Samsung asks ITC to ban import of Apple products in latest legal complaint
Samsung has fired another shot in its ongoing legal battle with Apple, this time asking the U.S. International Trade Commission to ban the import and sale of devices including the iPhone and iPad.
The request for an import ban is standard procedure for an ITC complaint. For example, in January of 2010 Apple asked the ITC to ban in the import of Nokia-made handsets.
As noted by Florian Mueller at FOSS Patents, it's extremely likely that the ITC will agree to investigate Samsung's complaint against Apple, and a final decision would be reached within 16 to 18 months.
The latest legal filing comes as rumors continue to mount that Apple plans to move away from Samsung for supplies for its custom-built ARM processors. One rumor that surfaced this week, claims that Apple will have its next-generation A6 chip built instead by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company in 2012.
The success of the iPhone and iPad has made Apple the largest customer of Samsung, with the Cupertino, Calif., company expected to buy $7.8 billion in components from its rival this year.
The courtroom showdown began in April, when Apple sued Samsung and accused the rival electronics maker of creating devices that copy the look and feel of the hardware and software found on the iPhone and iPad. Specifically cited were products like the Galaxy S smartphone and Galaxy Tab touchscreen tablet.
Samsung fired back with its own legal action, accusing Apple of violating patents related to mobile devices. That complaint was filed in a San Jose, Calif., court.
The request for an import ban is standard procedure for an ITC complaint. For example, in January of 2010 Apple asked the ITC to ban in the import of Nokia-made handsets.
As noted by Florian Mueller at FOSS Patents, it's extremely likely that the ITC will agree to investigate Samsung's complaint against Apple, and a final decision would be reached within 16 to 18 months.
The latest legal filing comes as rumors continue to mount that Apple plans to move away from Samsung for supplies for its custom-built ARM processors. One rumor that surfaced this week, claims that Apple will have its next-generation A6 chip built instead by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company in 2012.
The success of the iPhone and iPad has made Apple the largest customer of Samsung, with the Cupertino, Calif., company expected to buy $7.8 billion in components from its rival this year.
The courtroom showdown began in April, when Apple sued Samsung and accused the rival electronics maker of creating devices that copy the look and feel of the hardware and software found on the iPhone and iPad. Specifically cited were products like the Galaxy S smartphone and Galaxy Tab touchscreen tablet.
Samsung fired back with its own legal action, accusing Apple of violating patents related to mobile devices. That complaint was filed in a San Jose, Calif., court.
Comments
Do I honestly think that Samsung is in the wrong here? - yes. Do I think this will actually happen? - No. Is this starting to get absolutely ridiculous? - Yes!!!!!! At this point, if I were the judge, I'd tell both companies (Apple/Samsung) to grow the hell up, quit whining, and knock it off - and dismiss the entire case.
What whining or unreasonable actions has Apple done? It's a trade dress case so apple has a right to inspect samsung's announced products that they think infringe on their IP. Samsung's on the other hand thinks they can inspect products that haven't even been announced.
A: You can reason with Al Qaeda
0_o
Do I honestly think that Samsung is in the wrong here? - yes. Do I think this will actually happen? - No. Is this starting to get absolutely ridiculous? - Yes!!!!!! At this point, if I were the judge, I'd tell both companies (Apple/Samsung) to grow the hell up, quit whining, and knock it off - and dismiss the entire case.
That is, of course, exactly Samsungs strategy.
What if Apple just moves manufacturing to the U.S.?
This is not gonna happen, but it's funny to read in the news about such attempts.
Aside from some cosmetic differences, every tablet on the planet looks like an iPad. How many ways can you make a framed skinny rectangle?
You can make it entirely metal. You can make it have different designs on the side. You can place the buttons whereever you want. There are lots of different ways. Think of the different ways people distinguish picture frames. It's the same concept, there's tons of ways to get creative with the shape, despite it being in a "rectangle" format. They'd just rather not experiment, however, because they're betting that people will associate it with an iPad if it looks similarly. And no, no tablet currently looks like an iPad. The Android 3.0 tablets are the closest things that come close to imitating Apple's interface, and they don't look anything like it. The actual hardware on the other hand...
And so their business logic goes something like this:
Step 1: Copy Apple and the black frame as opposed to coming up with some new cool design that doesn't have a matte black or white
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!!
Then you can simply reply to every email (and/or litigation) with the following:
STFU! FTW!
P.S. You're holding it wrong.
-Steve
Apple needs to stop buying any parts from Samsung NOW!!! I'm sure there are a lot of states with high unemployment rates that would court a few Apple factories here in the US, and that would give Apple a secrecy advantage. Also there is a firm in Brazil, and other Asian suppliers, but pull the plug on Samsung!!!
Manufacturing isn't coming back to the United States as long as the NLRB and the federal governments try to dictate terms to the free market.
Hell, one only has to look at the most recent Boeing case to see why manufacturing will continue fleeing the country.
It doesn't matter if people are unemployed because the markets do not dictate wages. Even if those people *wanted* to work for lower wages instead of simple not working, the federal government wont allow them to do so.
During the great depression, when wage controls were implemented, elevator operators were priced out of the market. It became apparent that the automated systems would be cheaper than paying the operators the new federally imposed minimum wage. The building owners didn't want to fire these people. The people *wanted* to continue to work for their wages, they appreciated being employed. Sadly FDRs court packing scheme turned over years of precedent and the exploration of alternative labor markets began.
It seems as if the federal government would rather have people unemployed then working for lower wages. Its quite sad actually.
If I had a huge legal team at my disposal, I'd be suing people left and right also.
Manufacturing isn't coming back to the United States as long as the NLRB and the federal governments try to dictate terms to the free market.
Or it could be that other countries pay huge free market distorting subsidies to industry for the privilege of hosting their facilities. Germany is hardly free market red in tooth and claw.