or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Samsung fail to reach agreement in court-ordered talks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple, Samsung fail to reach agreement in court-ordered talks

post #1 of 40
Thread Starter 
After two days of settlement talks involving each of the companies' chief executives, Apple and Samsung failed to reach an agreement that would end their sprawling patent infringement suits.

The California trial between Samsung and Apple is now headed for a scheduled start in late June, after the companies could find "no clear agreement," a Samsung official told The Korea Times. Both companies reportedly held firm in their respective beliefs, as Samsung believes Apple should pay royalties for using wireless transmission technology, while Apple believes Samsung copied the design of its iPhone and iPad.

The lack of resolution is not surprising to onlookers, as the discussions involving Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook and Samsung CEO Choi Gee-sung were court-ordered. The two took part in discussions on Monday and Tuesday of this week in San Francisco, Calif.

A similar outcome occurred last year, when Oracle's Larry Ellison and Google's Larry Page took part in a court-ordered mediation. No settlement was reached in that case either, and the case eventually went to trial.

Though the discussions with Apple have concluded, Samsung CEO Choi and Shin Jong-kyun, the company's mobile division chief, remain in the U.S. and are reportedly inspecting the company's stateside operations before returning to their home country of South Korea.



Experts have said that thus far, there has not been much of an incentive for Apple to settle its patent infringement dispute with Samsung, as the iPhone maker has yet to lose an infringement claim lodged by Samsung. Instead, Apple has earned a handful of victories and won infringements barring the sale of various Samsung products around the world.

Apple hopes to find even more success in the courtroom with a new injunction filed last week in the U.S. against the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. An injunction against the device would not likely be a major financial issue for Samsung, which previously redesigned the device in Germany to avoid infringement. But it would be a publicity win for Apple, which has asserted that Samsung has illegally copied the look and feel of its popular iPhone and iPad product lineups.
post #2 of 40

Of course they didn't! Why on earth would Apple be interested in "agreements" when they could just as easily get what they want out of a trial?  

 

To what advantage is it to Apple to offer concessions, especially at this very point in the company's amazing performance?  Apple is set to own the next 5-7 years in consumer tech. There is no reason to not push their legal concerns as hard as possible. Consumers are on board, Apple has the money and the experience, etc.  Why bother negotiating with the competition? Just so you can chip away at your own level of differentiation? Differentiation is the rarest commodity in this turkey of an industry that Apple has turned on its head. To give *any* of that away via patent concessions or licensing agreements is madness. The only reason Apple is a force today (and a key reason for their unparalleled success) *is* a level of differentiation that no one else has employed or has been able to.

post #3 of 40

Time to carry out Steve Job's wishes of "going nuclear"?

post #4 of 40

Wow. What a surprise.

post #5 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Of course they didn't! Why on earth would Apple be interested in "agreements" when they could just as easily get what they want out of a trial?  

 

To what advantage is it to Apple to offer concessions, especially at this very point in the company's amazing performance?  Apple is set to own the next 5-7 years in consumer tech. There is no reason to not push their legal concerns as hard as possible. Consumers are on board, Apple has the money and the experience, etc.  Why bother negotiating with the competition? Just so you can chip away at your own level of differentiation? Differentiation is the rarest commodity in this turkey of an industry that Apple has turned on its head. To give *any* of that away via patent concessions or licensing agreements is madness. The only reason Apple is a force today (and a key reason for their unparalleled success) *is* a level of differentiation that no one else has employed or has been able to.

Couldn't have put it better.  Be it a Kia or a few years back, Lexus / Toyota copying a BMW or Mercedes design or some cigarette lighter maker in Japan 40 years ago copying Ronson's design I am personally sick and tiered of this Asian MO of simply making what the west designs only cheaper (which easy in many cases if you are just copying).  It's about time some company stood up to them.

Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #6 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Of course they didn't! Why on earth would Apple be interested in "agreements" when they could just as easily get what they want out of a trial?  

