Samsung Loses $1 Billion in Market Value After U.S. Veto on Apple Ban, Files Appeal Against Patent Ruling

[Chupa Chupa]

Yeah.... so that's gotta be one of the most epic forum wins I've ever seen. Congrats, sir!

Sorry, I'm dense. I know you are being facetious but not sure about what. I'm not playing to "win" anything here -- unlike most here I don't need to "beat" strangers. (But I think you exposed your own psyche). I come here to talk and learn about tech and Apple. But the truth has to be put out there because so many peopling talking out of their arse so when I see bozo posts, yes, I ask for clarification and such.

 

[Solomani]

I realize you're probably being facetious but I'm willing to bet South Korea would not want to risk jeopardizing US/SK relations by doing such a thing, considering the Wacko that resides to the north of them and the resources the US have invested over there to help protect them from said Wacko. Just sayin'.

SK is a much wealthier nation than the near-bankrupt USA of today. I'd prefer that the SK citizens invest and pay for their own protection to defend against their northern neighbor. USA needs to invest in its own people rather than continue to funnel billions of dollars playing ineffective "global police" on other continents.

 

[cmartinez]

Oh good grief. Samsung stock was down ~1% today. Big deal. Apple had lost billions in market value in a single day for no reason many times. This really is a non story.

Yep... I was surprised the WSJ made a big deal about the $1B loss in market cap ("wiped off"!). If you look at recent trading, today's drop (-0.93%) is hardly a discernible blip and the stock was already trending down.

 

[LagunaSol]

Who in the Senate or House would back Samsung over Apple?

Anyone funded by the Holy Trinity (Schmidt/Page/Brin, blessed be their names, amen) I assume.

----------

SK is a much wealthier nation than the near-bankrupt USA of today. I'd prefer that the SK citizens invest and pay for their own protection to defend against their northern neighbor. USA needs to invest in its own people rather than continue to funnel billions of dollars playing ineffective "global police" on other continents.

We give them military protection, Google gives them free IP, they bend us over a barrel by flooding the market with copycat products while attaining a stranglehold on processor and display production. Sounds great! Hey, so long as Google can sell a lot of ads, it's all good. Right Android Bros?

 

[rjohnstone]

Was it good faith to request a royalty of 2.4-2.7% of the entire cost of the phone, and/or the inclusion of non-SEP patent licensing?

The terms were never fully disclosed.
Apple simply refused to negotiate after Samsung's initial offer.
That was according to the ruling anyway.
Only ONE member who dissented saw it differently, but I fail to see why.

Apple can't seriously think they can use SEP patents and not pay at some point in time.

 

[69650]

This is a very tangled web of claims and counter claims. I think Obama is foolish to get involved. He should leave it to the official agencies and courts to sort it out. Presumably the US must have a system of adjudication for FRAND claims? Leave it to them. What happens now if the Chinese or South Korean government strike down Apple's patent claims against their local competitors? This is not going to end well for anyone.

 

[pirg]

The terms were never fully disclosed.
Apple simply refused to negotiate after Samsung's initial offer.
That was according to the ruling anyway.
Only ONE member who dissented saw it differently, but I fail to see why.

Apple can't seriously think they can use SEP patents and not pay at some point in time.

What makes you think they think that? They want a fair rate, comparable to what others are getting.

They never said we want this for free.

----------

This is a very tangled web of claims and counter claims. I think Obama is foolish to get involved. He should leave it to the official agencies and courts to sort it out. Presumably the US must have a system of adjudication for FRAND claims? Leave it to them. What happens now if the Chinese or South Korean government strike down Apple's patent claims against their local competitors? This is not going to end well for anyone.

If there were frand claims (and no, there wasn't) they should be struck down.

 

[BaldiMac]

True, but even in non-SEP cases a sales ban should be considered an extreme measure, and the government should have posed a veto. Patents in general are out of control and SEPs are simply the most egregious abuse of the system. It's good that the government finally seems to be taking action, but the whole system needs a review and a reform.

So if you acknowledge that this instance was "the most egregious abuse of the system", why do you keep implying that there was favoritism involved?

That's not the point here - the point is: the administration vetoed the court ruling but wouldn't do the same for a foreign company.

What makes you think so? There has never been a sales ban over SEPs before, so you have no basis for this statement.

 

[apolloa]

I still see this whole thing as nothing more then the ITC makes the correct and lawful decision as it's supposed to, but because Apple cried about being an American company it's government stood up for it. Yeah, still see the US patent system as nothing but a corrupt and broken system which the government seems hell bent on keeping?

 

[BaldiMac]

This is a very tangled web of claims and counter claims. I think Obama is foolish to get involved. He should leave it to the official agencies and courts to sort it out.

The President is the official recourse. The ITC is outside of the courts.

Presumably the US must have a system of adjudication for FRAND claims? Leave it to them.

That's exactly what happened. The decision is now in the hands of the courts.

What happens now if the Chinese or South Korean government strike down Apple's patent claims against their local competitors? This is not going to end well for anyone.

No patent claims were struck down. Samsung is still entitled to collect FRAND rates.

 

[lazard]

So if you acknowledge that this instance was "the most egregious abuse of the system", why do you keep implying that there was favoritism involved?



What makes you think so? There has never been a sales ban over SEPs before, so you have no basis for this statement.

And there has never been a company that walked away from the negotiation table without paying licensing fees for SEPs.

 

[mtneer]

You mean like the US? You're contradicting yourself. Also, Apple isn't "your interest". Apple is a private company. Do you think Samsung doesn't employ anyone in the US?

