or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › South Korean court finds both Apple and Samsung guilty of patent infringement
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

South Korean court finds both Apple and Samsung guilty of patent infringement - Page 2

post #41 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post


And who's payroll are you on...?


I'm wondering if anyone's on the payroll of anyone right here. Does anyone but us Appleinsider commenters read them forums?

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply
post #42 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Take it up with googleguy. He thinks Foss is a great reference.
 

Really?

Show me some link.

He is a heavy anti-Google/anti-Android/anti-Samsung guy.

I can not trust your comment.

 

http://9to5google.com/2011/10/14/patent-analyst-accused-of-anti-google-stance-funded-by-microsoft/#idc-cover

 

http://thedroidguy.com/2012/05/florian-mueller-is-a-fraud/

post #43 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post


Do I smell xenophobia here? Of course, I'm certain the US court will not find Apple, the American company, to be in its right... No way that could happen. I mean, of course the refueling planes the US Army will use for the next 80 years are the more appropriate, better built Airbus, and not the Boeing ones that did not meet the requirements. Oh... oh, wait.


I think it's pretty much a balanced judgment that Korean Court issued, given the complexity of the matter, not to mention the political ramifications.

Foss says:

"It would mean that foreign companies would either have to bow to Samsung's and LG's demands and, among other things, give up their own non-standard-essential intellectual property or stop selling in Korea."

http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/08/apple-samsung-ruling-suggests-south.html?m=1

Sounds very fair and balanced...
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #44 of 77

THE high-profile Android case has led to pressure from the judge to disclose paid bloggers. Google named nobody, whereas Oracle named two .

Now it turns out that “Apple has retained Florian Mueller as a consultant,” which is a known way of passing a bribe (it’s the business model, as Microsoft privately calls it). “So GROKLAW keeps catching FM showing bias while publicly holding himself up to be an expert on FLOSS patent violations and the like, and a blogger/journalist,” writes Pogson, who adds: “The guy really is in “Technology Evangelism Mode”. He even sent me an e-mail about Oracle v Google, unsolicited. I reported it to PJ at GROKLAW as did others so she has been on FM’s case for a while.”

“They use the same tactics of misinforming journalists en masse. That’s their service.”Groklaw continues investigating this case and remarks from bloggers are telling: “So, the guy is clearly not an expert on FLOSS patents and is an advocate for those who pay him, not just a “consultant”.

http://techrights.org/2012/08/23/spamming-the-web/

post #45 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by 845032 View Post

Really?
Show me some link.
He is a heavy anti-Google/anti-Android/anti-Samsung guy.
I can not trust your comment.

http://9to5google.com/2011/10/14/patent-analyst-accused-of-anti-google-stance-funded-by-microsoft/#idc-cover

http://thedroidguy.com/2012/05/florian-mueller-is-a-fraud/

You are obviously new around here. All the pro-Android camp loved Mueller until he started to say things they didn't like.
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #46 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen View Post


Foss says:
"It would mean that foreign companies would either have to bow to Samsung's and LG's demands and, among other things, give up their own non-standard-essential intellectual property or stop selling in Korea."
http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/08/apple-samsung-ruling-suggests-south.html?m=1
Sounds very fair and balanced...

 

 

NOT VIOLATING FRAND

As to whether Samsung violated the Fair, Reasonable and Non- Discriminatory (FRAND) terms, the Seoul court ruled that it was hard to find the South Korean company did not follow the terms, saying that Apple failed to ask for a licensing agreement or consult on the use of standard-essential patents with Samsung before using the related patents.

The court noted that Apple seemed to have the intent to avoid the claims of Samsung to stop infringing on its standard patents rather than make a sincere negotiation, saying that Apple seemed to overly undervalue the standard patents for telecommunications technology.

The FRAND is a legal term used to describe patent licensing terms. According to the FRAND, companies can manufacture products by using the standard-essential patents, and then negotiate with the patent holders about how much to pay for the usage of the patents.

 

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/business/2012-08/24/c_131805787.htm

post #47 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoadm View Post

Rubber banding is a good patent to have hold of. Using any android phone without it seems cheaper and nastier than the rest of them


The good thing is if Samsung and all other Android phones are required to remove it, a simple app from the market will restore it.

post #48 of 77
You expect the court to say anything that wouldn't agree with their own ruling?
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #49 of 77

A South Korean court? Ok.

 

So what?

post #50 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen View Post


You are obviously new around here. All the pro-Android camp loved Mueller until he started to say things they didn't like.

