Palm Releases webOS 1.3.1, iTunes Media Sync Missing

[zacman]

Huh?

Wait. Are you now saying that the iPhone doesn't support GSM?

It doesn't matter if there is a lawsuit pending as Apple is obviously using the technology right now. It's like saying Psystar hasn't pirated MacOS X because the law suit is still pending you know...

 

[pdjudd]

Wait. Are you now saying that the iPhone doesn't support GSM?

It doesn't matter if there is a lawsuit pending as Apple is obviously using the technology right now. It's like saying Psystar hasn't pirated MacOS X because the law suit is still pending you know...

A lawsuit doesn’t prove theft occurred which is what was claimed. A conviction proves theft. An valid scenario could be that there is nothing more than a licensing dispute that Nokia is trying to step up by suing Apple. Happens lots of times and cannot be accepted as proof of anything.

Thats why I state conviction or admission by Apple. If apple is guilty, then there should be a conviction. Otherwise we cannot validly state any guilt. All we know is what nokia claims - so far there hasn’t been any evidence put forward to establish their claims. There is nothing. Anybody can file a lawsuit. Just file a suit, pay the fee, and your are good to go. You don’t even have to prove a thing until the case reaches court.

 

[zacman]

Thats why I state conviction or admission by Apple.

Apple hadn't negotiated with Nokia for 3 years if they hadn't thought that Nokia had a case. Apple just didn't want to pay what all other manufactures paid to Nokia under the FRAND rules (5 percent of revenue). Plus Apple didn't even say that they do not use the technology but that they think that the patents won't hold up in court.

 

[pdjudd]

Apple hadn't negotiated with Nokia for 3 years if they hadn't thought that Nokia had a case. Apple just didn't want to pay what all other manufactures paid to Nokia under the FRAND rules (5 percent of revenue). Plus Apple didn't even say that they do not use the technology but that they think that the patents won't hold up in court.

So why sue now? Again, I want a conviction, not an accusation. I don’t care how bad it looks, you cannot claim that somebody stole something without proof. So far we have no proof - just allegations. There has been no trial yet - until that happens, we have to assume Apple is innocent. There was a reason I said these things do not count in my first post - I knew that this was going to be brought up and I knew that this could end up the same way that any number of other lawsuits that get brought up against Apple every ear over IP - until there has been a judgement, we cannot assume anything.

I will not accept this as proof - this case has yet to reach a trial phase where evidence will come out - all we have amount to “he said - she said” from both parties - not enough. I want actual hard proof - not allegations.

 

[Goona]

So Apple will steal even more of Nokia's technology?

You have proof that Apple stole anything?

 

[*LTD*]

You have proof that Apple stole anything?

Never knew Nokia really had anything wort stealing.

 

[jimmyjoemccrow]

Never knew Nokia really had anything wort stealing.

3G?

 

[*LTD*]

3G?

What does Nokia have to do with 3G?

 

[DMann]

What does Nokia have to do with 3G?

That would be Qualcomm, not Nokia. From what I understand, Apple uses its manufacturer as middleman (Foxconn). Foxconn pays the license fee to Qualcomm, drawing from the price it charges Apple.

Apple then purchases the iPhone from Foxconn, and sells it at full price.

Apparently, Nokia holds a patent on GSM technology, for a span of 25 years - it's Monsanto all over again.

It is interesting to note, however, that Nokia reported its first net loss in October, while Apple beat Wall Street estimates for sales and profits, partly because of the iPhone's success.

Apple reported a 25% increase in third-quarter revenue, compared with a 20% drop for Nokia.

In retrospect, Nokia deciding to sue, now, is somewhat analogous to waiting for one's house to burn all the way down before calling the fire department.

They really should have called when they first smelled smoke, if they didn't want this to come across as insurance fraud.

 

[Test17]

That would be Qualcomm, not Nokia. From what I understand, Apple uses its manufacturer as middleman (Foxconn). Foxconn pays the license fee to Qualcomm, drawing from the price it charges Apple.

I'm afraid the term 3G is pretty meaningless, however the GSM, UMTS/HSDPA, and LTE standards incorporate patents held by Nokia.

They really should have called when they first smelled smoke, if they didn't want this to come across as insurance fraud.

Conveniently forgetting the negotiations with Apple prior to the filing of the suit.

 

[DMann]

Conveniently forgetting the negotiations with Apple prior to the filing of the suit.

Yes, it is likely that this action was intended to push along the behind-the-scenes negotiations with Apple.

Although three years would not be considered an excessive amount of time for such negotiations, it does seem possible that this suit was motivated by the recent shift in sales.

Having read Nokia’s complaint, the gist of the dispute between Nokia and Apple appears to be whether Nokia offered Apple Fair Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) licensing terms for its essential patents.

For all we know, the structure of the royalty, rather than the amount of it, could violate FRAND and/or the essential facility doctrine.

At this level of escalation, we'll find out soon enough.

 

[charlituna]

I'm afraid the term 3G is pretty meaningless, however the GSM, UMTS/HSDPA, and LTE standards incorporate patents held by Nokia.

weren't some, if not all, of those patents the same ones that Qualcomm sued Nokia over, leading to a joint ownership agreement.