or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung seeks ban of Apple's iPhone, iPad in new Netherlands lawsuits
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung seeks ban of Apple's iPhone, iPad in new Netherlands lawsuits

post #1 of 56
Thread Starter 
Following through on its threat to become more aggressive in the courtroom, Samsung has filed new patent infringement lawsuits against Apple in the Netherlands, seeking to ban sales of the company's iPhone and iPad products.

The four new patent cases were filed in district court in The Hague, Netherlands, according to Macworld. Samsung's complaint takes issue with Apple's iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, first-generation iPad, and iPad 2.

Samsung has alleged that the devices infringe on four 3G patents it owns. The Korean electronics maker seeks to ban the importation and sale of all devices listed in the suit. Each of the four patents in question are represented by their own separate lawsuit.

The complaints come as Samsung has made public comments vowing the step up its own legal action against Apple. The company said in a statement earlier Friday that Apple has been "free riding" on its own patented inventions.

The complaints filed in the Netherlands are just a few of the growing number of lawsuits between Samsung and Apple. The legal battle began in April, when Apple filed a suit against Samsung in the U.S., accusing its rival of copying the look and feel of the iPhone and iPad.



Rumors began to swirl earlier this week that Samsung was planning more legal action against Apple in Europe and Korea. It is expected that Samsung plans to take legal action against Apple's anticipated fifth-generation iPhone, which is expected to be unveiled in an event on Oct. 4.

Samsung's more aggressive strategy follows a handful of key early legal victories for Apple. This month, the iPhone maker won a permanent ban on sales of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany, while the device has also been barred from sale in Australia.
post #2 of 56
I would love to see iPhone banned in Europe. That means the waiting list for iPhone 5 here would be tolerable for once. Last year my wife waited almost 2 months. I couldn't imagine how long it's gonna take for a new PC-free iPhone.
post #3 of 56
This is getting ridiculous. Samsung shouldn't have stooped down to Apple's levels. Trying to get your legitimate competitor's products banned is a scummy thing to do. But I can see both coming to an agreement or out of court settlement eventually.
post #4 of 56
This patent madness needs to stop. Have we really progressed none at all since being children and screaming: "No, that's MINE!"
post #5 of 56
I think I'll champion Samsung for a while just to change things up.

Hell, I get into the same amount of trouble no matter who I champion.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #6 of 56
How can you infringe on 3G patents? Pretty sure those have to be licensable. Stupid Samsung.
post #7 of 56
Dang it!

Did someone patent "a sequence of alphanumeric characters greater than 1 but less than 3 that contains an integer number in the first position and a lower case consonant that is a voiced post alveolar affricate" when we weren't looking?

gc
post #8 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Following through on its threat to become more aggressive...
It is expected that Samsung plans to take legal action against Apple's anticipated fifth-generation iPhone...
Samsung's more aggressive strategy follows a handful of key early legal victories for Apple. This month, the iPhone maker won a permanent ban on sales of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany, while the device has also been barred from sale in Australia.

Apple, as everyone knows, is innovative. It puts large sums into that innovative effort. Not to be hatin', but Samsung had detailed information about Apple's iPad and iPhone inner workings since they were a supplier of component parts. Then, Samsung came out with me-too products which just happened to be just like Apples. Rightly, Apple sought relief from the courts, and pretty much prevailed.
Apple is a very important American company and Samsung is trying to harm it. I will never buy a Samsung product as long as they persist.
post #9 of 56
Apple: Whos laughing now?
Samsung: MUMMMY!!!
post #10 of 56
What kind of idiots run Samsung?
These really appear to be the actions of a company that's starting down the road to decline and ultimate ruin.
post #11 of 56
OMG!! when will Samsung stop this slavish copying? Just because apple sues them for copying doesn't mean they must sue apple for copying. There is no suggestion anywhere except in the pea brained Samsung execs' minds that apple has copied or infringed on anything from Samsung.

What a bunch of losers!!!!
post #12 of 56
Well... since Germany already put an injunction on Samsung's products, its a pretty safe bet the netherlands will follow suit.

Samsung come out screaming with guns blazing, and at the end of the day they will look the biggest fool.

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #13 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomlawler View Post

OMG!! when will Samsung stop this slavish copying? Just because apple sues them for copying doesn't mean they must sue apple for copying. There is no suggestion anywhere except in the pea brained Samsung execs' minds that apple has copied or infringed on anything from Samsung.

