Verizon comes to Samsung's defense in Apple patent lawsuit
U.S. carrier Verizon Wireless has taken sides in the legal dispute between Apple and Samsung with a legal brief opposing a preliminary injunction against the South Korean company's smartphones and tablets.
The nation's largest wireless operator has submitted a request to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to file an amicus curiae, or "friend of the court," brief in support of Samsung, Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents reports. The brief would allow Verizon to intervene as a third party in the case.
Apple's request for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. against the Infuse 4G, Galaxy S 4G, Droid Charge and Galaxy Tab 10.1 was filed in July and is scheduled to be addressed in a hearing on Oct. 13.
The carrier argues that such an injunction "would hinder Verizon Wireless in developing and deploying its next generation high-speed LTE [fourth-generation] network, the job growth dependant on that network, and will undercut key public policy goals, including expansion of American's [sic] access to broadband networks and faster communication with emergency personnel."
Verizon was an early partner with handset makers making use of Google's Android mobile operating system, including Samsung. The carrier has faced off against rival AT&T, which held an exclusive lock on Apple's iPhone in the U.S. for three and a half years.
The company's reliance on Android has been reduced some since Apple released the CDMA iPhone 4 on Verizon in February. As of August, Verizon's Android market share in the U.S. has dropped from 51.4 percent to 41.1 percent since the release of the iPhone on its network.
Verizon appears to be stepping lightly in its decision to defend Samsung in Apple's patent case against the Korean electronics giant, likely in an effort to avoid damaging its newly minted partnership with Apple. But, Mueller believes the move will still be considered as "hostile" by Apple, noting that Verizon's actions are simply part of the "constant power struggle between carriers and device makers."
The company's brief formally addresses a software patent that Apple, just one of four intellectually property rights that it has brought against Samsung, he noted. Given that the other three patents in the suit are design patents, Verizon has avoided taking a stance, presumably to avoid the appearance of condoning any alleged "copying" done by Samsung.
Though Verizon notes in its brief that it "supports without reservation the protection of intellectual property rights," that claim is undermined by the fact that it is opposing the enforcement of those rights. The filing also states that it "takes no position on whether Apple is likely to succeed on the merits of its infringement claims," but it does offer an argument that the injunction would public interest.
"The requested injunction of certain Samsung products will harm Verizon Wireless and U.S. consumers. It also has the possibility of slowing the deployment of next-generation networks -- such as Verizon Wireless's -- contrary to the stated goals of the U.S. government," the document reads.
Verizon argues that an injunction would damage its efforts to spur adoption of 4G Long-Term Evolution "at a critical moment:" the holiday shopping season. The document points out that Samsung is "one of only six manufacturers" that has released a device with LTE technology.
The carrier also asserts that Apple has targeted only 4G devices in its preliminary injunction, while products in the main proceeding are "mainly older devices that are not designed to make use of Verizon Wireless's and other carriers' next-generation networks." But, Mueller objects to that line of argument, noting that preliminary injunctions require, by nature, a sense of urgency, so they must target new products in order to be considered by courts.
Verizon continued its public interest argument by highlighting "the importance of wireless broadband networks in helping first responders and other public safety officials," adding that "[s]peed and information are critical assets in an emergency." An injunction against Samsung would affect subscriber revenue, thereby stunting the expansion of Verizon's LTE network, "which is used by first responders," the company argued.
The legal battle between Apple and Samsung began in April and has quickly heated up. Apple has so far succeeded in blocking Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany and delaying it in Australia.
Samsung vowed this week to become "more aggressive" in its dispute with Apple, accusing the company of "free riding" on its intellectual property. According to one executive, Samsung was originally "respectful" and "passive" in its fight against Apple, the component maker's largest customer, but will no longer hold back.
The nation's largest wireless operator has submitted a request to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to file an amicus curiae, or "friend of the court," brief in support of Samsung, Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents reports. The brief would allow Verizon to intervene as a third party in the case.
Apple's request for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. against the Infuse 4G, Galaxy S 4G, Droid Charge and Galaxy Tab 10.1 was filed in July and is scheduled to be addressed in a hearing on Oct. 13.
The carrier argues that such an injunction "would hinder Verizon Wireless in developing and deploying its next generation high-speed LTE [fourth-generation] network, the job growth dependant on that network, and will undercut key public policy goals, including expansion of American's [sic] access to broadband networks and faster communication with emergency personnel."
Verizon was an early partner with handset makers making use of Google's Android mobile operating system, including Samsung. The carrier has faced off against rival AT&T, which held an exclusive lock on Apple's iPhone in the U.S. for three and a half years.