 

To what advantage is it to Apple to offer concessions, especially at this very point in the company's amazing performance?  Apple is set to own the next 5-7 years in consumer tech. There is no reason to not push their legal concerns as hard as possible. Consumers are on board, Apple has the money and the experience, etc.  Why bother negotiating with the competition? Just so you can chip away at your own level of differentiation? Differentiation is the rarest commodity in this turkey of an industry that Apple has turned on its head. To give *any* of that away via patent concessions or licensing agreements is madness. The only reason Apple is a force today (and a key reason for their unparalleled success) *is* a level of differentiation that no one else has employed or has been able to.

Well put. There may be agreements and compromises to be made on such things as wireless transmission technology, but when it comes to hardware and software design (as in the aesthetic qualities and the resultant user experience), it is a different story. 

post #7 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Well put. There may be agreements and compromises to be made on such things as wireless transmission technology, but when it comes to hardware and software design (as in the aesthetic qualities and the resultant user experience), it is a different story. 

There's really nothing to agree to on wireless transmission technology. Those patents are FRAND. The negotiation doesn't need to be any longer than this.

Samsung: We demand payment for our wireless transmission patents

Apple: OK. What is the amount you are charging everyone else?

Samsung can easily get the amount they're charging everyone else. They can not get more from Apple. So the discussion on that issue shouldn't take long.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #8 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


There's really nothing to agree to on wireless transmission technology. Those patents are FRAND. The negotiation doesn't need to be any longer than this.
Samsung: We demand payment for our wireless transmission patents
Apple: OK. What is the amount you are charging everyone else?
Samsung can easily get the amount they're charging everyone else. They can not get more from Apple. So the discussion on that issue shouldn't take long.

 

Yep, those FRAND patents are supposed to be like 90% of what Samsung is trying to use against Apple. The other 10% are patents of questionable validity. Apple would want them slammed in court on the FRAND issue because Samsung deserves it. And would want the other bits invalidated in court to avoid going through this again at any point. 

 

Just like they want their design patent validated by the courts because once a court says yes it is valid it will make it easier to get other courts to say the same, especially if they get it up to a higher level that would have precedent setting authority over lesser courts. One victory in the right court and Apple could move and get summary judgment on a good dozen similar cases. 

 

Also as I have heard it, Apple isn't fussing over the actual fee being asked for as much as the form of payment. Samsung is basically refusing to take cash for those FRAND patents but wants it paid in access to Apple patents that are vital to the uniqueness of the iOS lineup and are not FRAND (so Apple doesn't legally have to license them to anyone). That it seems is Apple's major issue even before the issue of the actual fee comes into play. 

post #9 of 40

Samsung has a huge amount of IP, unfortunately most of it is FRAND or related to their semiconductor business. Samsung literally has thousands of patents related to manufacturing of semis, DRAM, Flash and processors. Unfortunately, when someone buys components (like Apple) the IP is included so there's no way this huge cache of IP can be used in any way in their legal battles.

 

I find it funny that out of all the legal wrangling so far, the only thing Samsung has achieved is to get an official antitrust investigation from the EU for using FRAND patents to seek injunctions against Apple. It's one thing to file a suit and get denied (this has happened to Apple as well), but wuite another to have a suit denied and then be faced with the possibility of substantial fines.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #10 of 40

Exactly who was doing the talking in this?

 

Was in Tim and Samsung's CEO and possible a translator involved with lawyers to advise and nothing more? Or was it their lawyers doing the talking with the two there to merely observe and give a thumbs up or thumbs down?

 

If it was their lawyers then its obvious it would've failed. those guys have no interest in a resolution. Long drawn out battle = more money for them.
 

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

Exactly who was doing the talking in this?

Was in Tim and Samsung's CEO and possible a translator involved with lawyers to advise and nothing more? Or was it their lawyers doing the talking with the two there to merely observe and give a thumbs up or thumbs down?

If it was their lawyers then its obvious it would've failed. those guys have no interest in a resolution. Long drawn out battle = more money for them.

 

That's not how most lawyers work. Good lawyers have plenty of work to keep busy and are better served by doing what's best for their clients.

