They dont HAVE to, but they are FREE too. Just like Apple were free to use a keyboard and a mouse, or a desktop paradigm UI (neither of which are Apple inventions).
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.
Samsung Already Planning to Target iPhone 5 with Patent Lawsuits
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They dont HAVE to, but they are FREE too. Just like Apple were free to use a keyboard and a mouse, or a desktop paradigm UI (neither of which are Apple inventions).
Can you sue just on size of screen and thickness? Then all television manufacturers should be suing each other. Apple is suing Samsung because of design similarities between the iPad/iPhone and the Samsung Galaxy products. To Apple the Galaxy series of phones and tablets look too much like the iPad and iPhone not just physically but also the UI.
If you think the Dutch Economy has jack for influence within the EU versus the German Economy then you keep on thinking just that. Ignore reality all you want.
Both sides should just settle, regarding this and the tablets.
Which is what it's about mostly, samsung are just acting defensively in this case.
I doubt samsung intend to block the iPhone 5, it's only a threat to get Apple to drop the suites to block on their own products.
Which is what it's about mostly, samsung are just acting defensively in this case.
I doubt samsung intend to block the iPhone 5, it's only a threat to get Apple to drop the suites to block on their own products.
Weird, they don't even know what the iPhone 5 will be like, or if it will infringe on their patents.
If the iPhone 5 was already out and infringed on their patents, fair enough, but preemptively suing is a bit silly, unless they're fed up with Apple suing them over everything and are trying to show them that 2 can play at that game.
If the iPhone 5 was already out and infringed on their patents, fair enough, but preemptively suing is a bit silly, unless they're fed up with Apple suing them over everything and are trying to show them that 2 can play at that game.
Most standards covered by policies of RAND patent licensing include some clause requiring reciprocity in patent agreements.
For example, standards ratified by ITU-T, ITU-R, ISO, and IEC, allow their members to offer patents essential to a standard under any of three options:
1) A no-fee license for all other implementations of the standard. This is based on the principle of reciprocal cross-licensing, and if member X decides to offer their license for free, but they discover that member Y is going to charge a fee for their patents, then member X can choose to charge a reciprocal fee to member Y, while leaving the license free for everybody else. Additionally, a retaliatory clause says that if member Y chooses to take up legal action against member X, then member X can choose to withhold or revoke its license to member Y, while leaving the license open to all other implementations.
2) A reasonable license fee for all other implementations of the standard. This is still based on the principle of a retaliatory clause, and if member Y takes up legal action against member X, then member X can still choose to withhold or revoke their license to member Y.
3) A simple disclosure that they hold a patent essential to the implementation of the standard, with no specific commitment to actually license the patent out to anybody. Every individual implementation must apply on a case-by-case basis to receive a license to the patent.
Under any of these terms, Samsung would be within its rights to withhold a license to Apple (because Apple was the original aggressor of legal action) without violating their RAND obligations to all other manufacturers.
----------
Their assertion is, if it's a device that uses UMTS (ie. 3G GSM) or anything else that builds upon it (eg. HSDPA, HSUPA, HSPA, HSPA+, etc), then there would be no possible way for it to exist without treading upon some of Samsung's patents...
Apparently, it is much more difficult to receive a preliminary injunction for technological patents than it is for community design in Europe. They're governed by two different processes. There was an article somewhere that summarized it much better than I can explain it from memory, but I cannot find it right now. When I find it, I'll link to it.
Many FRAND patent licenses, as I said above, can often be revoked in retaliation to an aggressor instigating legal action against you.
...
Apple started it first. But probably they didn't expect that situation will go like this when Samsung, HTC and Google with help of IBM strike back. Apple invented something but that's nothing compared to IBM.
In 2010. Samsung had 2 times bigger revenue than Apple, Samsung got US$ 133.78 billion, while Apple got US$ 65.23 billion revenue
, so according to this Samsung can hardly buy Apple .
Apple started it first. But probably they didn't expect that situation will go like this when Samsung, HTC and Google with help of IBM strike back. Apple invented something but that's nothing compared to IBM.
In 2010. Samsung had 2 times bigger revenue than Apple, Samsung got US$ 133.78 billion, while Apple got US$ 65.23 billion revenue
, so according to this Samsung can hardly buy Apple .
The iPhone 5 according to the mockups may look similar to a Samsung device, but it doesn't matter because the mockups appear to be knock offs of the iPad 2.
No, the injuction in Germany is because Dusseldorf court is like Eastern District of Texas court regarding IP trials.
In Netherland, judges have dismissed the injuction and is the same Community Design.
That's ok, Samsung isn't planning to sue over design but over patents for wireless communications. It has nothing to do with how something looks.
(In fact, all of Samsung's counterclaims have been about either power management patents or wireless communications patents).
samsung, you're pathetic!!!! stop copying, start innovating and stop whining like a little bitch!
----------
that's very true, apple suing based on design patents, protecting their look and feel, samsung on the other hand uses what it's got - hw patents
----------
nope, no settling. samsung should employ designers not just photographers
----------
that's very true, apple suing based on design patents, protecting their look and feel, samsung on the other hand uses what it's got - hw patents
----------
nope, no settling. samsung should employ designers not just photographers
So wait, Samsung is pathetic for "copying Apple IP" but Apple isn't because hey, it's not design patents and looks ?
I'm sorry, the look of my iPhone is the last thing I care about. I care about it making calls and accessing data. Otherwise, it's just a plastic slab. HW patents are much more important in this field than subjective looks.
And that's just what these "copying" comments are : Subjective. It's been shown time and again that Apple cherry picked pictures don't quite mesh with reality.
The Netherlands handles a significant proportion of EU electronic imports. Kinda hard to sell stuff in Germany that never gets to Europe.
Samsung is pathetic for copying Apple design so Apple is pathetic for copying Samsung hw IP?
With a preliminary injunction, they would have exactly the same risk that Apple had: If a preliminary injunction is later found to be unjustified, then the company getting the injunction would have to pay for all damages caused by the injunction.
I think it will just settle out of court, but you know Apple could just buy Samsung.
Makes me wonder how old you are.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8L1)
Sounds like the making of another massive Samsung gaffe.
What are they going to offer as evidence next? The robot from Buck Rogers? Actually, I'd really like to see these clowns pull out one of those pain-belt things that Kirk, McCoy and Scotty were wearing when they went in search of Spock's brain - the ones that looked like they had a sour cream container attached to them with a button glued on top.
That would be classic Samsung legal-team. Pointless, but lots of fun to watch.
Sounds like the making of another massive Samsung gaffe.
What are they going to offer as evidence next? The robot from Buck Rogers? Actually, I'd really like to see these clowns pull out one of those pain-belt things that Kirk, McCoy and Scotty were wearing when they went in search of Spock's brain - the ones that looked like they had a sour cream container attached to them with a button glued on top.
That would be classic Samsung legal-team. Pointless, but lots of fun to watch.
Last edited: