or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung fires back with patent lawsuits against Apple
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung fires back with patent lawsuits against Apple

post #1 of 40
Thread Starter 
Samsung made good on its word to fight back against Apple's lawsuit, which accused the Korean electronics giant of copying the look and feel of the iPhone and iPad, by filing several patent infringement lawsuits against Apple in Seoul, Tokyo and Germany on Friday.

The Seoul, Korea-based company revealed on Friday that it had filed suit against Apple over patents related to cellphone transmission technologies, The Wall Street Journal reports. Though the lawsuits don't directly respond to Apple's filling, Samsung has indicated that they come as a counter to Apple.

"Samsung is responding actively to the legal action taken against us in order to protect our intellectual property and to ensure our continued innovation and growth in the mobile communications business," the company said in a statement.

According to a company spokesperson, Samsung's suits relate to patents for transmission optimization and reduction of power usage during data transmission, 3G technology for reducing date-transmission errors and a method of tethering a mobile phone to a PC to enable the PC to utilize the phone's wireless data connection, the report noted.

The Journal reported on Monday that Apple was suing Samsung for allegedly copying the look and feel of the iPhone and iPad with its Galaxy-branded smartphone and tablet products.

On Tuesday, Samsung vowed to retaliate with its own legal action. "Apple is one of our key buyers of semiconductors and display panels. However, we have no choice but to respond strongly at this time," an unidentified Samsung official reportedly said.

Samsung Chairman Lee Kun-hee suggested to reporters on Thursday that Apple's lawsuit was an attempt to hold his company back. "When a nail sticks out, [people] try to pound it down," South Korean news outlets reported Lee as saying.



During a quarterly earnings conference call Wednesday, Apple COO Tim Cook reassured investors that Samsung remains a "valuable partner" in supplying components for Apple's devices in spite of the law suit.

"We felt the mobile communication division of Samsung had crossed the line, and after trying for some time to work out the issue, we decided we needed to rely on the courts," Cook said.

Apple reportedly accounted for 4 percent of Samsung's revenue last year, or $5.68 billion, making the iPhone maker Samsung's second-largest customer, behind Sony. Reports have suggested that Apple wil pass Sony to become Samsung's largest client this year with $7.8 billion in component purchases.

Earlier this week, a post to message boards accusing Apple of copying Samsung went viral. However, it was later revealed that Samsung may actually have copied Apple, since the F700 smartphone was announced in 2006, but not shown until Feb. 2007, a month after Apple unveiled the iPhone.



The impending legal battle between Apple and Samsung comes as the latest in a series of disputes between Apple and other handset manufacturers. In 2009, Nokia sued Apple over patents related to wireless technology. Apple quickly responded with a countersuit.

Apple sued Taiwanese manufacturer HTC in March of last year. At the start of the U.S. International Trade Commission trial for Apple's case against HTC earlier this week, the ITC staff, which acts as a third-party in the trial, came out in support on behalf of HTC.

Motorola and Apple are also locked in a legal tussle. Motorola sued Apple last October. Apple responded later that month, eventually adding most of the patents included in Apple's dispute with HTC.
post #2 of 40

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #3 of 40
Here's the break down of what Samsung is suing Apple for.

South Korea: We hired South Koreans first to work for us, Apple must hired Americans for their store.

Japan: Same as is South Korea. We are all Asians, Apple must hire Americans.

Germany: The Apple store in Germany had an Asian working in one of their sore, and like we said before, we have a patent on the Asian workforce.

Samsung doesn't have a chance running against Apple!!!
post #4 of 40
If Apple filed in the U.S. District Court of Northern California what good does Samsung filing in S. Korea, Germany and Japan in regards to the original lawsuit?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #5 of 40
I have a 52" samsung TV and an AppleTV. The AppleTv disconnected itselft from the TV in retaliation.
post #6 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by kriskkalu View Post

Here's the break down of what Samsung is suing Apple for.

