or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › European Union to officially charge Samsung in antitrust case
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

European Union to officially charge Samsung in antitrust case

post #1 of 34
Thread Starter 
Samsung will soon face formal charges in an antitrust case from the European Commission, which claims the South Korean company broke competition rules by filing patent lawsuits against Apple.

"We will adopt a statement of objections very soon. I don't know if before the end of this year or the beginning of next year because we are in the last step of our internal procedures," Joaquin Almunia, the European Union's antitrust chief, said to the Financial Times.

The news comes roughly 48 hours after Samsung dropped injunction applications against Apple in five European countries. Despite Samsung's withdrawals, the European Commission—the executive body of the EU in charge of the union's policies—is moving ahead with its decision, even though it was reportedly content with Samsung's recent actions.

Samsung


"We are very happy if these [requested] injunctions are withdrawn but we will continue to investigate the possible abuses that existed . . . in the past," Almunia said.

Samsung was first notified by the EC in January that it was under investigation to assess whether or not the company had used patent rights to "distort competition in European mobile device markets," and thereby breached EU antitrust laws.

The EU's charge is the latest development in the sprawling legal battles between Samsung and Apple. Most significantly, a California jury in August called for Samsung to pay Apple nearly $1.05 billion in damages over patent infringement.
post #2 of 34

Yay.


We will adopt a statement of objections very soon.

 

Wait, shouldn't they know why they're doing what they're doing before they do it?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #3 of 34
Whatever....
post #4 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Yay.
Quote:
We will adopt a statement of objections very soon.

Wait, shouldn't they know why they're doing what they're doing before they do it?

It sounds like they know, but they have to go through a procedure to make it official.
post #5 of 34
Move along, nothing to see here. Apple is not mentioned in a negative way so this story will be buried by the tech media in short order. Samsung could be called the teflon of tech. Nothing sticks to it. Chinese factory labor issues, problems with hardware and software, anti-trust violations, patent infringement, the list goes on. Nothing sticks. Apple, on the other hand, is like flypaper hanging on the porch. Every little hiccup is blown up into monstrous proportions, enhanced by jerk pundits, fodder for the iHaters. Everything negative sticks to Apple these days.
post #6 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

No this likely has to do with the EU investigating Samsung and Motorola's over their attempts to use FRAND patents to gain injunctions.
 
TBell did call this 2 days back.

 

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/155083/samsung-drops-injunction-applications-against-apple-in-5-european-countries

post #7 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Move along, nothing to see here. Apple is not mentioned in a negative way so this story will be buried by the tech media in short order. Samsung could be called the teflon of tech. Nothing sticks to it. Chinese factory labor issues, problems with hardware and software, anti-trust violations, patent infringement, the list goes on. Nothing sticks. Apple, on the other hand, is like flypaper hanging on the porch. Every little hiccup is blown up into monstrous proportions, enhanced by jerk pundits, fodder for the iHaters. Everything negative sticks to Apple these days.

 

That's because Google pays a small army of people to go onto any site that accepts comments and lie through their teeth to spin everything.

post #8 of 34

Serves Samsung right for calling out Mr Almunia a few weeks back, saying they weren't at all worried about the EU taking action anytime in the near future since they move so slow. I think Samsung got his attention.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #9 of 34
Good. Samsung HAS to stop STEALING STUFF. It's NOT just Apple. They've stolen technology from EVERYBODY, then just expect to tie it up in the courts for ten years. And the OWNER of Samsung should give back the stolen Ferrari he's attempting to keep. Horrible company - will NEVER buy anything from them ever again....
post #10 of 34
Yay for the European Union. They need to designate Samsung as an antitrust violator and monopolist.

This will then force Samsung to behave better.
post #11 of 34
Originally Posted by jameskatt2 View Post
Yay for the European Union. They need to designate Samsung as an antitrust violator and monopolist.
This will then force Samsung to behave better.

 

Just kick them off the continent.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #12 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Yay.

 

Wait, shouldn't they know why they're doing what they're doing before they do it?

 

 

I suspect they mean issue the formal written document listing the objections, which starts a process. 

post #13 of 34

 

 

Thanks for the props. 1smile.gif I am sure other people keeping up on these types of stories probably guessed the same thing. 

post #14 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

 

That's because Google pays a small army of people to go onto any site that accepts comments and lie through their teeth to spin everything.