More importantly, Apple would probably be using its in-house lawyers for this negotiation and they are on salary.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #12 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Couldn't have put it better.  Be it a Kia or a few years back, Lexus / Toyota copying a BMW or Mercedes design or some cigarette lighter maker in Japan 40 years ago copying Ronson's design I am personally sick and tiered of this Asian MO of simply making what the west designs only cheaper (which easy in many cases if you are just copying).  It's about time some company stood up to them.

 

Asian MO?

 

Wow!

post #13 of 40

Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post
 

Couldn't have put it better.  Be it a Kia or a few years back, Lexus / Toyota copying a BMW or Mercedes design or some cigarette lighter maker in Japan 40 years ago copying Ronson's design I am personally sick and tiered of this Asian MO of simply making what the west designs only cheaper (which easy in many cases if you are just copying).  It's about time some company stood up to them.

 

Yeah, I agree.

 

The mobile projector

quad core processors

voice controls

8 megapixel cameras

4g LTE

wireless syncing

multitasking

pressure sensitive styluses

curved glass

deep black AMOLED displays

NFC

Face Unlock

Burst mode photo shooting

taking pictures while shooting video

pop up video players while using another app

eye recognition anti-lock

....the list goes on

 

....all things the iphone had FIRST that these asian manufacturers just slavishly copied and put onto their handsets

 

Downright disgusting

 

I mean, what next? They gonna steal the 4-inch screen that apple came up with first?
 

Apple on the other hand, all of the things in the iphone were done by them FIRST. They didn't copy anyone. I still wonder how they came up with the brilliant idea for a drop down notification menu or a messaging application that allows free iphone messaging...maybe if RIM think of something like that they wouldn't be in so much trouble right now.


Edited by sleepy3 - 5/23/12 at 11:42am
post #14 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post

Yeah, I agree.

The mobile projector
quad core processors
voice controls
8 megapixel cameras
4g LTE
wireless syncing
multitasking
pressure sensitive styluses
curved glass
deep black AMOLED displays
NFC
Face Unlock
Burst mode photo shooting
taking pictures while shooting video
pop up video players while using another app
eye recognition anti-lock
....the list goes on

....all things the iphone had FIRST that these asian manufacturers just slavishly copied and put onto their handsets

Downright disgusting

I mean, what next? They gonna steal the 4-inch screen that apple came up with first?

 
Apple on the other hand, all of the things in the iphone were done by them FIRST. They didn't copy anyone. I still wonder how they came up with the brilliant idea for a drop down notification menu or a messaging application that allows free iphone messaging...maybe if RIM think of something like that they wouldn't be in so much trouble right now.

Why don't you show us where Apple claimed to have done all of the above first?

Put up or shut up.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #15 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Why don't you show us where Apple claimed to have done all of the above first?
Put up or shut up.

Show me where i said APPLE said that. Put up or shut up.

 

I was simply saying that I, like the rest of this forum, am of the opinion that all asian manufacturers do is copy apple ideas and i simply listed the ideas that apple came up with first which were then copied. You can't deny, Samsung and company stole all of those ideas from apple. All they do is steal, they could never have come up with even something as simple as wireless syncing if apple didn't show them the way. Its MY opinion that they stole it from apple, and the opinion of the rest of this forum as well.

post #16 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post....I still wonder how they came up with the brilliant idea for a drop down notification menu...

 

I do believe that was a feature added by an app on jailbroken iPhones.

post #17 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Wow. What a surprise.

Yeah! I never saw this coming at all!! 

I thought Apple was just gonna roll over and pee on itself in awe.

post #18 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Couldn't have put it better.  Be it a Kia or a few years back, Lexus / Toyota copying a BMW or Mercedes design or some cigarette lighter maker in Japan 40 years ago copying Ronson's design I am personally sick and tiered of this Asian MO of simply making what the west designs only cheaper (which easy in many cases if you are just copying).  It's about time some company stood up to them.

Nice one you bigot. You think Apple never copying anyone right?

post #19 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post

Its MY opinion that they stole it from apple, and the opinion of the rest of this forum as well.