South Korea: We hired South Koreans first to work for us, Apple must hired Americans for their store.

Japan: Same as is South Korea. We are all Asians, Apple must hire Americans.

Germany: The Apple store in Germany had an Asian working in one of their sore, and like we said before, we have a patent on the Asian workforce.

Samsung doesn't have a chance running against Apple!!!

I'm curious. How do you know?
post #7 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

If Apple filed in the U.S. District Court of Northern California what good does Samsung filing in S. Korea, Germany and Japan in regards to the original lawsuit?

Since their a foreign based company, they may not have as many patents available. here. I'm curious to see what the patents they are claiming are. That could give us a better idea why they were suing in those countries.
post #8 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

Since their a foreign based company, they may not have as many patents available. here. I'm curious to see what the patents they are claiming are. That could give us a better idea why they were suing in those countries.

Are you foreign? Because your personalized use of their is not only wrong but not even the correct conjunction [They are => Since they're a foreign based company, ....].
post #9 of 40
I hate to say it, but it does look like Samsung copies existing designs. My gf's Samsung laptop looks almost exactly like a Macbook, right down to the non-removable battery!
post #10 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Are you foreign? Because your personalized use of their is not only wrong but not even the correct conjunction [They are => Since they're a foreign based company, ....].

post #11 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post


thanks!!!
post #12 of 40
And that, Virginia, is what patents are for.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #13 of 40
Counter law suit or not, it does not negate the fact that Samsung is a copycat in chief.
They are doing this as a face saving approach.
post #14 of 40
Don't forget everyone, Samsung is a copycat company and specialized in Apple recently, whatever Apple do then they'll mimic. So when Apple sue, they'll copy that too. It goes like the saying: Monkey see, monkey do.
post #15 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by kilimanjaro View Post

Don't forget everyone, Samsung is a copycat company and specialized in Apple recently, whatever Apple do then they'll mimic. So when Apple sue, they'll copy that too. It goes like the saying: Monkey see, monkey do.

Absolutely.
post #16 of 40
This all came about because Apple gave up on asking Samsung to play the game and to stop copying how the iPhone looks. Samsung execs must think that their products can't stand on their own and need the sales boost by looking, at a glance, like iPhones.

Samsung need to grow a pair and realise that they don't need to copy Apple and can do better by making their own style of product.
post #17 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkalu View Post

Counter law suit or not, it does not negate the fact that Samsung is a copycat in chief.
They are doing this as a face saving approach.

I'm not sure how naming a defendant in a lawsuit is an act of "saving face." In wars like this one, there are few winners in the end. It costs money to hire lawyers and bring people to court. This could turn into a war of attrition for their legal departments.
post #18 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post

This all came about because Apple gave up on asking Samsung to play the game and to stop copying how the iPhone looks. Samsung execs must think that their products can't stand on their own and need the sales boost by looking, at a glance, like iPhones.

Samsung need to grow a pair and realise that they don't need to copy Apple and can do better by making their own style of product.

To be precise, those Samsung execs need to grow pairs..

You're right you know, Samsung is one of the largest tech companies in the world, they even supply components to Apple, so basically they have enough resources and power to make at least a great and innovative product. So why can't they? Instead, why did they copy Apple's iPhone? Because the execs can't grow a pair, errr sorry, pairs..
post #19 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

I sue you!
You sue me!
We're a happy family!

Samsung didn't like it when Steve told them "You're innovating it wrong".
post #20 of 40
I have to believe Apple is vigorously pursuing and putting in place alternatives to all Samsung parts currently supplied to Apple.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #21 of 40
Nothing. It is all about advantage. Apple filed in California where its home is located. It could have filed else place though. Samsung thinks it has a better shot in those other places. Foreign Courts do strange things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

If Apple filed in the U.S. District Court of Northern California what good does Samsung filing in S. Korea, Germany and Japan in regards to the original lawsuit?
post #22 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I have to believe Apple is vigorously pursuing and putting in place alternatives to all Samsung parts currently supplied to Apple.

