or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple: Samsung shirked FRAND obligations, filed suit before making a licensing offer
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple: Samsung shirked FRAND obligations, filed suit before making a licensing offer

post #1 of 43
Thread Starter 
Samsung abused its rights as a standard-essential patent holder, Apple said Wednesday, by filing a complaint with the International Trade Commission before even trying to come to an agreement with the Cupertino company over licensing terms.

ITC Logo


Apple noted the abuse in an ITC statement on Wednesday, which was subsequently discovered by FOSS Patents on Thursday. In it, Apple summarizes why a recent FRAND decision ? from the case RealTek v. LSI/Agere ? runs parallel to the complaint Samsung lodged with the ITC.

"The Realtek case is strikingly similar to the instant case. Samsung brought an ITC complaint before making any offer specific to its declared-essential patents, let alone a FRAND-compliant offer. Just as in Realtek, when Apple responded to the ITC complaint by requesting that Samsung provide FRAND terms for the specific asserted patents, Samsung responded by making a non-FRAND demand based on the total price of the accused Apple products--rather than the cost of the relevant accused components. Indeed, Samsung's conduct here is even more egregious--[redacted] In short, just as in Realtek, Samsung's pursuit of an ITC exclusion order directly conflicts with its FRAND commitments."



The RealTek case involved a dispute over the IEEE 802.11 WLAN standard, with Agere, the patent holder, suing RealTek for alleged infringement. The court issued a summary judgment finding in RealTek's favor, ruling that Agere had breached its obligation to license essential technologies in a fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) manner. The court found further breach in that Agere had sought an injunction before even offering licensing terms.

Apple, in pointing to the RealTek case, is hoping for the same sort of decision to be handed down in its own proceedings. In the RealTek case, the court barred the patent holder from asserting its patent in court without first extending a FRAND offer.

The ITC is scheduled to render a final decision on the FRAND patent case brought by Samsung against Apple in the coming weeks.

post #2 of 43
Samsung is in violation of so many things, filing a suit before it was necessary was probably a knee-jerk reaction from being in court so much.

Bunch of thieves. I hope Samsung gets nailed to the wall. Shame that our court system is so incredibly slow and ineffective in dealing with such violations in a timely manner.

So when will they schedule a hearing? September of 2016?
post #3 of 43
Remember, though: Apple ALWAYS sues everyone. Nobody ever sues Apple.

Apple is always wrong--work backwards from there to justify anything 1smile.gif
post #4 of 43
Things just keep getting worse for Samsung. Not only were their demands outrageous (as Motorola was recently found to be), but they never even made an offer in the first place.

Where are all the people who posted that Apple was an "unwilling licensee"? How can you be unwilling without there even being an offer in the first place? Samsung's true colors are being revealed more and more as these cases progress. A truly corrupt company.

Imagine they'll all avoid this discussion just like they're avoiding the Google 3D Maps discussion.
post #5 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

Samsung is in violation of so many things, filing a suit before it was necessary was probably a knee-jerk reaction from being in court so much.

Bunch of thieves. I hope Samsung gets nailed to the wall. Shame that our court system is so incredibly slow and ineffective in dealing with such violations in a timely manner.

So when will they schedule a hearing? September of 2016?

What do you think ties the court systems up? I don't think it's an issue of multitudes of empty courtrooms and judges with downtime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Things just keep getting worse for Samsung. Not only were their demands outrageous (as Motorola was recently found to be), but they never even made an offer in the first place.

Where are all the people who posted that Apple was an "unwilling licensee"? How can you be unwilling without there even being an offer in the first place? Samsung's true colors are being revealed more and more as these cases progress. A truly corrupt company.

Imagine they'll all avoid this discussion just like they're avoiding the Google 3D Maps discussion.

That surprises me. I would have at least expected their lawyers to catch it prior to filing.

post #6 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Things just keep getting worse for Samsung. Not only were their demands outrageous (as Motorola was recently found to be), but they never even made an offer in the first place.

Where are all the people who posted that Apple was an "unwilling licensee"? How can you be unwilling without there even being an offer in the first place? Samsung's true colors are being revealed more and more as these cases progress. A truly corrupt company.

Imagine they'll all avoid this discussion just like they're avoiding the Google 3D Maps discussion.


Samsung's true colors were always out there for the world to see since the moment they came out with their iClone.  Fantards, iHaters, and spinmeisters were the ones that kept trying to deflect attention to what was important to them - just hating Apple for the sake of it.

post #7 of 43

Samsung innovation! They just move too fast for the rest of the world, ya know?

post #8 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Longtime Apple fan here.
Nevertheless, Apple's recent strategy of "competing by lawsuits" leaves an increasingly sour taste in my mouth.
Especially, when viewed in light of their unwillingness to pay their fair share on taxes.
I sure wish the Apple of old back.