 

 

I don't know if Google does that, but it would not surprise me. Microsoft used to do that to Apple when Windows first came out. Various governments are known to do this as well. 

post #15 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Move along, nothing to see here. Apple is not mentioned in a negative way so this story will be buried by the tech media in short order. Samsung could be called the teflon of tech. Nothing sticks to it. Chinese factory labor issues, problems with hardware and software, anti-trust violations, patent infringement, the list goes on. Nothing sticks. Apple, on the other hand, is like flypaper hanging on the porch. Every little hiccup is blown up into monstrous proportions, enhanced by jerk pundits, fodder for the iHaters. Everything negative sticks to Apple these days.

 

It's the new "politically correct". People love to attack and tear down the wealthy and successful, in this case, Apple.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #16 of 34
I love how the same EU that is derided for telling Apple off for the AppleCare spin is suddenly a hero.

Also, I don't quite understand how using courts can actually qualify as "distorting the rules of competition".... Competition is done on the marketplace, not in courts.

But maybe I'm just not following well enough, or my lawyer-allergy makes me incapable of getting the whole picture 1tongue.gif

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

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

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

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #17 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

 

It's the new "politically correct". People love to attack and tear down the wealthy and successful, in this case, Apple.


Also, like Henry Ford or the Bush family, sometimes the wealthy and successful are very friends with Adolf Hitler and Pinochet. Being rich and successful is no reason to be a target, it's no reason for immunity either.

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

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

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

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #18 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Serves Samsung right for calling out Mr Almunia a few weeks back, saying they weren't at all worried about the EU taking action anytime in the near future since they move so slow. I think Samsung got his attention.

 

That's pretty funny. Out of curiosity, do you know if use/misuse of SEPs has been tested there before in this manner? I'm curious as to the typical method of recourse if the two sides can't agree on terms.

post #19 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

 

It's the new "politically correct". People love to attack and tear down the wealthy and successful, in this case, Apple.

 

 

The media certainly likes to attack the successful, Apple in particular. However, considering the wealthy have more influence in creating legislation via their well funded lobbying efforts, it only seems fair to direct attacks towards them when things go wrong for the rest of us. 

post #20 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post

I love how the same EU that is derided for telling Apple off for the AppleCare spin is suddenly a hero.
Also, I don't quite understand how using courts can actually qualify as "distorting the rules of competition".... Competition is done on the marketplace, not in courts.
But maybe I'm just not following well enough, or my lawyer-allergy makes me incapable of getting the whole picture 1tongue.gif

 

 

The EU is very consumer friendly. I certainly didn't voice complaints over the investigation you cite. However, I did take issue with the publisher price fixing complaint also going on in the US. 

 

Under no traditional definition of anti-trust has Apple's iBooks Store engaged anti-competitively.

post #21 of 34

Time update FRAND...it should specify the trigger point and cost of the license then it would be considered fair.  If they won't, reject it as a standard.
 

post #22 of 34
This is a start, but they should go after this corrupt, manipulative organization and bring it to heal. If you think I'm going a bit overboard, then you should really read this.
http://www.kernelmag.com/features/report/3028/samsung-power-corruption-and-lies/
post #23 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

 

 

The media certainly likes to attack the successful, Apple in particular. However, considering the wealthy have more influence in creating legislation via their well funded lobbying efforts, it only seems fair to direct attacks towards them when things go wrong for the rest of us. 

 

I read somewhere that Apple spent a relatively puny $500K on lobbying last year. Google spent several times that amount (I think six). I'm guessing Google worries quite a bit more that Apple do about possible antitrust issues...

post #24 of 34
Apple pushes the envelope in environmental computer hardware, interface design, and innovates a smart phone that change the landscape. Creepy sweetshop madam and cloner of other's tech, is seen as David to Apple's Goliath while ripping off the designs of a company they were tasked as the manufacturer and revamping their own phones and pads with a third party company that DID NOTHING BUT go through each and every Apple screen to see "how much more like the iOS can we tweak this Android phone?" There's been a lot of money spent to make sure Apple gets all the bad press, and to create the illusion that they are suing over "rounded corners." I'm not an apologist for Apple -- but come on. They are just an innovative "American" tech company and they get more bad press than BP after the oil spill while Nokia is overcharging them by a factor of 10 for the same tech everyone uses for phones and Samsung and Google had a privileged relationship they exploited. The lawsuits thus far have been a slap on the wrist; Samsung "might" pay $1 Billion but they made $28 Billion on Apple's iPhone while other companies that tried to innovate lost their shirts. There are a billion ways to design a smart phone -- the best selling smart phone is just like the iPhone. 'Nuff said.
post #25 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonteponte View Post

 

I read somewhere that Apple spent a relatively puny $500K on lobbying last year. Google spent several times that amount (I think six). I'm guessing Google worries quite a bit more that Apple do about possible antitrust issues...

