Samsung to Respond 'Strongly' Against Apple Lawsuit

[iStudentUK]

So what? They're already getting sued by Apple, so what's another lawsuit? Point is, contract breach or not, Samsung could cripple Apple's whole ecosystem within days by halting all processor shipments.

Big businesses aren't usually personal. Law suits happen, it shouldn't mean it turns into fisty-cuffs!

(Breach of contract isn't simple, if Samsung did pull out and cripple Apple they could be made to pay damages to cover for that as it is foreseeable. It is obviously much more complex than that, but you get the point.)

 

[Erwin-Br]

Samsung is starting to be less and less innovative, they really are setting down at the drawing board , scratching their heads trying to come up with a design and then....." bing!!! their iphone mail alert just popped off and there is their next cell design!!

Samsung doesn't innovate on pretty case designs, and never has. They innovate on the stuff you can't see. You know, the stuff that gives function to those otherwise empty shells?

 

[daneoni]

So what? They're already getting sued by Apple, so what's another lawsuit? Point is, contract breach or not, Samsung could cripple Apple's whole ecosystem within days by halting all processor shipments. Apple makes the vast majority on iDevices and this would kill Apple's whole economic model. And this doesn't even account for Samsungs components that go into their Macs. As a result, Apple would have no hardware to sell. They would dip into their treasure chest. It could be devastating to Apple.

You might be willing to walk away from $5.7 billion, face an even bigger lawsuit that you're all but certain to lose and become known in the industry as 'that guy who breaches contracts because of a legal dispute' but i doubt Samsung are.

 

[Popeye206]

I think you mean 4% of 142 million $.....

Samsung's worldwide turnover was only 138.4 billion for 2010. So I'm guessing Apple buys about $6 billion.

I was thinking the same thing... the numbers didn't make sense.

 

[Full of Win]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Do no buckle to these power hungry tyrants Samsung. The stinger you fight, the more I will buy your products in the future.

 

[chedda]

Flattery

If they try shafting apple on parts i'm sure another crippling law suit would occur. Isn't apple now capable of making it's own chips didn't they buy up something ? Lot's of telephones and all the tablets are mac copies to some degree i suppose it's the best form of flattery, most people see this.If i'm right all these items are at a lower price point than apple ? I mean come on you would never pay more than an apple product for an item which is heavily influenced right ?

Didn't we have all this on stage before with the OS comparisons between OSX & vista or was it 7 ? That didn't lead to a lawsuit ? I guess the bit that really hurts apple is that they are already in business and partners in production it must feel like a stab in the back.

 

[Erwin-Br]

But then they'd have been hammered with 2 law-suits, and then lost their 2nd biggest customer. Thats financial suicide, Apple would find someone else for parts.

4% doesn't sound like financial suicide to me. Though I do believe that Samsung would probably try to avoid losing that 4%.

Apple would probably find someone else for parts, but the question is if the quality/price would be the same. If I was a parts manufacturer, I would take advantage of this, knowing Apple is in desperate need of new parts. Cha-ching!!!!

 

[Dr McKay]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Do no buckle to these power hungry tyrants Samsung. The stinger you fight, the more I will buy your products in the future.

You'd buy their products just because they opposed Apple? I buy products because I like them, hence a Samsung HDTV, Xbox 360, Sony Vaio Laptop, iPhone 4 and iPad.

One of my friends will not buy a piece of clothing if its cheaper than $50. (except underwear obviously) He could spot a shirt he liked, run over, and see it was $40, and he'd say "It's too cheap"

Where I would go, "Hey that shirt looks good"

4% doesn't sound like financial suicide to me. Though I do believe that Samsung would probably try to avoid losing that 4%.

Apple would probably find someone else for parts, but the question is if the quality/price would be the same. If I was a parts manufacturer, I would take advantage of this, knowing Apple is in desperate need of new parts. Cha-ching!!!!

Losing out on $142 billion in 1 deal, just to spite someone makes sense, if the CEO is 12.