What a twisted view of things.
I wish the actual Apple good luck and all the best.
post #9 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Longtime Apple fan here.

Nevertheless, Apple's recent strategy of "competing by lawsuits" leaves an increasingly sour taste in my mouth.

Especially, when viewed in light of their unwillingness to pay their fair share on taxes.

I sure wish the Apple of old back.

It's not 8:20 yet, you are early and will NOT get a check in the mail.

post #10 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Longtime Apple fan here.
Nevertheless, Apple's recent strategy of "defending their property by lawsuits" leaves an increasingly sour taste in my mouth.
Especially, when viewed in light of them legally paying their fair share of taxes.
I sure wish the Apple of old back.

Fixed that for you.

No fee required.
"That’s brilliant. I can see this annoying some people, but what doesn’t these days?" - PMZ
Reply
"That’s brilliant. I can see this annoying some people, but what doesn’t these days?" - PMZ
Reply
post #11 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

W

T

F

 

Mate, you actually believe this crap you posted?

 

So how much tax does Samsung pay in the US?

 

They make a lot on the back of American innovation, which they don't want to pay for.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #12 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

Mate, you actually believe this crap you posted?

 

So how much tax does Samsung pay in the US?

 

They make a lot on the back of American innovation, which they don't want to pay for.

Well as it was shown in the hearing the other day on capital hill, Samsung as whole makes more revenue than Apple paid less total taxes worldwide than Apple did and Apple can not being the money home for the simple reason they would pay far more taxes than all their competitors.

post #13 of 43

If anyone is curious, What happening in the Tech industry with everyone suing everyone over IP is not a new business strategy. If you go research the automotive industry at the turn of the 20th century, Ford was suing everyone and everyone was suing Ford over patents. Ford was using this tactic to eliminate competition. At that time there were no standards and companies were not required to license their IP under FRAND. 

 

People act like this is something new going on with companies fighting over Patents and their rights, This strategy has been used over and over in many industries. Apple is just showing companies they will not be messed with.

post #14 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac95 View Post


What a twisted view of things.
I wish the actual Apple good luck and all the best.

Me too wish Apple good luck and all the best, this is why I think their current focus on aggressive (and oftentimes unfair) litigation is a mistake which will not benefit them in the long run.

 

Presumably you do realize that this article is about Samsung aggressively pursuing Apple, not the other way around. 

post #15 of 43
Originally Posted by AppleWins
Nevertheless, Apple's recent strategy of "competing by lawsuits" leaves an increasingly sour taste in my mouth.

Especially, when viewed in light of their unwillingness to pay their fair share on taxes.

 

Shut up and go away.


Originally Posted by AppleWins 
…I think their current focus on aggressive (and oftentimes unfair) litigation is a mistake which will not benefit them in the long run.


You think protection of intellectual property is bad. Got it.


Originally Posted by AppleWins 
Other companies not paying their fair share does not make it better for Apple to do so too.

 

Correct. Except for the part where Apple is paying their share, you liar.


In any case, Samsung is a Korean company, they have no moral obligation to pay US taxes.

 

… Their operations in the US do, silly-billy. 1rolleyes.gif


How much taxes does Apple pay in Korea?

 

An amount befitting their operations in South Korea. Obviously. How is that a question?

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #16 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

Presumably you do realize that this article is about Samsung aggressively pursuing Apple, not the other way around. 

 

Of course. I just wish Apple never started with this lawsuit fever.

 

In the interest of consumers and technology progress all software patents should be abolished, for they only benefit a few good-for-nothing CEOs (who stash all their money overseas anyway) and lawyers. 

 

So you think that Apple started it? And that they should not be able to protect their IP, and in fact that IP should not be protectable if it is software, even if it were expensive to develop and is central to the value of the company's products?

 

It's not in the interests of consumers or of technology if the removal of IP protection destroys the incentive to invest heavily in R&D.

post #17 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

"So how much tax does Samsung pay in the US?" What an immature thing to write. Other companies not paying their fair share does not make it better for Apple to do so too. Are we still in Kindergarten?

 

In any case, Samsung is a Korean company, they have no moral obligation to pay US taxes.

 

How much taxes does Apple pay in Korea?

 

Seeing as how Samsung feels they can freely steal Apple's innovations, for which they have been found guilty, how much tax do they pay in the US or do they disappear offshore with their bounty?

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #18 of 43
Originally Posted by AppleWins 
Therefore, I suspect that this IP protection is not needed and only benefits CEOs and lawyers.

 

So you'd be the first in line demanding Google to release their search algorithms, then, hmm?

 

Or, rather, when someone infiltrates the company and steals it, Google shouldn't be able to protect itself and its property?