 

Unfortunately, even though Apple learned a lot about protecting their IP from being ripped off by Microsoft for a decade -- they are still babes in the woods about how the world really works. Owning judges and lobbyists works a lot better than owning patents.
post #26 of 34

it's doesn't matter. Sammy will be told to sit in a corner and think about what they've done. It'll be a 5 million euro fine.

post #27 of 34
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post
it's doesn't matter. Sammy will be told to sit in a corner and think about what they've done. It'll be a 5 million euro fine.

 

HA! 1.3, tops.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #28 of 34
ikrupp, It's not teflon. It's grease. That's how Samsung does it.
post #29 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonteponte View Post

 

I read somewhere that Apple spent a relatively puny $500K on lobbying last year. Google spent several times that amount (I think six). I'm guessing Google worries quite a bit more that Apple do about possible antitrust issues...

The amount spent by Google is mentioned here. A bit higher than you thought:

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/googles_spending_lobbyists_shot_2011

 

Apple only spent $500K on lobbying for all of last year? Your memory fails you. According to Apple they spent more than that in just the first quarter of last year, and nearly another $800K in the second. I didn't bother tracking down the numbers for the remaining two quarters but just the totals from the first two are nearly three times higher than you thought for the entire year.

http://gigaom.com/apple/another-use-for-the-cash-pile-apples-ballooning-lobbying-spend/

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #30 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

it's doesn't matter. Sammy will be told to sit in a corner and think about what they've done. It'll be a 5 million euro fine.

I dunno. Europe's fines are based on how much money they need more than anything else. It could be much bigger than the billion Samsung owes Apple.
post #31 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonteponte View Post

I read somewhere that Apple spent a relatively puny $500K on lobbying last year. Google spent several times that amount (I think six). I'm guessing Google worries quite a bit more that Apple do about possible antitrust issues...

A thousand times this.

This is the root of the problem. Apple really has to start playing the game.
post #32 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Move along, nothing to see here. Apple is not mentioned in a negative way so this story will be buried by the tech media in short order. Samsung could be called the teflon of tech. Nothing sticks to it. Chinese factory labor issues, problems with hardware and software, anti-trust violations, patent infringement, the list goes on. Nothing sticks. Apple, on the other hand, is like flypaper hanging on the porch. Every little hiccup is blown up into monstrous proportions, enhanced by jerk pundits, fodder for the iHaters. Everything negative sticks to Apple these days.

That's because Google pays a small army of people to go onto any site that accepts comments and lie through their teeth to spin everything.

That's funny: I was thinking to myself, while reading lkrupp's quoted post, that there must be money being made in the Apple-bashing industry, given the latter's vitriol and apparently wide adoption.

Snap! Spooky!
post #33 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexN View Post


That's funny: I was thinking to myself, while reading lkrupp's quoted post, that there must be money being made in the Apple-bashing industry, given the latter's vitriol and apparently wide adoption.
Snap! Spooky!

 

As I see it they are at least indirectly paying their "customers" since they are extremely successful in making the impression that they are giving it all away (software, services, hardware) just out of the godness of their heart ("do not evil"). When they are actually selling their users and all the data they can possibly collect about them to the highest bidder. It's actually quite brilliant since their "customers" are also violently defending Googles right to do so. "They only need that data to improve their services, it's win, win!". Interestingly, Google has recently started to charge for some of their Services that used to be "free". I'm guessing shareholders are starting to wonder where their payoff of having 75% of the mobile market is?

post #34 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post


I don't know if Google does that, but it would not surprise me. Microsoft used to do that to Apple when Windows first came out. Various governments are known to do this as well. 

I suspect they already are. Not that I should mention other sites but has anyone read the comments on mac rumours recently. There are definately some anti apple people there! Really the clue is in the site name so there is only one reason they would post negative comments. I'm now a fully fledged Apple insider!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › European Union to officially charge Samsung in antitrust case