No I am not contradicting. I am saying the US should do it as long as the Koreans, amongst others, do not play on a level playing field. And Apple is "my interest" as a shareholder - and as a company listed on a stock exchange regulated by the US Government, its fair game to have the government intervene.

 

[BaldiMac]

And there has never been a company that walked away from the negotiation table without paying licensing fees for SEPs.

And by "walked away", you mean what? Any sources?

If Samsung said, "if you want this SEP, you have to pay 3 times the going rate and license us non-SEP patents. That's non-negotiable." If Apple doesn't agree, does that mean that Apple walked away?

I thought the FRAND claims were already in the courts anyway. Has Samsung not sued yet?

 

[giantfan1224]

The terms were never fully disclosed.
Apple simply refused to negotiate after Samsung's initial offer.
That was according to the ruling anyway.
Only ONE member who dissented saw it differently, but I fail to see why.

Apple can't seriously think they can use SEP patents and not pay at some point in time.

And there has never been a company that walked away from the negotiation table without paying licensing fees for SEPs.

Apple purchased the chip from Infineon who had a licensing agreement with Samsung for the SEP. Samsung is clearly trying to double dip. Apple has stated that they are willing to pay Frand pricing when they may very well have the right to not pay anything at all after having done so already through the purchase price of the chip.

 

[AppleCruncher]

No I'm not kidding you. Would you like to provide your sources that there were behind the scenes dealings? Or are you just making things up?

How about you provide proof there wasn't? The vast majority of his mutual fund holdings are in the Vanguard FTSE Social Index fund which Apple is (was) the number 2 company in that fund.

It's all crooked.

 

[Glideslope]

You don't think South Korea protects their industries too? South Korea, China, Japan, etc are all very protective of their industries.

And the US has protected their industries too. Steel companies, airline industry, the automotive industry(chicken tax and the bailouts), etc.

This wasn't simply the government giving Apple special treatment.

Thank you. There is hope in here.

 

[pirg]

How about you provide proof there wasn't? The vast majority of his mutual fund holdings are in the Vanguard FTSE Social Index fund which Apple is (was) the number 2 company in that fund.

It's all crooked.

Because you're the one making the outrageous claims (or at least agreeing with the person who initially made the claim). That's usually how it works, the one making the claims has to prove them...

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Who cares if they lost 0.9% of their value?

WSJ and Hedgefund managers gutted 60 times or more from Apple on hyperbolic rhetoric.

 

[AppleCruncher]

Because you're the one making the outrageous claims (or at least agreeing with the person who initially made the claim). That's usually how it works, the one making the claims has to prove them...

I don't need a source to tell me how I feel. I feel there was some shady stuff going on. If nothing else, it looks bad and is a clear conflict of interest. Anyone remember Halliburton?

 

[markster17]

You missing the point

I don't even understand how this is a big deal.. Those iPads are obsolete, so is the iPhone 3G, 3GS, and the 4 will be as well in a few weeks.

Just as many people here you are missing the point. Sumsung has licensed CMDA technology to a chip company. Apple in turn is using the chip. Should Apple be paying the license? This is a question. Imagine that the same chip goes into a car and Samsung wants 2% of the car value as a license fee.
Would you agree?

The main point many people are missing here is that any other vendors who decides to use the chip with Samsung technology (already licences ) should not be forced to pay again period.

 

[Solomani]

Heh. I wonder how this US veto will affect, or sway, or perhaps even hurting Samsung's credibility, as it attempts to dodge the lawsuit initiated by the European Union. (article link below)

Samsung in talks to settle EU antitrust case involving Apple & essential patents
Facing an antitrust lawsuit from the European Union for allegedly abusing its ownership of standard-essential patents, Samsung has reportedly begun talks with regulators to settle the charges before a trial can begin.

Samsung was formally charged by the European Commission last December. The Korean electronics maker is accused of abusing its dominant market position to gain a foothold in legal disputes being waged against Apple.

Specifically, Samsung has been accused of misusing standard-essential patents it owns as legal weapons to gain leverage in its ongoing patent infringement disputes against Apple. Samsung, however, has a duty to license standard-essential patents to rivals under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms.

Apple, too, has argued that Samsung did not meet its requirements as a standard-essential patent holder. Instead, it has accused Samsung of filing lawsuits seeking injunctions against Apple devices for those patents before making a licensing offer.

Now, with EU regulators prepared to go to court, Samsung actively "wants to settle," one source quoted in Tuesday's report said. However, they added it's too early to determine whether the current talks would actually result in a deal that would allow Samsung to avoid fines of as much as $17.3 billion.

 

[pirg]

I don't need a source to tell me how I feel. I feel there was some shady stuff going on. If nothing else, it looks bad and is a clear conflict of interest. Anyone remember Halliburton?

Ok you could have just said that from the beginning instead of acting as if I was way out of left field because I didn't agree with you.

That's your opinion, that's fine. No proof whatsoever but it's fine.

 

[Plutonius]

Presumably the US must have a system of adjudication for FRAND claims?

You presume wrong then . This is the ITC that implemented the ban. The only thing the US could do is is either veto it or accept it. Accepting a ban for FRAND patents is much worse in the long run then the veto.

 

[scoobydoo99]

After the Obama administration vetoed a partial ban

There was NO veto.

Read, people. Read.

 

[Mike MA]

Good news, still waiting for iCloud push notification to go live again in Germany .