What a bunch of losers!!!!

LOL. After all the legalese and detailed arguments, I needed a straight-no-chaser response like this. Kudos.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #14 of 56
Take it this way, if Apples products did get banned in all these countries Samsung is trying to get them banned in (which is 1/100000000000 likely to happen), then Samsung will end up going bust anyways, since their have no one to copy.

So Samsung are effectively trying to fire their own designers.
post #15 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

What kind of idiots run Samsung?
These really appear to be the actions of a company that's starting down the road to decline and ultimate ruin.

By this I mean that in a short span of time they have alienated their top customer (and the largest publicly held company out there) by obviously copying Apple's very obvious design patents (and heck, even the very color, design and arrangement of the iPhone interface.) Now they're attempting to fight back by citing FRAND encumbered patents Apple has already licensed.

No possible outcome can make up for future revenue and goodwill they will be losing.
Perhaps for their next trick, they should hire Meg Whitman as their CEO.
post #16 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by kozchris View Post

How can you infringe on 3G patents? Pretty sure those have to be licensable. Stupid Samsung.

You're no quite sure about the heart of the matter, but you conclude that a gigantic corporation with access to some of the biggest and best law firms is wrong.

Somehow, I'm not as certain as you seem to be.
post #17 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordonComstock View Post

Dang it!

Did someone patent "a sequence of alphanumeric characters greater than 1 but less than 3 that contains an integer number in the first position and a lower case consonant that is a voiced post alveolar affricate" when we weren't looking?

gc

Well done, but I think your comment will go above most heads since most don't have a deeper understanding of phonetics.
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 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

You're no quite sure about the heart of the matter, but you conclude that a gigantic corporation with access to some of the biggest and best law firms is wrong.

Somehow, I'm not as certain as you seem to be.

If the patents are part of the 3G spec, they are FRAND encumbered. There is no arguing this.
post #19 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

Now they're attempting to fight back by citing FRAND encumbered patents Apple has already licensed.

Which of the 4 patents is subject to FRAND? How did you come to that conclusion about these specific 4 patents?
post #20 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

You're no quite sure about the heart of the matter, but you conclude that a gigantic corporation with access to some of the biggest and best law firms is wrong.

Somehow, I'm not as certain as you seem to be.

Microsoft was the largest tech company, and probably has the worse lawyers.
post #21 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

Which of the 4 patents is subject to FRAND? How did you come to that conclusion about these specific 4 patents?

I can's say about these patents as they are not specified in the article. But previously they have cited patents that are part of the the 3G spec, which is FRAND encumbered. I refer to them in your quote.

These four patents are only referred to as "3G patents" which is nebulous at best.
I merely point out quite accurately that , "If the patents are part of the 3G spec, they are FRAND encumbered. There is no arguing this."
post #22 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by alienzed View Post

...Have we really progressed none at all since being children and screaming: "No, that's MINE!"

Nope, we haven't. It's basic human nature that some of us manage to suppress most of the time. Children haven't learned to suppress it yet, and lawyers never do.

Thompson
post #23 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Well done, but I think your comment will go above most heads since most don't have a deeper understanding of phonetics.

While you all slept, I acquired the the patent on 1G, so there!
post #24 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esprit de Corps View Post

Apple, as everyone knows, is innovative.

But far from unique.

Quote:
It puts large sums into that innovative effort.

So do others.

Quote:
Not to be hatin', but Samsung had detailed information about Apple's iPad and iPhone inner workings since they were a supplier of component parts. Then, Samsung came out with me-too products which just happened to be just like Apples. Rightly, Apple sought relief from the courts, and pretty much prevailed.

The show ain't over till the fat lady sings. And now the shoe is on the other foot.

Quote:
Apple is a very important American company and Samsung

is a very important Korean company. So what? Nationality has fuck all to do with it.

Quote:
is trying to harm it.

FYI: it's called 'competition'. And if Americans had been around (they weren't) they would have invented it. So to start whining about something that is as American as apple pie is pathetic.
TBS, Americans did invent sueing and intellectual property as 'competition' mechanisms. So now they get a taste of their own medicine.

Quote:
I will never buy a Samsung product as long as they persist.