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #19 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

"So how much tax does Samsung pay in the US?" 
What an immature thing to write. Other companies not paying their fair share does not make it better for Apple to do so too. Are we still in Kindergarten?


In any case, Samsung is a Korean company, they have no moral obligation to pay US taxes.

How much taxes does Apple pay in Korea?

Apple paid $6 billion in US taxes. As you say, Apple does not have the moral obligation outside the US.
post #20 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

So you think that Apple started it? And that they should not be able to protect their IP, and in fact that IP should not be protectable if it is software, even if it were expensive to develop and is central to the value of the company's products?

 

It's not in the interests of consumers or of technology if the removal of IP protection destroys the incentive to invest heavily in R&D.

 

I don't care who started it.

 

Many open source projects are equal or better than their commercial counterparts (for example VLC media player, which is better than all commercial players). Therefore, I suspect that this IP protection is not needed and only benefits CEOs and lawyers.

 

Except that you said exactly that you wish Apple had not started it, so you are contradicting yourself now. And if you prefer open source solutions, why, exactly, are you a "long-time Apple fan"?

post #21 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

Except that you said exactly that you wish Apple had not started it, so you are contradicting yourself now. And if you prefer open source solutions, why, exactly, are you a "long-time Apple fan"?

 

Our beloved Apple might have not have started it, but they increasingly rely on it as business strategy.

Nowadays, many people when they think "Apple" they think "lawsuit", sadly.

 

It is certainly one of their business strategies to tackle IP theft.

 

Quote:
I don't understand your second sentence, why wouldn't I be able to run open source on my mac?

 

I see - so you don't run OS X. Fair enough, but I would say there is no chance that Apple would even be in business today if they had not had the advantage of their operating system and associated software infrastructure. And why would you even buy Apple hardware if you are just booting it into Linux or whatever? There are much cheaper options.

post #22 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post


Yes, all software patents should be abolished for the greater good, including Google's.

I couldn't agree more. Software Patents are unenforcable and just pure poppy-cock. (This coming from a software developer.) But, that isn't the cae now, so no use crying over spilt milk. Apple is defending is its proprietary Hardware and the Software it created. Samesung has certain things it put out there as FRAND, and has violated the terms of FRAND; not to mention the numerous occasions it has jst all-out stole from other corporations.

To put this in easy terms: Show me one thing Apple stole from Samsung. Now try to find 10 things Samsung didn't steal from someone else.

Also, not to just bash you around or anything, but I had to say something about this as well. You have every right to be able to voice your opinion. Don't let anyone (even Tallest Skil 1biggrin.gif ) take that away from you. That said, you don't have the right to commit Libel (libel, n. defamation: a false and malicious published statement that damages somebody's reputation.) about Apple's practices. Yes, they paid only (really, only!?) 6 billion dollars. Yes, I think they should have paid more. That said, they followed the laws as they are written, and paid only what they had to as according to the tax code. You shouldn't be pissed at Apple (and every other large corporation) because they followed the rules; you should be pissed at the Representatives and Senators who put those loopholes in there in the first place.

-- Mike Eggleston
-- Mac Fanatic since 1984.
-- Proud Member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
-- Wii #: 8913 3004 4519 2027

Reply

-- Mike Eggleston
-- Mac Fanatic since 1984.
-- Proud Member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
-- Wii #: 8913 3004 4519 2027

Reply
post #23 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

 

I don't care who started it.

 

Many open source projects are equal or better than their commercial counterparts (for example VLC media player, which is better than all commercial players). Therefore, I suspect that this IP protection is not needed and only benefits CEOs and lawyers.

 

So why did that French software hippy demand VLC iOS version be removed from the App store?

 

Oh, yeah IP protection.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #24 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Longtime Apple fan here.

Nevertheless, Apple's recent strategy of "competing by lawsuits" leaves an increasingly sour taste in my mouth.

Especially, when viewed in light of their unwillingness to pay their fair share on taxes.

I sure wish the Apple of old back.

 

You must be joking. When you say "pay their fair share on taxes", how much is that? They have paid what is required by law. IRS agents are permanently stationed at Apple and as Tim Cook told Congress, Apple is under a perpetual on-site IRS audit and everything they do gets IRS approval. So you are saying their "fair share" is more than the law requires? When was the last time you "paid your fair share" by paying the IRS more than the law required? Did you send them a tip, a bonus, or a "here you go just for the heck of it" check?

 

Get real and stop living in an alternate reality. You're also saying that a corporation has no right to defend its intellectual property? If not sue, how are they supposed to do it? In your world, Apple invents stuff that others steal, shouldn't hold anyone accountable, and should pay the IRS more than it is legally required. I can imagine that any business you run would be OUT of business within 6 months.

post #25 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

 

Our beloved Apple might have not have started it, but they increasingly rely on it as business strategy.