When was he ever pro-Android?? It's been years since he blogged anything that disfavored Microsoft, which almost by definition means all things Google are bad. Ask yourself why, when Nokia demanded an import and sales injunction on Apple products over FRAND-pledged IP, it didn't get any complaints from him. They used the threat to force Apple into a cross-license agreement on top of ongoing royalty payments and Apple blinked. After all that he still considered Nokia "one of the good guys" (his words). Yet Samsung or Motorola doing the same gets an impassioned article on how unfair, unreasonable and plainly ridiculous it is. 

 

His agenda is pretty clear unless someone here can explain why Nokia going after Apple injunctions on SEP's is different from Samsung going after Apple injunctions on SEP's. Neither was right IMO, but Mr. Mueller only has a problem with an Android-licensee doing so.


Edited by Gatorguy - 8/24/12 at 6:17am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #51 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

When was he ever pro-Android?? It's been years since he blogged anything that disfavored Microsoft, which almost by definition means all things Google are bad.

And, yet, you were praising him as an unbiased, qualified expert when he was saying things that you liked. In particular, he argued that all software patents should be disallowed which would put Google in a position of being able to copy Apple's iOS with impunity. You were fully supporting everything he said at that time.

Now that he's saying that Samsung has grossly overstepped its bounds, he's suddenly a paid hack. /s
"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 #52 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


And, yet, you were praising him as an unbiased, qualified expert when he was saying things that you liked. In particular, he argued that all software patents should be disallowed which would put Google in a position of being able to copy Apple's iOS with impunity. You were fully supporting everything he said at that time.
Now that he's saying that Samsung has grossly overstepped its bounds, he's suddenly a paid hack. /s

Oh, geesh. Another accusation without proof or links or examples. Who woulda thunk you'd continue your tradition of making claims without merit (some might call it lying, as you accused another member of this morning). Try coming back with even a teensy bit of evidence that I've ever claimed Mueller to be unbiased (tho he is an expert IMO).

 

So apparently you don't have an explanation for why Nokia and Samsung should be treated differently by Mueller, but figured you had to say something anyway that had nothing to do with proving or disproving what I said.

 

I think this is the part where you jump back in with an insult since you already know your statement wasn't true when you wrote it, but you gotta save face somehow, right? I don't think the late Dr. Rhodin would be impressed.


Edited by Gatorguy - 8/24/12 at 6:48am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #53 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


And, yet, you were praising him as an unbiased, qualified expert when he was saying things that you liked. In particular, he argued that all software patents should be disallowed which would put Google in a position of being able to copy Apple's iOS with impunity. You were fully supporting everything he said at that time.
Now that he's saying that Samsung has grossly overstepped its bounds, he's suddenly a paid hack. /s

 

Yup. I remember it well. Surely he can remember what he himself has posted in the past...

"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #54 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Take it up with googleguy. He thinks Foss is a great reference.
BTW, even if he is paid by Oracle, how does that refute what he said? Please point out the errors in his blog.

It sounded like he was responding to your posted reference to Foss. What does googleguy have anything to do with it?

 

The problem with Mueller's articles is that they usually start with a small factual tidbit that is then followed up with massive amounts of biased conjecture. That 'conjecture' is what usually gets plastered all around here and taken as some sort of 'authoritative' analysis. The fact remains that Florian Mueller is nothing more than a demonstrated paid shill, and should be treated as such.

 

Then again, you do like to cite random user comments from the Internet to back your positions, so expecting you to vet other citations may have been expecting too much...

post #55 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen View Post

 

Yup. I remember it well. Surely he can remember what he himself has posted in the past...

I once believed in Santa too. Then one day. . . ;)

 

Well-reasoned does not equal unbiased. Florian always posts long well-supported articles with lots of facts and links, and on the surface often seem quite reasonable. He's absolutely one of my go-to sources for patent news and I often agree with points he makes. Yet he still manages to leave out specific facts that might put Microsoft in a bad light, and I've not ever seen an article boosting Google. Is it by pure chance that he never misses those that might seem bad for Android licensees or Google? 


Edited by Gatorguy - 8/24/12 at 7:30am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #56 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Oh, geesh. Another accusation without proof or links or examples. Who woulda thunk you'd continue your tradition of making claims without merit (some might call it lying, as you accused another member of this morning). Try coming back with even a teensy bit of evidence that I've ever claimed Mueller to be unbiased (tho he is an expert IMO).