LOL!
Can you vote yet?
post #25 of 56
Pathetic. Pathetic Apple. Pathetic VIA. Pathetic Samsung. Pathetic HTC. Just cross license and be done with it. Wasting money in court............this is getting out of hand.
post #26 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post

Pathetic. Pathetic Apple. Pathetic VIA. Pathetic Samsung. Pathetic HTC. Just cross license and be done with it. Wasting money in court............this is getting out of hand.

Apple should cross license their design patents?
Should they cross license their logo and company name as well?
I'd say your grasp of the essential facts is a bit pathetic.
post #27 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

I merely point out quite accurately that , "If the patents are part of the 3G spec, they are FRAND encumbered. There is no arguing this."

Oh. That's different. Yes, if Apple has already licensed the patents, then they are not infringing on the patents.

But I thought you said "Now they're attempting to fight back by citing FRAND encumbered patents Apple has already licensed."

That's very different.
post #28 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

Which of the 4 patents is subject to FRAND? How did you come to that conclusion about these specific 4 patents?

The linked article at macworld states that the patents in question here are FRAND patents. Appple requested a hearing on the patents so Samsung is basically going to get some backdated licensing for the patents in question and won't get the injunction against Apple's products. It will at least help them pay their other legal fees against Apple
post #29 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

The linked article at macworld states that the patents in question here are FRAND patents. Appple requested a hearing on the patents so Samsung is basically going to get some backdated licensing for the patents in question and won't get the injunction against Apple's products. It will at least help them pay their other legal fees against Apple

I read it. It does indeed say that.

I was impressed with the quality of the writing and the amount of information included. The issues and the stakes are presented with depth and reason. Thanks.
post #30 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therbo View Post

Microsoft was the largest tech company, and probably has the worse lawyers.

Considering Apple lost its UI case against them, I wonder what that implies?
post #31 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacksons View Post

Considering Apple lost its UI case against them, I wonder what that implies?

Way to pick the most inapposite case. How about stepping a little closer to the present.
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 #32 of 56
Samsung is going to pursue a suit against the iphone 3gs which is a 2 year old model.

I thought patent law said something like if you don't take action within a certain time frame then the patent loses some of it's exclusivity, that is that the design is in the public domain.
Thinking that will hurt sammy's cause.
post #33 of 56
What I presume apple has assessed is that their patent portfolio is going to help with

- advantage of hindering a competitor in a certain market(s) through patent claims

Vs

- potential of apple itself being hindered in a market through a competitor's patent claims

Given apple's arguably greater market share and mind share in many (most?) markets, they potentially stand to lose more than gain by playing this game.
post #34 of 56
deleted
post #35 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacksons View Post

Considering Apple lost its UI case against them, I wonder what that implies?

It means that Apple began to register and patent its 'innovations' properly, and to hire better lawyers. And it means that "Metro" will remain a clunky clunker.

Cheers
post #36 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Does licensable mean free?
Does Apple have a receipt of their payments to Samsung?
Are the specific patents in question completely part of a FRAND agreement?

If all of the above are true, then it would seem Samsung is indeed blowing hot air and will be slapped into submission by the judge.

But if any of the above are not true, there may be a case.

If all the patents are FRAND, then the judge could determine they were infringing, but most likely Apple would just end up having to pay back licensing fees and obtain a license for going forward, which Samsung cannot deny them as part of the whole FRAND thing. So I'm not exactly sure why Samsung is even trying to say they are trying to get an injunction here.
post #37 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post

Pathetic. Pathetic Apple. Pathetic VIA. Pathetic Samsung. Pathetic HTC. Just cross license and be done with it. Wasting money in court............this is getting out of hand.

You forgot S3 and Motorola
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #38 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therbo View Post

Take it this way, if Apples products did get banned in all these countries Samsung is trying to get them banned in (which is 1/100000000000 likely to happen), then Samsung will end up going bust anyways, since their have no one to copy.

So Samsung are effectively trying to fire their own designers.

And, they will have no one to sell their iPhone components to.

Cut nose, spite face, whatever......
post #39 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

I'd say your grasp of the essential facts is a bit pathetic.

So is your reply.
post #40 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

And, they will have no one to sell their iPhone components to.

Can't see that eating into their revenues, though! Have you seen the pace at which Samsung is selling phones and tablets? Have you seen the rate at which the installed Android user base has inflated? It is now about 3 to 4 times the size of iOS'. Ignore it at your peril.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung seeks ban of Apple's iPhone, iPad in new Netherlands lawsuits