Past-perfect tense: had vigorously pursued...
Plan-B would have already been sorted out prior to pushing the lawsuit button.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #23 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


Popcorn?

Good point, it represents an American food product that is totally unfamiliar in Asia. Asia has recently catapulted itself into a business, the production of technology for consumers, with which Asian society is totally unfamiliar. All they really understand is hard work.

Look at it this way. If you suddenly found that your only way to earn a living was opening a noodle restaurant, where would you look to find out how to do it? Japanese, Chinese and Korean noodle restaurants of course. At first they wouldn't care, because who wants to buy noodles from a popcorn stand? But when the business gets big enough, and it is obvious your noodle restaurant looks exactly like a particular Korean noodle restaurant, its owner might start to complain.

When the case comes to court, it's because the noodle restaurant owner has an alternative supplier of popcorn. I strongly suspect that this case started the moment Apple secured fall-back suppliers of the chips, displays etc. it currently gets from Samsung.
post #24 of 40
The Clash of the Titans!

They'll end up making-up by cross-licensing their patents.
post #25 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post

The Clash of the Titans!

They'll end up making-up by cross-licensing their patents.

Or, maybe, this will encourage Apple to see other vendors for their parts and Samsung will lose big time. Forget what happens with the patents. Apple is in the driver's seat with this one. The only big effect I see on Apple's bottom line is that this might encourage them to bid higher on the Nortel patents.
post #26 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhyde View Post

Or, maybe, this will encourage Apple to see other vendors for their parts and Samsung will lose big time. Forget what happens with the patents. Apple is in the driver's seat with this one. The only big effect I see on Apple's bottom line is that this might encourage them to bid higher on the Nortel patents.

Last year Apple accounted for what? 5-10% of the revenue from samsung? Will it hurt if Apple leaves? Yes. Will Apple lose "Big time" because of that? Not really. Also remember that Apple is having Serious issue with backlog right now, they're struggling to meet demand as it is. Do you really think they'll drop a supplier and face more shortages?

Not to mention that Apple and Samsung most likely have a multi-year contract for supplies because Apple likes signing those to get a cheaper volume price (which allows them to have such outstanding margins on sales)
post #27 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by kilimanjaro View Post

To be precise, those Samsung execs need to grow pairs..

You're right you know, Samsung is one of the largest tech companies in the world, they even supply components to Apple, so basically they have enough resources and power to make at least a great and innovative product. So why can't they? Instead, why did they copy Apple's iPhone? Because the execs can't grow a pair, errr sorry, pairs..

Apple wasn't the first one out with a touchscreen smartphone that uses the common form factor today. See LG's Prada. Samsung also had its own offering out earlier.

I don't see anyone coming out as a huge winner in this one. Any judge reviewing this complaint will see it for what it is. Far-reaching patent claims have no merit. I believe most of Apple's frivolous patent claims against HTC were summarily dismissed by the judge. Just 5 left out of the 20-30 patents they got sued over.
post #28 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Apple wasn't the first one out with a touchscreen smartphone that uses the common form factor today. See LG's Prada. Samsung also had its own offering out earlier.

I don't see anyone coming out as a huge winner in this one. Any judge reviewing this complaint will see it for what it is. Far-reaching patent claims have no merit. I believe most of Apple's frivolous patent claims against HTC were summarily dismissed by the judge. Just 5 left out of the 20-30 patents they got sued over.

I guess we'll see what happens. It's interesting, though, that Windows 7 Mobile and Palm OS are very different from iOS, while the Android systems of Samsung, HTC and Motorola are very close copies. It's not just a question of using a touchscreen.
post #29 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

I guess we'll see what happens. It's interesting, though, that Windows 7 Mobile and Palm OS are very different from iOS, while the Android systems of Samsung, HTC and Motorola are very close copies. It's not just a question of using a touchscreen.