 

So apparently you don't have an explanation for why Nokia and Samsung should be treated differently by Mueller, but figured you had to say something anyway that had nothing to do with proving or disproving what I said.

 

I think this is the part where you jump back in with an insult since you already know your statement wasn't true when you wrote it, but you gotta save face somehow, right? I don't think the late Dr. Rhodin would be impressed.

 

Well, GG, I remember you frequently linking to Mueller's posts when they supported your points, and then turning around and bashing him when they didn't. (And, no, I'm not going to spend hours digging through the archives trying to find them, we all remember that it happened.) So, the criticism is entirely to the point.

 

How about a little honesty from you before you start impugning that of others with your disingenuous deflections. No? I didn't think so.

post #57 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I once believed in Santa too. Then one day. . . ;)

 

Well-reasoned does not equal unbiased. Florian always posts long well-supported articles with lots of facts and links, and on the surface often seem quite reasonable. He's absolutely one of my go-to sources for patent news. Yet he still manages to leave out specific facts that might put Microsoft in a bad light, and I've not ever seen an article boosting Google. Is it by pure chance that he never misses those that might seem bad for Android licensees or Google? 

 

Sounds a lot like a poster here, oh, who is it... oh, right, you. Except that your "links" never seem to actually support your arguments, whereas his do.

post #58 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_veritas View Post

... What does googleguy have anything to do with it? ...

 

I like how everyone now refers to Gatorguy as googleguy.

post #59 of 77

This court ruling is simply an instance of the corrupt South Korean legal system allowing Samsung to save face. It would have been a too egregious example of that country's deeply embedded corruption to simply ignore Samsung's blatant copying, so they chose this disingenuous tu quoque verdict as the best way to do nothing to harm Samsung but maintain some level of credibility themselves.

 

While it maintains a facade of honour, their is no honour in this pretense of justice.

post #60 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Take it up with googleguy. He thinks Foss is a great reference.
BTW, even if he is paid by Oracle, how does that refute what he said? Please point out the errors in his blog.

I'm starting to warm up to GoogleGuy. Gives an air of knowledgeable authority, as tho those that use it aren't familiar with both sides of the issues and relying on me to fill them in.  ;)


Anyway, the errors aren't in what he said. He's correct in the facts he states way more often than he's wrong. The bias shows in what he left out.

 

Nokia wanted the same thing, an injunction, and over the same type of FRAND-pledged standards-essential patents, and claimed Apple wouldn't take a license from them either. Apple also made their same claims as they make against Samsung, that Nokia was being unreasonable in it's royalty demands. If you relied only on FOSSPatents for a viewpoint on this ruling you'd think Apple hadn't already dealt with a nearly identical situation already and established a precedent of cross-licensing and royalty payments when pushed hard enough. 


Edited by Gatorguy - 8/24/12 at 7:47am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #61 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I'm starting to warm up to GoogleGuy. Gives an air of knowledgeable authority, as tho those that use it aren't familiar with both sides of the issues and relying on me to fill them in.  1wink.gif

Except that for people who know what is going on, Google represents massive IP theft, misrepresentation, and flat out lies.

Not surprising that you find that it describes you well.
"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 #62 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

This article misses the big picture of what is going on. Read Foss Patents latest post for a better understanding
The situation is not good and could result in Apple withdrawing from the Korean market

Rounding error.

post #63 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zozman View Post

just uploaded on youtube, Jimmy Kimmel samsung add http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITm1QooF3tc&feature=g-all-u

This is embarrassingly bad.

 

This thoroughly unfunny guy got his show moved to the 11.35 PM (prime slot for late night TV in the US) on ABC (owned by Disney)?!

post #64 of 77

Samsung is more than a corporation in Korea; it's a chaebol and has enormous political clout in that country. You can bet that this is an attempt to sway an American jury from awarding Apple a big settlement. The Korean judges' finding that Samsung phones bear little resemblance to the iPhone originals is laughable.

post #65 of 77
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post
And who's payroll are you on...?

 

Samsung's. lol.gif


Originally Posted by lightknight View Post
I'm wondering if anyone's on the payroll of anyone right here. Does anyone but us Appleinsider commenters read them forums?

 

It's difficult to even group about half of the trolls in under the word "commenters", particularly when "us" accompanies that.

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 #66 of 77

So the judgement stopped South Korean sales of Samsung's Galaxy S, Galaxy S II, Galaxy Nexus, Galaxy Tab and Galaxy Tab 10.1, and this is clear proof of Samsung bribing judges? Okaaay.