 

[iJays]

So what? They're already getting sued by Apple, so what's another lawsuit? Point is, contract breach or not, Samsung could cripple Apple's whole ecosystem within days by halting all processor shipments. Apple makes the vast majority on iDevices and this would kill Apple's whole economic model. And this doesn't even account for Samsungs components that go into their Macs. As a result, Apple would have no hardware to sell. They would dip into their treasure chest. It could be devastating to Apple.

and someone thinking again that Apple and Samsung didn't sign into a contract.

 

[Igantius]

Do any of these suits ever actually get resolved?

It's going back over a decade, but eMachines had to stop selling its eOne after Apple won a legal battle over the physical similarity with the original iMac model. eMachines gave its product a different shape to the Apple 'teardrop', but it wasn't enough.

There was another computer, the ePower that looked even more like an iMac (IIRC, it was even the same colour as Bondi Blue) - that one didn't get to the market because of an injunction by Apple.

In at least one legal case over iMac 'influenced' PCs, the judge commented on the amount of marketing Apple had spent and which focussed on the physical look - so essentially was saying that other companies were trying to exploit that.

 

[Bilbo63]

Samsung running Android look very very similar to Apple's, to the point where it causes confusion in the marketplace for consumers. I've seen several people mistake one of these things for an iPhone because they look that similar. It's a combination of Google's Android and Samsung's hardware.

This confusion is no accident, that was the intent all along. There is no reason why they could not create their own look and feel... change it up enough so it's not an obvious copy. Other handset makers have been able to do that.

 

[*LTD*]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)

One part supplier gone, another one pops up.

Samsung can't afford to lose customers the likes of Apple.

Regardless, this suit has nothing to do with Samsung's supply agreements with Apple. Bridges won't be burned, Samsung won't breach their contracts, and the sky won't fall.

It's just business. And yes, a lot of entities are guilty of ripping off Apple's work. It's almost a favorite pastime in the industry. Apple has the wherewithal to go after whomever the wish without fear of losing customers, partners, or suppliers. Yeah, they are *that* secure, folks. Welcome to 2011 and the beginning of a massive growth phase for Apple driven by insane customer demand.

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRI40) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Samsung running Android look very very similar to Apple's, to the point where it causes confusion in the marketplace for consumers. I've seen several people mistake one of these things for an iPhone because they look that similar. It's a combination of Google's Android and Samsung's hardware.

This confusion is no accident, that was the intent all along. There is no reason why they could not create their own look and feel... change it up enough so it's not an obvious copy. Other handset makers have been able to do that.

The Nexus S looks different to the Galaxy S in software and physical looks but is included in the suit. As that is a Google experience device I do wonder why Apple don't target Google directly.

 

[blackburn]

Should be studying in law school instead of engineering. No innovative products but loads of cash to be made Lawsuits everywhere.

 

[macsmurf]

The Nexus S looks different to the Galaxy S in software and physical looks but is included in the suit. As that is a Google experience device I do wonder why Apple don't target Google directly.

Google probably have a kickass patent portfolio so they'll just countersue.

 

[KnightWRX]

Google probably have a kickass patent portfolio so they'll just countersue.

Google actually doesn't, being an industry newcomer and all (they only appeared at the end of the 90s in the industry). That is one of their Achilles' heels.

 

[LegendKillerUK]

Did anyone else notice that the iPhone picture is actually a 3G running iOS 2.x?

Silly Apple.

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRI40) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

The Nexus S looks different to the Galaxy S in software and physical looks but is included in the suit. As that is a Google experience device I do wonder why Apple don't target Google directly.

Google probably have a kickass patent portfolio so they'll just countersue.

I doubt it considering the Nortel bid. Apple could hit Google hard now and be in a decent position if they tried now.

 

[314631]

Google actually doesn't, being an industry newcomer and all (they only appeared at the end of the 90s in the industry). That is one of their Achilles' heels.

They have plenty of patents. It wasn't until the 90s that the patent madness really started with software. Google is also leading the bidding for a large portfolio of mobile patents to protect them against Apple and Microsoft.

 

[maclaptop]

Apple is pathetic.

I'm with you.

Poor little Stevie, he's old and bored.

The greedy little man.