Excellent point.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #30 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Apple wasn't the first one out with a touchscreen smartphone that uses the common form factor today. See LG's Prada. Samsung also had its own offering out earlier.

I don't see anyone coming out as a huge winner in this one. Any judge reviewing this complaint will see it for what it is. Far-reaching patent claims have no merit. I believe most of Apple's frivolous patent claims against HTC were summarily dismissed by the judge. Just 5 left out of the 20-30 patents they got sued over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

I guess we'll see what happens. It's interesting, though, that Windows 7 Mobile and Palm OS are very different from iOS, while the Android systems of Samsung, HTC and Motorola are very close copies. It's not just a question of using a touchscreen.


I think Apple's strongest argument centers upon the exterior form factor. But then again, Samsung's legal defense team is going to have decades of prior art to go off of. That complaint won't take long for any judge worth half his salt to decide to toss out for failure to state a complaint upon which a relief can be granted.

And you're not very clear on how Android is a ripoff of Apple. If you're referring to the fact that a "grid of apps" constitutes a ripoff of Apple's iPhone/iPad OS...well...I believe the truth of that claim is self-evident.






Doing well in IP law isn't about pointing fingers at every single competitor past and present for having a UI or physical form factor that's similar to yours. I suppose we should reform patent law not to discourage frivolous lawsuits like the ones we're now witnessing, but to allow a company like Apple to retroactively sue the likes of Palm, HP, and Dell who've had similar app layouts in their pocket PCs and PDAs dating back to the 1990s and earlier 2000s.
post #31 of 40
I really think that Palm. Samsung, Apple, and LG all mimicked the Newton in it's design. They should all pay the company that developed the Newton. Oh, wait, I think that was Apple. Well there we have it!

Also, in this economy, with all the money Apple has, why not build a couple of factories to have their won supply chain? I'm sure a few states desperate for jobs would cut them a sweet deal. They could alos build in Brazil as well. With control over their won supply chain, Apple wouldn't be instantly mimicked by their suppliers, and the quality couldn't get any lower than it is with asian labor!
Still looking for a witty comment to put here.
Reply
Still looking for a witty comment to put here.
Reply
post #32 of 40
I don't agree with Apple suing over look and feel. Copy cats are to always be expected. It's the way the world has worked since the dawn of time. You keep it classy and continue innovating. Not this rubbish.
post #33 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by yvo84 View Post

You keep it classy and continue innovating. Not this rubbish.

Why do people assume that you cant sue someone for patent and trademarks infringements and continue to innovate. Its not like their engineers are moonlighting as their lawyers.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #34 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by brent View Post

I really think that Palm. Samsung, Apple, and LG all mimicked the Newton in it's design. They should all pay the company that developed the Newton. Oh, wait, I think that was Apple. Well there we have it!

Also, in this economy, with all the money Apple has, why not build a couple of factories to have their won supply chain? I'm sure a few states desperate for jobs would cut them a sweet deal. They could alos build in Brazil as well. With control over their won supply chain, Apple wouldn't be instantly mimicked by their suppliers, and the quality couldn't get any lower than it is with asian labor!

This post is rife with so many assumptions. Makes me wonder whether all Apple fans like to pretend they're corporate lawyers and executives inside.

Newton was developed in the 1980s. Are you suggesting software patents should last 30 years? What if I were to patent the automobile steering wheel? Would you be ok with me suing every single automobile manufacturer in existence for not patenting something that's become commonplace for a century?

Also I hope you do realize two things. First, building flash memory and LCD screens isn't a matter of building a few factories. You need the technological know-how and the designs. Apple has neither for developing flash memory or screens. It COULD acquire a flash memory company or two, but that would be prohibitively expensive and would distract from Apple's core areas of focus. The same goes for LCD technology. Apple would wind up paying billions in R&D to develop its own core technologies--and that's assuming it doesn't trample on someone else's display tech. And cheap Asian labor isn't the reason some products are of lower quality than of others. All your Macs and iPhones are built in China but are arguably of excellent quality. It's all about quality control and smart engineering. I'm no Apple fanboy or hater, but I myself recognize excellent engineering in the iPhone 4 and the Macbook Pro.