Hey that is YOUR opinion and donn't speak for everyone else as you certainly don't speak for me.

post #20 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Of course they didn't! Why on earth would Apple be interested in "agreements" when they could just as easily get what they want out of a trial?  

To what advantage is it to Apple to offer concessions, especially at this very point in the company's amazing performance?  Apple is set to own the next 5-7 years in consumer tech. There is no reason to not push their legal concerns as hard as possible. Consumers are on board, Apple has the money and the experience, etc.  Why bother negotiating with the competition? Just so you can chip away at your own level of differentiation? Differentiation is the rarest commodity in this turkey of an industry that Apple has turned on its head. To give *any* of that away via patent concessions or licensing agreements is madness. The only reason Apple is a force today (and a key reason for their unparalleled success) *is* a level of differentiation that no one else has employed or has been able to.

Because there's always the chance of losing just like Oracle did and you get nothing.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #21 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Why don't you show us where Apple claimed to have done all of the above first?
Put up or shut up.

 

Not to mention Apple has more applications of `curved glass,' than any corporation in history. Do we need to discuss multitasking? That's innovation because it was sluggishly added to underpowered embedded processors first by the Android group?

 

Everyone knows Apple doesn't have nearly 40 years of OS expertise long before Android--whose founder comes from Apple but sure as hell wouldn't have cut it at NeXT.

 

NFC--not mature enough technology and not deployed at levels worth including. Yes, Apple has quite a few NFC patents and working examples of it. When the market matures on the infrastructure Apple will include it.

 

LTE--a moving standard. Bravo! Now that Apple has a huge stake of patents in it we saw it included.

 

The mobile projector -- it's value to consumers?

quad core processors -- Apple's worked with Quad core for years with ARM designs. Try again.

voice controls -- I'll take Siri over being first, but then again Apple was working with voice controls decades prior

8 megapixel cameras -- seriously?

4g LTE -- post iPhone 4S Telcos are heavily investing in it due to Apple's overall demand on their networks, not Android.

wireless syncing -- Not a technical issue, but low on the list of providing to the public, not to mention bandwidth is highly constrained

multitasking -- truly sad

pressure sensitive styluses -- long done before

curved glass -- long done before

deep black AMOLED displays -- who gives a crap. The bulk of AMOLED patents are with Dupont, not Samsung or other Android competitors and until they actually mature to a point where they are useful beyond a 5 in screen at current competitor tech pricing this will continue to be a waste of time.

NFC -- premature ejaculation

Face Unlock -- retarded

Burst mode photo shooting -- gimmick with crappy sensors

taking pictures while shooting video -- resource hog to show a gimmick that takes a still from one frame of video and saving it as a photo. More power drain

pop up video players while using another app -- premature ejaculation. Glad it gets you off

eye recognition anti-lock -- gimmick

post #22 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Because there's always the chance of losing just like Oracle did and you get nothing.

 

If Samsung was confident about taking it to court they would have done so long ago. They aren't and were hoping to settle. Apple holds the cards.

post #23 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Not to mention Apple has more applications of `curved glass,' than any corporation in history. Do we need to discuss multitasking? That's innovation because it was sluggishly added to underpowered embedded processors first by the Android group?

Everyone knows Apple doesn't have nearly 40 years of OS expertise long before Android--whose founder comes from Apple but sure as hell wouldn't have cut it at NeXT.

NFC--not mature enough technology and not deployed at levels worth including. Yes, Apple has quite a few NFC patents and working examples of it. When the market matures on the infrastructure Apple will include it.

LTE--a moving standard. Bravo! Now that Apple has a huge stake of patents in it we saw it included.

