Samsung loses 'important' patent decision to Apple in Netherlands
Samsung suffered a legal setback on Wednesday in the Netherlands, where a court sided with Apple on a FRAND patent dispute that was characterized as both "important" and "highly meaningful."
The decisions from the District Court of The Hague, Netherlands, was summarized by Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents, who explained that Samsung cannot pursue injunctive relief as long as Apple is willing to negotiate a license agreement under FRAND terms for wireless patents. Samsung is obligated to license certain essential patents under FRAND terms, meaning fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory.
In addition, the court also ruled that Samsung cannot assert its 3G/UMTS wireless patents against Apple's latest smartphone, the iPhone 4S. Mueller explained this is because of "patent exhaustion."
"Apple is licensed by extension since it purchases baseband chips from Qualcomm, and Samsung's attempt to terminate its license agreement with Qualcomm as far as third-party beneficiary Apple is concerned failed because Samsung had made a commitment to ETSI, the standards body in charge of 3G, that it would grant irrevocable licenses to its 3G/UMTS essential patents," he wrote.
Mueller declared the decision an "meaningful victory" for Apple, in part because the court's position on FRAND patents means Samsung is unlikely to get much money out of the current litigation.
"So far, Samsung has not been able to prevail with any of its offensive claims against Apple anywhere on this planet," he explained. "Today's ruling is only the latest in a series of losses."
Samsung and Apple currently have more than 30 lawsuits between them in what is a growing legal battle. In its most recent filing, Samsung sued Apple earlier this month in South Korea, seeking to block sales of the iPhone 4S and iPad 2 for alleged violation of three patents.
Even in the face of the legal showdown between Samsung and Apple, Samsung still remains a vital partner for Apple in supplying the company with key components. In particular, Samsung is believed to be the lead manufacturer of Retina displays for Apple's new iPad.
[ View article on AppleInsider ]
Comments
Oops. Wrong thread.
Apple is doomed....
Oops. Wrong thread.
Yep and $591 and climbing I love this doom!
Google is pushing its fibre business pretty heavy with it already rolling out in test markets in the US.
It is supposedly even faster than anything else out on the market now.
The question is.....with the developments we see now, will it be possible that Google rolls out their fibre in a wider area to more customers while at the same time NOT submit any patents on it as FRAND, keeping the whole thing proprietary?
In other words, is Google planning to become a service provider that plays by its own rules?
Maybe Apple should start looking into the service side as well cause you wouldn't want a situation like that to develop. Especially with things like Apple TV on the way. A cheap speedy connection from Google that is totally proprietary may end up gaining traction in the market and cause problems for competitors.
Just realised something
Google is pushing its fibre business pretty heavy with it already rolling out in test markets in the US.
It is supposedly even faster than anything else out on the market now.
The question is.....with the developments we see now, will it be possible that Google rolls out their fibre in a wider area to more customers while at the same time NOT submit any patents on it as FRAND, keeping the whole thing proprietary?
In other words, is Google planning to become a service provider that plays by its own rules?
Maybe Apple should start looking into the service side as well cause you wouldn't want a situation like that to develop. Especially with things like Apple TV on the way. A cheap speedy connection from Google that is totally proprietary may end up gaining traction in the market and cause problems for competitors.
I don't know of anything in Google's rollout other than they are paying for it. From what can be determined, there is nothing propriatary about it. It's just standard stuff.
Wow... so Samsung hasn't won a single lawsuit against Apple anywhere? Kinda weird. What I don't understand is how my Android friend so vehemently states that Apple is this evil litigation giant just bullying everyone around. It sounds like Apple has the right of it...
Ah, but Android users do consider Apple and Microsoft evil because they developed all of the technology that they've patented that they aren't allowing Google to just steal and use for free.
After all, Google actually made the comment that they are so innovative, and that these other companies are holding innovation back because they aren't just giving Google all the technologies they want.
I had a strong suspicion this would happen. I didn't see any legal standing for Samsung's suits. This also could have significance for Motorols'a suits, and they have other problems.
Yeah, but I wonder now whether Samsung and the other non-motarola phone makers will just decide that Android/Google isn't worth the effort now that they are losing and Google is in the Phone-Design business!
I think they will seriously look at WIN/8 because the marketplace App System has to be better than Androids POC that has no chance of keeping customers on their devices like iTunes does for iOS users!
Just realised something
Google is pushing its fibre business pretty heavy with it already rolling out in test markets in the US.
It is supposedly even faster than anything else out on the market now.
The question is.....with the developments we see now, will it be possible that Google rolls out their fibre in a wider area to more customers while at the same time NOT submit any patents on it as FRAND, keeping the whole thing proprietary?
In other words, is Google planning to become a service provider that plays by its own rules?
Maybe Apple should start looking into the service side as well cause you wouldn't want a situation like that to develop. Especially with things like Apple TV on the way. A cheap speedy connection from Google that is totally proprietary may end up gaining traction in the market and cause problems for competitors.
That would be a monopoly and eventually the courts would handle it much like they did with Microsoft.
That would be a monopoly and eventually the courts would handle it much like they did with Microsoft.
What, bow down to them and let them get off scott free?
I don't know of anything in Google's rollout other than they are paying for it. From what can be determined, there is nothing propriatary about it. It's just standard stuff.
Didn't you know? Fibre is the just next step of many in communications for Android phones!
They just sit back and let us grunts do all of the work while they get the credit. Sounds just like the reason I got the hell out of advertising.
That would be a monopoly and eventually the courts would handle it much like they did with Microsoft.
You mean they will dither around for years and years wasting everyone's time and then eventually decide that the best remedy is to split the company up into multiple entities and then turn around and *don't* do that but instead just let it slide?
Yeah, but I wonder now whether Samsung and the other non-motarola phone makers will just decide that Android/Google isn't worth the effort now that they are losing and Google is in the Phone-Design business!
I think they will seriously look at WIN/8 because the marketplace App System has to be better than Androids POC that has no chance of keeping customers on their devices like iTunes does for iOS users!
It's an interesting question, because I don't know where else they can go. There's no evidence so far that WP7 has any momentum at all. Samsung remember, has been a WP7 maker from the beginning.
Didn't you know? Fibre is the just next step of many in communications for Android phones!
Well, the estimate to serve all the people in the USA with fiber is about $10 trillion. As far as I know, Google doesn't have that.
The question is.....with the developments we see now, will it be possible that Google rolls out their fibre in a wider area to more customers while at the same time NOT submit any patents on it as FRAND, keeping the whole thing proprietary?
In other words, is Google planning to become a service provider that plays by its own rules?
Google - a service provider? Unlikely, not with fibre at least.
Fibre may be cheap, the equipment maybe cheapish (economy of scales), but digging up the road and sending people up poles, the whole 'final mile' thing is excruciatingly expensive.
Plus there is the small problem of competition.
An example if I may.
The Channel Tunnel between the UK and France was meant to destroy the ferry business. What could be better? A direct tunnel that takes 25 minutes.
They ran into two problems a) the cost of a ticket was so high that it didn't capture the whole market, just a percentage of it, b) they never expected the ferry companies to compete - which they did by slashing their fares which in turn made the tunnel even more expensive in comparison.
So although Google might roll out a network in a district, they need a huge take up, and they are expecting no resistence from the existing telcos. Remember that Google's sole "Unique Selling Point" is that they are Google - they have very little to differentiate themselves from anyone else after that.
That would be a monopoly and eventually the courts would handle it much like they did with Microsoft.
And by handle it you mean... do essentially nothing?