or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple heats up legal battle against Samsung with new ITC complaint
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple heats up legal battle against Samsung with new ITC complaint

post #1 of 37
Thread Starter 
Apple has filed a U.S. trade complaint against Samsung in hopes of blocking the import of the company's Galaxy S phone and Galaxy Tab touchscreen tablet as the legal dispute between the two companies ramps up.

The new filing comes days after the Cupertino, Calif.-based company asked a federal court to bring sales of the aforementioned devices to a standstill in the U.S. The complaint was lodged with the U.S. International Trade Commission on Tuesday, countering patent infringement claims made by Samsung to the ITC last week in an attempt to block imports of Apples iPhone and iPad.

Samsung has followed each of Apples groundbreaking products with imitation products that incorporate Apples technology and distinctive design, Apple wrote in the complaint. If the commission decides to pursue an investigation, the case will be heard in 15 to 18 months.

Apple and Samsung began their legal dispute back in April when Apple accused the Korean electronics giant of copying the look and feel of its devices. The disagreement has since spread to courts in four countries (1, 2). During the cases proceedings, Apple was granted a request to see copies of Samsungs unreleased products, while a counter-claim from Samsung was denied.

In addition to competing with the company in the smartphone and tablet markets, Samsung serves as one of Apples key component partners, supplying chips for most of their leading products. Given the two close partnership between the two companies, some analysts have been surprised by the intensity of their legal disagreement.

It has become very public and very ugly, very quickly, Bloomberg reported Gleacher & Co. analyst Brian Marshall as saying. Theyre just going after each others throats.

Marshall believes that an import ban on Samsungs devices is doubtful and predicts that both companies will eventually reach a settlement and cross-licensing deal. According to the analyst, Apple may not have a choice in licensing its intellectual property to Samsung, which has a number of patents Apple needs.

As tensions between the two companies have mounted, some have speculated that Apple plans to reduce its reliance on its rival. Recent rumors suggest the iPhone maker will go with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company instead of Samsung for its A6 chip in 2012. Meanwhile, Samsung is restructuring its component operations and could be planning to spin off its semiconductor and LCD business to avoid a conflict of interest.
post #2 of 37
I still don't understand Apple motives here. Do they honestly think they will be successful in their efforts? What am I missing?
post #3 of 37
And with MS beating at Samsung's door for $15 per Android-based handset Samsung is getting it from all angles. But that's not necessarily a bad thing as it does mean Samsung is being very successful in order to be such a big target.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

I still don't understand Apple motives here. Do they honestly think they will be successful in their efforts? What am I missing?

Specifically what they are asking for here? Probably not, but It's all part of the overall process.
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 #4 of 37
Can we get some source materials in this joint?

I'm actually surprised to see absolutely no source material in the forums?

Does Apple insider have their own team of journalists that report (first hand) about these events?

I suspect these information are coming from secondary sources. The least you could do is give them some credit.

"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 #5 of 37
Apple may have had a point once upon a time. Wherever it was, it's now lost, with the picture now becoming tiresome. They're acting more like a spoiled child IMHO..
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #6 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Apple may have had a point once upon a time. Wherever it was, it's now lost, with the picture now becoming tiresome. They're acting more like a spoiled child IMHO..

A spoiled child that doesn't want his stuff stolen.
post #7 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

I still don't understand Apple motives here. Do they honestly think they will be successful in their efforts?

Yes..
post #8 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

They're acting more like a spoiled child IMHO..

I don't understand this analogy. In what way is Apple like a 'spoiled child'? Spoiled by whom? When?
post #9 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

I still don't understand Apple motives here. Do they honestly think they will be successful in their efforts? What am I missing?

Maybe they don't like people ripping off their products?
post #10 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

I still don't understand Apple motives here.

You have absolutely no right to make your product look so much like mine.

Quote:
Do they honestly think they will be successful in their efforts?

Yes.

Quote:
What am I missing?

That they've won this sort of thing in the past so well that said losing company was bankrupted.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #11 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

And with MS beating at Samsung's door for $15 per Android-based handset Samsung is getting it from all angles. But that's not necessarily a bad thing as it does mean Samsung is being very successful.....

It is certainly easier than more difficult to be 'successful' if one didn't have to come up with one's own IP or spend a lot of time and resources coming up with it.

(I am not suggesting that I know anything about the specific IP issues here, just making a general observation.)
post #12 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

I still don't understand Apple motives here. Do they honestly think they will be successful in their efforts? What am I missing?

Patents infringed upon must be legally defended or they will become useless.
post #13 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Apple may have had a point once upon a time. Wherever it was, it's now lost, with the picture now becoming tiresome. They're acting more like a spoiled child IMHO..

Don't let a lack of understanding of infringement issues get in the way of a good ole snarky comment. Ignorance is always the best policy.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #14 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I don't understand this analogy. In what way is Apple like a 'spoiled child'? Spoiled by whom? When?

The newer claims are bordering silly IMO. The Galaxy Tabs would never be confused for iPads, not even the menu screens having any similarity to the iPad's splash screen. But that appears to matter not to Apple. They're screaming "mine, mine, give it back" louder than ever. Personally it looks like they've decided on the courts as another marketing arm.

