by the Dutch supreme court.

The thing is that Apple is bitching about design patents, and most of them are actually so trivial that they should not have been granted a patent for them in the first place. "Slide to unlock" is one of those ridiculous patents; as if those locks hadn't been invented hundreds of years ago... I can only shake my head to the fact that you can get a patent for something like this in the US. It speaks volumes about the quality of your patent system.

Generally, the Apple vs Samsung soap opera is about Apple claiming design patents (which seems to be all that they've got) and Samsung claiming patents for actual technology.

In the meantime, Microsoft is making jokes about the two of them and keeps throwing new products on the market that consolidate the user experience on ALL device classes, from smartphones and tablets over computers to entertainment consoles. They're re-inventing themselves while others rather litigate than innovate. Guess who will laugh in the end.

 

[kal101]

Microsoft [...] re-inventing themselves while others rather litigate than innovate.

Yes, because Apple's engineers are also their lawyers.
Not very smart Apple, not very smart.

 

[slughead]

We are disappointed that the Commission has overturned an earlier ruling and we plan to appeal. Today's decision has no impact on the availability of Apple products in the United States. Samsung is using a strategy which has been rejected by courts and regulators around the world. They’ve admitted that it’s against the interests of consumers in Europe and elsewhere, yet here in the United States Samsung continues to try to block the sale of Apple products by using patents they agreed to license to anyone for a reasonable fee.

Turnabout is fair play, bastards. Was "$1 billion" a "reasonable fee" ??

----------

I agree 100%. Have you also read the articles about how jurors in that case totally ignored "prior art" because it was "too complicated"? We were all saying that rounded edges on rectangular devices existed prior to the Apple patent; apparently they just ignored that.

http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20120828225612963

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390

Well, European Courts in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands completely disagreed with that and found that Samsung did NOT copy Apple's "rectangle with rounded corners" design. The last ruling in this regard only happened a few days ago and was made by the Dutch supreme court.

The thing is that Apple is bitching about design patents, and most of them are actually so trivial that they should not have been granted a patent for them in the first place. "Slide to unlock" is one of those ridiculous patents; as if those locks hadn't been invented hundreds of years ago... I can only shake my head to the fact that you can get a patent for something like this in the US. It speaks volumes about the quality of your patent system.

Generally, the Apple vs Samsung soap opera is about Apple claiming design patents (which seems to be all that they've got) and Samsung claiming patents for actual technology.

In the meantime, Microsoft is making jokes about the two of them and keeps throwing new products on the market that consolidate the user experience on ALL device classes, from smartphones and tablets over computers to entertainment consoles. They're re-inventing themselves while others rather litigate than innovate. Guess who will laugh in the end.