I'm going to guess you're not a business management major. Amirite?
post #35 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

I think Apple's strongest argument centers upon the exterior form factor. But then again, Samsung's legal defense team is going to have decades of prior art to go off of. That complaint won't take long for any judge worth half his salt to decide to toss out for failure to state a complaint upon which a relief can be granted.

And you're not very clear on how Android is a ripoff of Apple. If you're referring to the fact that a "grid of apps" constitutes a ripoff of Apple's iPhone/iPad OS...well...I believe the truth of that claim is self-evident.






Doing well in IP law isn't about pointing fingers at every single competitor past and present for having a UI or physical form factor that's similar to yours. I suppose we should reform patent law not to discourage frivolous lawsuits like the ones we're now witnessing, but to allow a company like Apple to retroactively sue the likes of Palm, HP, and Dell who've had similar app layouts in their pocket PCs and PDAs dating back to the 1990s and earlier 2000s.



Wait, where have I seen that grid before? Hello Palm picture poster Jack99, 1883 wants it's grid back...





And we can keep going back from there, via Xerox PARC, all the way to 1964 with Englebart's GUI pioneering work in the Stanford Research Institute, Augmentation Research Center.

Hint: Leave off with the weak attempts at attributing history, you missed by over three decades. You are a decade early on the Newton too, and you missed the opportunity to point out that Palm actually made it market with the Palm Pilot before Apple did with the Newton, by a little more than a year.

That poor grasp of tech history bodes very poorly for your hope at engaging successfully in an IP discussion.

I'm going to guess you're not an engineer. Amirite? Not to mention the world needs fewer business majors.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #36 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

Wait, where have I seen that grid before? Hello Palm picture poster Jack99, 1883 wants it's grid back...





And we can keep going back from there, via Xerox PARC, all the way to 1964 with Englebart's GUI pioneering work in the Stanford Research Institute, Augmentation Research Center.

Hint: Leave off with the weak attempts at attributing history, you missed by over three decades. You are a decade early on the Newton too, and you missed the opportunity to point out that Palm actually made it market with the Palm Pilot before Apple did with the Newton, by a little more than a year.

That poor grasp of tech history bodes very poorly for your hope at engaging successfully in an IP discussion.

I'm going to guess you're not an engineer. Amirite? Not to mention the world needs fewer business majors.



Ummm...come again?

All you did was further prove my point. I'm not here to show off my knowledge of software design history or write a thesis report on it. In other words, you missed my main point completely. Please reread my prior posts for reference.

My point all along has been that this madness associated with trying to claim originality with software patents when the prior art reaches back as far as a half a century as you yourself even proved needs to come to a stop. That has been my thesis so far. Yet, there are still others who don't seem to think so!

All in all, if my reading of your comment is correct, you and I may actually share the same fundamental belief. The patent system needs overhaul, and now's a good time as ever for our policymakers and yes, even our judiciary system to consider this problem.

I'm impressed. You have pretty robust grasp of tech history. All your posts reveal is that facts alone are just that. Facts.
post #37 of 40
This lawsuit BS has transformed from the out of hand to the ludicrous. The only people benefiting are the courts and the lawyers.
post #38 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tardis View Post

Popcorn?

Good point, it represents an American food product that is totally unfamiliar in Asia. Asia has recently catapulted itself into a business, the production of technology for consumers, with which Asian society is totally unfamiliar. All they really understand is hard work.

Look at it this way. If you suddenly found that your only way to earn a living was opening a noodle restaurant, where would you look to find out how to do it? Japanese, Chinese and Korean noodle restaurants of course. At first they wouldn't care, because who wants to buy noodles from a popcorn stand? But when the business gets big enough, and it is obvious your noodle restaurant looks exactly like a particular Korean noodle restaurant, its owner might start to complain.