They're losing my sympathy. In the beginning I felt that had a valid complaint with certain specific phones. Just my take on it.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #15 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

The newer claims are bordering silly IMO. The Galaxy Tabs would never be confused for iPads, not even the menu screens having any similarity to the iPad's splash screen. But that appears to matter not to Apple. They're screaming "mine, mine, give it back" louder than ever. Personally it looks like they've decided on the courts as another marketing arm.

They're losing my sympathy. In the beginning I felt that had a valid complaint with certain specific phones. Just my take on it.

How did you conclude that, in the case of Tabs, Apple's complaint had anything to do with "menu screens"?

The complaint talks about "technology" and "distinctive design".
post #16 of 37
People need to get it through their head that ``software'' patents are software designs that interact with hardware. They aren't actual algorithms but a specific software/hardware inter-connective relationship.

Design Patents are just that.
post #17 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

The newer claims are bordering silly IMO. The Galaxy Tabs would never be confused for iPads, not even the menu screens having any similarity to the iPad's splash screen. But that appears to matter not to Apple. They're screaming "mine, mine, give it back" louder than ever. Personally it looks like they've decided on the courts as another marketing arm.

They're losing my sympathy. In the beginning I felt that had a valid complaint with certain specific phones. Just my take on it.

Apple is on point and showing the same focus since they started. Samsung not so much.
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 #18 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

It is certainly easier than more difficult to be 'successful' if one didn't have to come up with one's own IP or spend a lot of time and resources coming up with it.

(I am not suggesting that I know anything about the specific IP issues here, just making a general observation.)

Sound observation. Samsung may have known from the start they can't win against Apple but factored the payout as being far less than the potential gain. That is not uncommon in business.
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 #19 of 37
This is getting really ugly. A cross-licensing deal will be a good option to ending this mess.
I totally support Apple in this battle.
post #20 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Sound observation. Samsung may have known from the start they can't win against Apple but factored the payout as being far less than the potential gain. That is not uncommon in business.

So, you're sure that Samsung is guilty,

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Samsung not so much.

Why is not in focus? And why does it matter for the trial?
post #21 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Can we get some source materials in this joint?

http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/

As ever fosspatents has an analysis
post #22 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Patents infringed upon must be legally defended or they will become useless.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Patents aren't like TMs, if you don't defend them you don't lose them. However obviously if you NEVER defend them then there was very little point filing them, except the defensive point of stopping somebody else.
post #23 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

The newer claims are bordering silly IMO. The Galaxy Tabs would never be confused for iPads, not even the menu screens having any similarity to the iPad's splash screen. But that appears to matter not to Apple. They're screaming "mine, mine, give it back" louder than ever. Personally it looks like they've decided on the courts as another marketing arm.

They're losing my sympathy. In the beginning I felt that had a valid complaint with certain specific phones. Just my take on it.

This suit isn't primarily Design Patents it's primarily utility patents including some hardware patents. They're not asserting that the G-Tab infringes either of the design patents included in this suit.
post #24 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

This suit isn't primarily Design Patents it's primarily utility patents including some hardware patents. They're not asserting that the G-Tab infringes either of the design patents included in this suit.

Thanks for that Cloudgazer. I incorrectly thought they were still trying to assert design patents on the Tab's.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #25 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Thanks for that Cloudgazer. I incorrectly thought they were still trying to assert design patents on the Tab's.

Only against the 10.1 and that's in the other motion. There are many so many motions it's getting incoherent, it's like a mosh-pit of lawyers.
post #26 of 37
I went into a Best Buy the other day. There was some Samsung Infuse phone set out front. A little kid walked by and said look mom an iPhone. The phone did look like an iPhone. Apple's motive is to 1) win a royalty (like Microsoft), or 2) win an injunction. Out of all the lawsuits Apple is involved in currently, I think Apple has the highest chance of success against Samsung and HTC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

I still don't understand Apple motives here. Do they honestly think they will be successful in their efforts? What am I missing?
post #27 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

The phone did look like an iPhone

Perhaps a little child like the one you saw could be confused, but th infuse doesn't look like an iPhone.
post #28 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

I still don't understand Apple motives here. Do they honestly think they will be successful in their efforts? What am I missing?


I said this before, it is apple strategy to take Samsung out of the cell phone business. Samsung component businesses many times has access to new design ideas of competing company long before the products are release and do not thing for a minute this information is not being share to the Samsung phone and other business units. I have worked with the Samsung and they ask lots of questions and one which are not relevant to the component they selling and sometime they will withhold critical design information until they get the information they are looking for. I know apple is very secret with what they do buy you can be guarantee and information their component busy is doing is being share with their electronic business.

So This is apple way of telling Samsung to get out of the smart phone business, either they are a component company or cell phone company, they need to decide and obviously they have risk many Billions of $ of business from apple because of this and they now announce earning warning for the 2H12 which telling you apple is putting a world of hurt on them. No other component company is giving earning warning in the 2h12 since that is traditional the best time of the year.
post #29 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

and they now announce earning warning for the 2H12 which telling you apple is putting a world of hurt on them. No other component company is giving earning warning in the 2h12 since that is traditional the best time of the year.