 

[kenypowa]

Samsung running Android look very very similar to Apple's, to the point where it causes confusion in the marketplace for consumers. I've seen several people mistake one of these things for an iPhone because they look that similar. It's a combination of Google's Android and Samsung's hardware.

This confusion is no accident, that was the intent all along. There is no reason why they could not create their own look and feel... change it up enough so it's not an obvious copy. Other handset makers have been able to do that.

Anyone who is stupid enough to confuse a Galaxy S with an iPhone shouldn't own a smartphone anyway. All they have to do is turn over the freaking phone and notice that big Samsung logo to know it's not an Apple product.

 

[gnasher729]

But that's the thing, this simply can't be about "look and feel" since the precedents on that are firmly established by Apple vs Microsoft where Apple lost the whole "look and feel" part of the suit.

You are quite badly informed. Just because a court case about "look and feel" was lost doesn't mean nobody else can win such a case. Apple lost that one because someone at Apple messed up some contracts between Apple and Microsoft. Unless the facts in two cases are identical you have no precedent.

(If I sued you for damaging my car with a hammer, and you proved in court that you were nowhere near my car when it was damaged, that wouldn't set a precedent that it is now allowed to damage someone else's car with a hammer).

Anyone who is stupid enough to confuse a Galaxy S with an iPhone shouldn't own a smartphone anyway. All they have to do is turn over the freaking phone and notice that big Samsung logo to know it's not an Apple product.

Many people want to buy a phone that looks like an iPhone, but are willing to buy a Samsung phone as long as it looks the same. Yes, that is a stupid reason to buy a phone, but some people are like that. Apple thinks that all those people should have to buy the real thing.

And some people base their decision on how nice a phone looks, and they think the iPhone looks nice, and since the Samsung phone looks the same, they think that one looks nice as well. These people might buy a Samsung phone because Apple put lots of effort into designing a nice looking phone, and Samsung just copied it. In Germany, that would fall straight under "unfair competition" and would be blocked for that reason; if one company spends lots of money developing a product and another company just copies it, that is "unfair competition".

 

[Boomhowler]

While I think this is silly I fully understand why Apple has to put down their foot and show what they think is ok and not ok to protect their brand. The phone IS very similar to the iPhone 3G and since it's almost impossible to sue someone for software design (so not google then) they sue the hardware company: Samsung.

 

[Northgrove]

Samsung running Android look very very similar to Apple's, to the point where it causes confusion in the marketplace for consumers. I've seen several people mistake one of these things for an iPhone because they look that similar. It's a combination of Google's Android and Samsung's hardware.

This confusion is no accident, that was the intent all along. There is no reason why they could not create their own look and feel... change it up enough so it's not an obvious copy. Other handset makers have been able to do that.

I agree. Sometimes I think this kind of lawsuits are a stretch and a bit silly, but not this time. When there's confusion even to me as a geek after a quick glance on these smarthpones, I have to agree that it's gone too far. It's obvious that Samsung is simply mimicking Apple at this point to ride on their popularity wave, and thus leeching off their profits. That just can't be right.

I've seen other comments in this thread, comments saying that iPhone UI's haven't changed the last four years, so Apple aren't actually renewing themselves. This is however completely besides the point -- no company has an obligation to do so, especially when the UI is part of their brand and image, like in Apple's case. Then it's counterproductive to change UI drastically bi-yearly. Their patents are invalidated even if they don't renew themselves.

I like how the iPhone revolutionized the idea with apps and app markets, and still maintaining ease-of-use, but I had really assumed that major competitors like Samsung would be able to keep competing while not starting their carbon copiers. Yes -- there are many undiscovered ways of building a smartphone, especially in terms of the software which I imagine is what Apple is getting at here.

 

[GLS]

Maybe....

Apple has other suppliers or manufacturers lined up for the items that Samsung produces for Apple at a better price than Apple is currently getting....Apple and Samsung have pre-existing contracts that cannot be terminated by either without cause....

So Apple files a lawsuit based on copyright infringement (questionable) and as terms of the (potential) settlement....Apple is free to go to other suppliers for the items they need....