The mobile projector -- it's value to consumers?
quad core processors -- Apple's worked with Quad core for years with ARM designs. Try again.
voice controls -- I'll take Siri over being first, but then again Apple was working with voice controls decades prior
8 megapixel cameras -- seriously?
4g LTE -- post iPhone 4S Telcos are heavily investing in it due to Apple's overall demand on their networks, not Android.
wireless syncing -- Not a technical issue, but low on the list of providing to the public, not to mention bandwidth is highly constrained
multitasking -- truly sad
pressure sensitive styluses -- long done before
curved glass -- long done before
deep black AMOLED displays -- who gives a crap. The bulk of AMOLED patents are with Dupont, not Samsung or other Android competitors and until they actually mature to a point where they are useful beyond a 5 in screen at current competitor tech pricing this will continue to be a waste of time.
NFC -- premature ejaculation
Face Unlock -- retarded
Burst mode photo shooting -- gimmick with crappy sensors
taking pictures while shooting video -- resource hog to show a gimmick that takes a still from one frame of video and saving it as a photo. More power drain
pop up video players while using another app -- premature ejaculation. Glad it gets you off
eye recognition anti-lock -- gimmick

There was curved glass long before it was able to be made straight.
How could NFC not be mature enough? The Japanese have been using mobile phones as payment for years now, why are we so behind?
LTE is the natural progression of GSM. It getting built out has nothing to do with Apple.
Edited by dasanman69 - 5/23/12 at 4:23pm
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #24 of 40

That's fine. With the mindshare Apple has, "nothing" will still equate to record sales and billions in profit. Nor does it mean that Apple cannot still engage in litigation. 

 

Apple has very, very little to lose. It's obvious that they're doing this because the benefits far outweigh the costs. 

 

The world is gripped in Apple-mania. And for the foreseeable future, provided a thermonuclear device is not dropped on Cupertino, and provided the Apple team don't suddenly go bonkers, this is how it'll be.

post #25 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

If Samsung was confident about taking it to court they would have done so long ago. They aren't and were hoping to settle. Apple holds the cards.

I never mentioned either company, I made a general statement. The same could be said of both Apple and Samsung.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #26 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
How could NFC not be mature enough? The Japanese have been using mobile phones as payment for years now, why are we so behind?

 

"Our country is bigger. Can't be expected to have the same level of tech as the rest of the world."

 

… Nope, doesn't work here, either. lol.gif

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #27 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

"Our country is bigger. Can't be expected to have the same level of tech as the rest of the world."

… Nope, doesn't work here, either. lol.gif

That's an argument that I'll accept not that its not mature enough.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #28 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
That's an argument that I'll accept…

 

Really? Pretty weak argument, in my view.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #29 of 40

Samsung has already, in a roundabout way, admitted to theft. 

 

 

 

 

Quote:

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/business/2011/10/19/26/0501000000AEN20111019000200320F.HTML

 

Samsung: Galaxy Nexus designed to avoid Apple patents

“The Galaxy Nexus smartphone, the first handset built using a new version of the Android system called ‘ice cream sandwich,’ is designed to bypass potential legal attacks from Apple Inc., the mobile chief of Samsung Electronics Co. said,” Lee Youkyung reports for Yonhap.

“‘Now we will avoid everything we can and take patents very seriously,’ Shin told reporters Tuesday on the eve of the Galaxy Nexus launch. His comments were embargoed until Wednesday,” Youkyung reports.
Youkyung reports, “Apple secured temporary sales bans on Samsung’s Galaxy Tab tablet computer in Germany and Australia on the argument that it copied the iPad. The injunctions will likely force the Korean firm to miss out on the key holiday sales season in both countries.”

“Patents are very complicated and can be difficult to identify, Shin said, but Samsung tried to ensure that no known patent by Apple is included in the new Android smartphone,” Youkyung reports. “Despite such efforts, he could not say with certainty that the Galaxy Nexus, dubbed by media as Google and Samsung’s answer to the iPhone 4S, would be entirely safe from Apple’s legal offense. ‘We will see if (the Galaxy Nexus) will be 100 percent free,’ from Apple lawsuits, he added.”

-----------------------------------------------

 


This is gold. 

Shin admitted they have either a) been copying Apple shamelessly the whole time, or b) have no understanding at all about what Intellectual Property means and don't particularly care to find out, or c) both a and b.