When the case comes to court, it's because the noodle restaurant owner has an alternative supplier of popcorn. I strongly suspect that this case started the moment Apple secured fall-back suppliers of the chips, displays etc. it currently gets from Samsung.

Your reading into it too much.

People eat popcorn when they see drama.

I see drama unfolding before me, thus the popcorn.

Having to explain this is making me my head.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #39 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post



Ummm...come again?

All you did was further prove my point. I'm not here to show off my knowledge of software design history or write a thesis report on it. In other words, you missed my main point completely. Please reread my prior posts for reference.

My point all along has been that this madness associated with trying to claim originality with software patents when the prior art reaches back as far as a half a century as you yourself even proved needs to come to a stop. That has been my thesis so far. Yet, there are still others who don't seem to think so!

All in all, if my reading of your comment is correct, you and I may actually share the same fundamental belief. The patent system needs overhaul, and now's a good time as ever for our policymakers and yes, even our judiciary system to consider this problem.

I'm impressed. You have pretty robust grasp of tech history. All your posts reveal is that facts alone are just that. Facts.

It's not madness with the patent concept, it's an exceptionally poor patent approval process. A better process would yield a far superior patent system. And your point on needing to redo the patent system was very poorly put. So poorly that your Palm pic smacked of typical Apple-basher flavor rather than patent dislike flavor.

As for facts, yep that's all they are. It's handy knowing the right facts though.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #40 of 40
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...s-lawsuit.html


This time, instead of Germany, Japan and Korea, its in the US.


Quote:
Samsung Electronics Co., the second-largest maker of mobile phones, broadened its patent- infringement dispute with Apple Inc. (AAPL) by suing the iPhone creator in the U.S. a week after making claims in Asia and Europe.

Apple is infringing 10 patents related to mobile phones, Samsung said in a lawsuit yesterday in federal court in San Jose, California. The Suwon, South Korea-based company, which sells the Galaxy smartphone and tablet, claims Apple is using Samsungs inventions without paying.

The lawsuit intensifies a legal dispute that began when Cupertino, California-based Apple sued Samsung earlier this month, claiming the Galaxy products slavishly copied iPad and iPhone technology and design. Samsung, which is also a supplier of some Apple chips, retaliated last week with lawsuits in Seoul, Tokyo and Mannheim, Germany.

In the U.S. complaint, Samsung accuses Apple of violating patents that relate to fundamental innovations that increase mobile device reliability, efficiency, and quality, and improve user interface in mobile handsets and other products.

The patented technology includes ways that a phone allows calls and Internet surfing at the same time; improvements in how text messages and attachments are sent; reductions in interference among mobile devices; and increases in the capacity of mobile networks, according to the complaint

Samsung, which received the second-highest number of U.S. patents last year after International Business Machines Corp., is seeking an order to prevent further use of its innovations by Apple, plus cash compensation.
Apple Complaint

Apple continues to violate Samsungs patent rights by using these patented technologies without a license, Samsung said in the lawsuit.

Apples April 15 complaint claims Samsung is infringing seven patents related to the way Galaxy devices understand user gestures, including selecting, scrolling, pinching and zooming. Samsung is also copying three patents on the design, including the flat black face of the iPhone and iPad, according to Apple.

The Galaxy phones and tablet, which use Google Inc. (GOOG)s Android software, were specifically designed to copy Apple products, Apple claims.

Apple is seeking a court order to block further use of its patents and trademarks, along with cash compensation and reasonable funds for future corrective advertising.

Samsungs mobile-phone business crossed the line, Tim Cook, Apples chief operating officer, said last week after the company reported profit that almost doubled from a year ago.

The case is Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc., 11cv2079, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San Jose).

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung fires back with patent lawsuits against Apple