And why Apple has to do nothing with this warning?
post #30 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

I said this before, it is apple strategy to take Samsung out of the cell phone business. Samsung component businesses many times has access to new design ideas of competing company long before the products are release and do not thing for a minute this information is not being share to the Samsung phone and other business units. I have worked with the Samsung and they ask lots of questions and one which are not relevant to the component they selling and sometime they will withhold critical design information until they get the information they are looking for. I know apple is very secret with what they do buy you can be guarantee and information their component busy is doing is being share with their electronic business.

So This is apple way of telling Samsung to get out of the smart phone business, either they are a component company or cell phone company, they need to decide and obviously they have risk many Billions of $ of business from apple because of this and they now announce earning warning for the 2H12 which telling you apple is putting a world of hurt on them. No other component company is giving earning warning in the 2h12 since that is traditional the best time of the year.

Folks claim that the Chinese are master copyists but really they're pretty half assed in comparison to the Koreans. The Koreans copy style AND offer high quality once they get their process in order. Hyundai makes good cars with nice Euro styling...they're going to continue to make headway in the global markets that way.

Samsung devices are pretty solid even if they tend to be a plasticly notch down from Apple devices. I could see owning the next gen 7" samsung tab if it were a little cheaper and Apple doesn't have a large iPod Touch to offer.

It's a shame that the Nook Color is still the best Android tablet for under $300.

That said, Samsung isn't leaving the handset business and that's not Apple's goal anyway. Just less direct copying.
post #31 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Folks claim that the Chinese are master copyists but really they're pretty half assed in comparison to the Koreans. The Koreans copy style AND offer high quality once they get their process in order.

A friend of mine bought a beautiful fake Louis Vuitton wallet in asia, Thailand I think. He said that the stall owner explicitly asked him whether he wanted the cheap Chinese copy or the good Korean copy - he went for the Korean one.
post #32 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

I said this before, it is apple strategy to take Samsung out of the cell phone business.

Samsung are free to stay in the cellphone business, they just need to be more careful about copying Apple's designs - better yet they could try actually creating a well defined design language of their own that clearly differentiates from others in the market.

What's really funny is that the entire reason why Samsung wants to play in the CE market and not just make components is because the cost of building a strong consumer brand is a barrier to entry to new participants. However unlike Apple, it hasn't yet figured out that a strong consumer brand means more than just a nice Logo.
post #33 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

What's really funny is that the entire reason why Samsung wants to play in the CE market and not just make components is because the cost of building a strong consumer brand is a barrier to entry to new participants. However unlike Apple, it hasn't yet figured out that a strong consumer brand means more than just a nice Logo.

I like Samsung products actually. LG too. Still occasionally spotty QA with both brands but I think in many markets they're coming in pretty strong. I can see them becoming equal to Japanese brands in these segments. Japanese brands are drifting slightly down in my mind as the Korean brands drift up.

Chinese brands...not so much...still shooting for that value segment. Which is fine given that Korea and Japan have been playing the game longer.

Nice though that US brands like Apple are still on top. With the decline of many US CE brands there was the feeling that all was lost to asian brands.
post #34 of 37
deleted
post #35 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

I like Samsung products actually. LG too. Still occasionally spotty QA with both brands but I think in many markets they're coming in pretty strong. I can see them becoming equal to Japanese brands in these segments. Japanese brands are drifting slightly down in my mind as the Korean brands drift up.

I'm not saying that they're poorly made, I'm saying that they're poorly differentiated.
post #36 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

I'm not saying that they're poorly made, I'm saying that they're poorly differentiated.

Mmm...is Toyota all THAT differentiated from Honda or Nissan as brands? If Samsung ends up in the same breath as Sony, Sharp, etc as one of the more premium CE brands I think they met their objectives even if they stay a notch below Apple.
post #37 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Mmm...is Toyota all THAT differentiated from Honda or Nissan as brands? If Samsung ends up in the same breath as Sony, Sharp, etc as one of the more premium CE brands I think they met their objectives even if they stay a notch below Apple.

I don't know enough about cars to speak with authority, but I'd say that car firms are generally more differentiated, maybe the Japanese firms aren't differentiated from each other, but they're very differentiated from the German marques, who all have very strong identities. In fact most of the European makers have very well defined brand identities, even much maligned Fiat.

Fiat recently took a page from Apple's playbook and opened its own stores, they're amazing examples of Italian Futurism, every time I walk past the one in London I find myself staring in through the window. The store takes the Fiat design language and exaggerates it, hammering it home, leaving you more aware of what it was about Fiat that you kinda liked (or hated) in the first place.

Fiat also recently relaunched the cinquecento, long their most recognisable car, bringing it close to its roots - much as Volkswagon relaunched the Bug, and BWM relaunched the Mini.

I'm sure if I bothered to look at the Japanese carmakers I'd find some design elements that separated them. The grill or the shape of the lights perhaps?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple heats up legal battle against Samsung with new ITC complaint