So NOW Samsung will respect Apple's patented IP?? How many units have these crooks sold already? They get away with copying and *then* make a late admission of guilt, and tack on a "we hope we'll be in the clear" statement?

Wow.

You can't make this stuff up. You just can't.

post #30 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Samsung has already, in a roundabout way, admitted to theft. 

 

 

This is gold. 

 

No, THIS is gold.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

 

I show this on my Galaxy Note to potential Apple shoppers while I'm at Best Buy. It has an especially profound affect on teen/young adults. Love to see their illusion of Apple shattered before my eyes.

post #31 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by angler View Post
No, THIS is gold.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

 

I show this on my Galaxy Note to potential Apple shoppers while I'm at Best Buy. It has an especially profound affect on teen/young adults. Love to see their illusion of Apple shattered before my eyes.

 

No, they're just laughing at you for how complete your lack of understanding is.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #32 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by angler View Post

No, THIS is gold.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

I show this on my Galaxy Note to potential Apple shoppers while I'm at Best Buy. It has an especially profound affect on teen/young adults. Love to see their illusion of Apple shattered before my eyes.

Wholesale photocopying someone else's work doesn't count. Great artists also add something of their own that's great. Something that Samsung hasn't done yet. You don't get a work into the MOMA with a "me too" work.
Edited by JeffDM - 5/23/12 at 8:03pm
post #33 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


Great artists also add something of their own that's great. Something that Samsung hasn't done yet. You don't get a work into the MOMA with a "me too" work.

 

Samsung was the first to introduce LED TVs, then 3D TVs, now they will be first again with big screen OLEDs. "Me too" wannabe is Apple.

post #34 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyram Gestan View Post
I don't know about anybody else, but I  love it when the moderators here sling personal insults at the posters.

 

That's no insult; that's just my observation. It happens to be true that he has completely misunderstood the tone and meaning of that quote, and it's quite often you see anti-Apple folk use it incorrectly in exactly the same manner.

 

No one deserves personal insults*. And no, my italicization of only the first word doesn't give me or anyone else leave to do the second. 

 

*Maybe pirates, but never personal.

 

Safari crashed three times for me while editing this post. Just while editing, not at any other time. I hope that gets resolved in DP4…

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #35 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by angler View Post

Samsung was the first to introduce LED TVs, then 3D TVs, now they will be first again with big screen OLEDs. "Me too" wannabe is Apple.

Nice troll.

What has Samsung added to the mobile device design other than replicating Apple's product designs, accessory designs, packaging, dimensions and changing a couple specs?
post #36 of 40
Ah, forget it, I should have realized I shouldn't bite at a troll's bait.
post #37 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyram Gestan View Post

I don't know about anybody else, but I  love it when the moderators here sling personal insults at the posters.  This one deserves it because he doesn't like apple.

Why not? People that come here to troll with distorted facts and an axe to grind deserve a bit of abuse.
post #38 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyram Gestan View Post

 

If you deny that Samsung stole Apple's designs and tech, you are in deep  denial.


You did read my list and realise i was being sarcastic. All of those things Android actually had first.

post #39 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyram Gestan View Post

 

There is no way Apple should pay as much as everyone else.  They will be buying bigger volumes or licenses, and their creditworthyness is better than anybody else.,

 

Apple should by right pay LESS than anybody.


If Samsung charged Apple LESS for its FRAND patent licenses than it charged everybody else, then that would also constitute discriminatory pricing -- treating all its other licensees differently than it treats one particular licensee -- and they would stand a strong chance of being accused of equally illegal practices under FRAND principles.

 

Charging less for FRAND patents in exchange for non-cash consideration such as (voluntary) cross-licensing of other the other party's patents is fairly commonplace.  Charging less for FRAND patents without any such reciprocation would probably be frowned upon.


Edited by lfmorrison - 5/24/12 at 5:49am
post #40 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post
You did read my list and realise i was being sarcastic. All of those things Android actually had first.


That didn't answer his question.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Samsung fail to reach agreement in court-ordered talks