The company's reliance on Android has been reduced some since Apple released the CDMA iPhone 4 on Verizon in February. As of August, Verizon's Android market share in the U.S. has dropped from 51.4 percent to 41.1 percent since the release of the iPhone on its network.
Verizon appears to be stepping lightly in its decision to defend Samsung in Apple's patent case against the Korean electronics giant, likely in an effort to avoid damaging its newly minted partnership with Apple. But, Mueller believes the move will still be considered as "hostile" by Apple, noting that Verizon's actions are simply part of the "constant power struggle between carriers and device makers."
The company's brief formally addresses a software patent that Apple, just one of four intellectually property rights that it has brought against Samsung, he noted. Given that the other three patents in the suit are design patents, Verizon has avoided taking a stance, presumably to avoid the appearance of condoning any alleged "copying" done by Samsung.
Though Verizon notes in its brief that it "supports without reservation the protection of intellectual property rights," that claim is undermined by the fact that it is opposing the enforcement of those rights. The filing also states that it "takes no position on whether Apple is likely to succeed on the merits of its infringement claims," but it does offer an argument that the injunction would public interest.
"The requested injunction of certain Samsung products will harm Verizon Wireless and U.S. consumers. It also has the possibility of slowing the deployment of next-generation networks -- such as Verizon Wireless's -- contrary to the stated goals of the U.S. government," the document reads.
Verizon argues that an injunction would damage its efforts to spur adoption of 4G Long-Term Evolution "at a critical moment:" the holiday shopping season. The document points out that Samsung is "one of only six manufacturers" that has released a device with LTE technology.
The carrier also asserts that Apple has targeted only 4G devices in its preliminary injunction, while products in the main proceeding are "mainly older devices that are not designed to make use of Verizon Wireless's and other carriers' next-generation networks." But, Mueller objects to that line of argument, noting that preliminary injunctions require, by nature, a sense of urgency, so they must target new products in order to be considered by courts.
Verizon continued its public interest argument by highlighting "the importance of wireless broadband networks in helping first responders and other public safety officials," adding that "[s]peed and information are critical assets in an emergency." An injunction against Samsung would affect subscriber revenue, thereby stunting the expansion of Verizon's LTE network, "which is used by first responders," the company argued.
The legal battle between Apple and Samsung began in April and has quickly heated up. Apple has so far succeeded in blocking Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany and delaying it in Australia.
Samsung vowed this week to become "more aggressive" in its dispute with Apple, accusing the company of "free riding" on its intellectual property. According to one executive, Samsung was originally "respectful" and "passive" in its fight against Apple, the component maker's largest customer, but will no longer hold back.
Comments
And in related news Apple announces iPhone no longer available on Verizon...
No, much more likely that Apple buys out Samsung and crushes Verizon as payback.
Fun aside, most likely of all: Apple lets its legal team handle patent disputes and keeps its business from getting dragged down by unpredictable court battles.
No, much more likely that Apple buys out Samsung and crushes Verizon as payback.
Fun aside, most likely of all: Apple lets its legal team handle patent disputes and keeps its business from getting dragged down by unpredictable court battles.
Ahhhh... Apple does not have nearly enough money to purchase Samsung, And if they did no way the south Korean Government would allow. Believe it or not Samsung really does help that country.
Edit: With more then 250 thousand koreans employed... They are the biggest Company in Korea. Being purchased by an american Company known to outsource jobs is not something the korean government will allow.
Ahhhh... Apple does not have nearly enough money to purchase Samsung, And if they did no way the south Korean Government would allow. Believe it or not Samsung really does help that country.
Just to be more precise, Samsung rules that country in many aspects.
Ahhhh... Apple does not have nearly enough money to purchase Samsung, And if they did no way the south Korean Government would allow. Believe it or not Samsung really does help that country.
Edit: With more then 250 thousand koreans employed... They are the biggest Company in Korea. Being purchased by an american Company known to outsource jobs is not something the korean government will allow.
Either way, Samsung financial reporting for 2012 will show a loss from 2011 of approx 8 billion dollars.
Either way, Samsung financial reporting for 2012 will show a loss from 2011 of approx 8 billion dollars.
Their Television department sucks and needs to be removed. But Samsung mobility shows record profits.
Trust me unless apple would like to bleed profits they should never get in the TV business. Margins are to low and the competition is too cutthroat.
And in related news Apple announces iPhone no longer available on Verizon...