 

The loser here are the customers. This insane patent war has to be put to an end.

post #67 of 77
Originally Posted by JohnnyW2001 View Post
The loser here are the customers. This insane patent war has to be put to an end.

 

Nope.

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 #68 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

This court ruling is simply an instance of the corrupt South Korean legal system allowing Samsung to save face. It would have been a too egregious example of that country's deeply embedded corruption to simply ignore Samsung's blatant copying, so they chose this disingenuous tu quoque verdict as the best way to do nothing to harm Samsung but maintain some level of credibility themselves.

 

While it maintains a facade of honour, their is no honour in this pretense of justice.

 

South Korean ruling? Does it even matter? It's not even worth mentioning were it not that Samsung is a Korean company.

 

This has no effect on any other court's rulings. And certain markets (or rather, countries with big markets for Apple gear) need to be careful about even considering a ban on Apple products. Not only would it create *a lot* of consumer discord, but also a massive black market for them.

post #69 of 77
This is rubish. Clearly Samsung was infringing on the Apple designs by trying to Mimick them with their smartphones, none the less, it isn't as important that Apple can't sell the iPhone 4 and iPad 2 in South Korea, buyers will just get it from the internet by directing their browsers to another Apple website, or visiting a country. As for Samsungs loss, they deserve it. Why would they copy almost every company from Palm, Blackberry, and to Apple!? They aren't innovators, they just invent stuff that's given to them by other people and sell it. Like Android, that's not theirs, it's Googles, and they are the reason to blame for this mess.
post #70 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyW2001 View Post

So the judgement stopped South Korean sales of Samsung's Galaxy S, Galaxy S II, Galaxy Nexus, Galaxy Tab and Galaxy Tab 10.1, and this is clear proof of Samsung bribing judges? Okaaay.

 

The loser here are the customers. This insane patent war has to be put to an end.

 

Customers don't lose. There are hundreds of other lousy Android devices they can choose from. 

 

Samsung products are banned? No problem. Some other OEM will step in and fill the void. There is no shortage of these very enterprising OEMs ready and willing to flood markets with their gear. 

post #71 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Samsung's. lol.gif

 

 

Gotta love when the moderators decide to jump in on the "I know you are, but what am I" banter....

post #72 of 77
Originally Posted by e_veritas View Post
Gotta love when the moderators decide to jump in on the "I know you are, but what am I" banter....

 

Banter? It's true.

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 #73 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by 845032 View Post

THE high-profile Android case has led to pressure from the judge to disclose paid bloggers. Google named nobody, whereas Oracle named two .


Now it turns out that “Apple has retained Florian Mueller as a consultant,” which is a known way of passing a bribe (it’s the business model, as Microsoft privately calls it). “So GROKLAW keeps catching FM showing bias while publicly holding himself up to be an expert on FLOSS patent violations and the like, and a blogger/journalist,” writes Pogson, who adds: “The guy really is in “Technology Evangelism Mode”. He even sent me an e-mail about Oracle v Google, unsolicited. I reported it to PJ at GROKLAW as did others so she has been on FM’s case for a while.”


“They use the same tactics of misinforming journalists en masse. That’s their service.”Groklaw continues investigating this case and remarks from bloggers are telling: “So, the guy is clearly not an expert on FLOSS patents and is an advocate for those who pay him, not just a “consultant”.

http://techrights.org/2012/08/23/spamming-the-web/

Your link offers no proof of Florian linked to Apple. Your link connects to another website, which also doesn't have any proof. The second website links to Groklaw which doesn't even mention Florian being paid by Apple.

I'm not sure if he is or isn't paid by Apple, but repeating something from blogs doesn't make something true. At least look for some facts, and then link to those.
post #74 of 77

On a different note, it appears that the ITC has issued their ruling regarding Motorola's complaints.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-24/apple-gets-mixed-ruling-in-motorola-mobility-patent-case-at-itc.html
 

post #75 of 77
I don't think FossPatents has Apple as a client.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #76 of 77

On an even bigger different note, the Apple v Samsung jury has allegedly reached a verdict!!!!

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-24/apple-samsung-jury-reaches-verdict-in-patent-trial.html
 

post #77 of 77

Copying is part of the Korean culture if you understand Korea's history. It's in their blood not to innovate but copy their way through everything, no wonder they're so good at cloning.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › South Korean court finds both Apple and Samsung guilty of patent infringement