If Verizon wants to Play footsie with Samsung instead of getting 4G phones from HTC and Motorola then Apple should cut them off and open the iPhone up to ever other carrier in Verizon's coverage area. If they thought competing with AT&T for 2 years put stress on the bottom line, just wait until they are the only carrier to not carry the iPhone. It's one thing to heavily advertise the competition over the iPhone but to publicly bite the hand that feeds you is STUPID!! Their contention that it would hinder their 4G deployment is ludicrous Samsung is not the only manufacturer of 4G devices. But they are the only manufacture to blatantly copy the look and feel of iDevices and as Apple contends, they don't mind the competition but they want to compete with another's innovation not their own design and look and feel.
Apple understands that, because it's in business for similar reasons.
They're both adults and will come to an understanding based on what's in their respective self-interest. It's nothing personal, and shouldn't be.
As the old saying goes, there are no friendships in business, only alliances of convenience and zones of mutual interest.
Trust me unless apple would like to bleed profits they should never get in the TV business. Margins are to low and the competition is too cutthroat.
So is the PC market and Apple seems to be doing just fine?
Verizon is in the service provider business, and its job is to maximize profits in that business. They would be stupid to do otherwise.
Apple understands that, because it's in business for similar reasons.
They're both adults and will come to an understanding based on what's in their respective self-interest. It's nothing personal, and shouldn't be.
As the old saying goes, there are no friendships in business, only alliances of convenience and zones of mutual interest.
So what does Verizon do if Oracle get's its way of shutting down droid, most of Verizon's smart phone run's droid.
So is the PC market and Apple seems to be doing just fine?
Apple maintains its margains by using OS X. They have a product that only they can obtain. They can charge a premium for it. However an Apple branded Television could not compete with their margins on price unless they where to offer something no one else can. So far they could in thoery just place an Apple tv inside it but in reality their are already so many T.V.s on the market that already have many of the basic functions as a T.V. with apple TV built into it. No one would want to pay 300$ more to have a TV with that built in when the set top box is only 100$. When they could buy a comparable product for 300$ less.
So what does Verizon do if Oracle get's its way of shutting down droid, most of Verizon's smart phone run's droid.
Why would oracle want to shut down android. (I think thats what you mean Android is an OS and Droid is a line of phones released on Verizon's network.) Their is no gain in oracle getting android stopped. If anything they would want it to be as successful as possible. They want royalties not to shut it down. Only apple and Microsoft stand to really lose by android OS being more powerful.
Verizon is in the service provider business, and its job is to maximize profits in that business. They would be stupid to do otherwise.
Apple understands that, because it's in business for similar reasons.
They're both adults and will come to an understanding based on what's in their respective self-interest. It's nothing personal, and shouldn't be.
As the old saying goes, there are no friendships in business, only alliances of convenience and zones of mutual interest.
Hmmm... you must not have got the memo... logic, level headedness and understanding are not allowed in any Apple vs. Samsung discussions.
[Interesting timing for this announcement, though,... just before the launch of the iPhone 5. Has Verizon already made its big push for LTE or is that something that is going to happen at the same time as the launch of the iPhone 5?]
Stupid move by Verizon they just should never have taken any sides.
Verizon is in the service provider business, and its job is to maximize profits in that business. They would be stupid to do otherwise.
Apple understands that, because it's in business for similar reasons.
They're both adults and will come to an understanding based on what's in their respective self-interest. It's nothing personal, and shouldn't be.
As the old saying goes, there are no friendships in business, only alliances of convenience and zones of mutual interest.
Verizon made a lot of money from Android-based phones which, at bottom, ripped off Apple and others. Google pulled a fast one. It made a mobile OS by using a technicality in patent law that lets an individual use the patented matter for their own personal use. They stole the intellectual property of others by the simple ruse of not making a direct profit from it. However, the manufacturers and sellers of those pirated properties have no such defense.
If Verizon gets hammered, it's only getting what it very richly deserves!
Verizon continued its public interest argument by highlighting "the importance of wireless broadband networks in helping first responders and other public safety officials," adding that "[s]peed and information are critical assets in an emergency." An injunction against Samsung would affect subscriber revenue, thereby stunting the expansion of Verizon's LTE network, "which is used by first responders," the company argued.
This is bulls**t. First responder speed is a ploy to mask their real argument, which is to charge more for LTE. That's why they are really worried about subscribers having revenue. If Verizon was really worried about if we have enough money, they'd stop nicked-diming us to death with their added charges for things that should be part of the expensive contracts they offer.
To Verizon, anything that takes money away from subscribers is money they can't squeeze out of its customers.
Then you can continue safe in the knowledge that the crapware you inflict on your customers is protected and you don't have to pull this stupid "essential services" ruse.
This will get thrown out as fast as Google's whining complaints were thrown out of Microsoft vs Motorola.