Nowadays, many people when they think "Apple" they think "lawsuit", sadly.

 

I don't understand your second sentence, why wouldn't I be able to run open source on my mac?

 

This is not a business strategy for Apple. A business strategy leads to a bigger business and higher profit. Suing companies is not profitable. Apple does it because it is the RIGHT thing to do when something you invented and were granted a patent for is stolen. You should be standing first in line to support a domestic, American success story protect its intellectual property from theft by a Korean company. I guess you have no allegiance.

post #26 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Our beloved Apple might have not have started it, but they increasingly rely on it as business strategy.
Nowadays, many people when they think "Apple" they think "lawsuit", sadly.

I don't understand your second sentence, why wouldn't I be able to run open source on my mac?

Business strategy? Please look up how much profit they made last qtr/year ( revenue was $156 billion in FY12). Even if Apple won all its lawsuits, it wouldn't amount to much compare with its main business strategy.
post #27 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Longtime Apple fan here.

Nevertheless, Apple's recent strategy of "competing by lawsuits" leaves an increasingly sour taste in my mouth.

Especially, when viewed in light of their unwillingness to pay their fair share on taxes.

I sure wish the Apple of old back.

Oh, you mean the really old Apple of 1980 that was assembling computers in Ireland because of the tax breaks even then?

post #28 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Of course. I just wish Apple never started with this lawsuit fever.

In the interest of consumers and technology progress all software patents should be abolished, for they only benefit a few good-for-nothing CEOs (who stash all their money overseas anyway) and lawyers. 

No patents equals no protection against theft equals no incentive to innovate as there is no money in it. Patent law may be in need of some reform but not abolished.
post #29 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Longtime Apple fan here.

Nevertheless, Apple's recent strategy of "competing by lawsuits" leaves an increasingly sour taste in my mouth.

Especially, when viewed in light of their unwillingness to pay their fair share on taxes.

I sure wish the Apple of old back.

Claiming to be a longtime Apple fan or being a fanatical Apple hater makes no difference when it comes down to facts. Neither is an excuse for ignorance. I don't care if you own 100 Macs and have three iPads in your bathroom.

 

Apple does not compete by lawsuits. Apple has an obligation to sue thieves that steal Apple's IP and design. Only a fool would not protect their property. Get real. Your naive and unrealistic view might work in some sort of fantasy world created in your head, but doesn't cut it in the real world.

 

And Apple does pay their fair share of taxes, every cent that they're obligated to pay as required by law, so you're wrong about that too.

post #30 of 43
Any company that abuses its FRAND patent obligations and seeks damages in court as is being alleged should permanently be permanently enjoined from ever asserting those same patent rights against the wronged party ever again. Additionally, the wronged party, in this case – Apple, should be granted use rights for said patent.

That would ensure that no company ever again abuse the FRAND patent system in the manner alleged of Samsung.
post #31 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist View Post

You must be joking. When you say "pay their fair share on taxes", how much is that? They have paid what is required by law. IRS agents are permanently stationed at Apple and as Tim Cook told Congress, Apple is under a perpetual on-site IRS audit and everything they do gets IRS approval. So you are saying their "fair share" is more than the law requires? When was the last time you "paid your fair share" by paying the IRS more than the law required? Did you send them a tip, a bonus, or a "here you go just for the heck of it" check?

Get real and stop living in an alternate reality. You're also saying that a corporation has no right to defend its intellectual property? If not sue, how are they supposed to do it? In your world, Apple invents stuff that others steal, shouldn't hold anyone accountable, and should pay the IRS more than it is legally required. I can imagine that any business you run would be OUT of business within 6 months.

No one seems to be able to quantify this mythical "fair share" as the term itself is subjective. Politicians use this buzz phrase because it riles up class warfare taking the focus away from their incompetence. If some one tries to support an argument against their position, the cut them off because they don't want to be shown as the arrogant blowhards the really are. This goes for both parties as this week's hearings demonstrated.
post #32 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSteelers View Post

No patents equals no protection against theft equals no incentive to innovate as there is no money in it. 

 

Demonstrably false.

 

  • The US didn't really have software patents until the early to mid 1990s.  There was plenty of innovation before then, and plenty since then that has not been patented.
  • There are hundreds of thousands of apps available, and I'd bet almost none have patent protection, yet there they are.
  • Apple has made incredible piles of money even without getting injunctions.

 

Quote:
Patent law may be in need of some reform but not abolished.

 

Trade dress and copyright used to be the only way that software was protected in the US.  The good thing about those is that they really are unique manifestations and implementations of ideas, unlike the generalized ideas we see getting patents.

 
Software patents favor huge corporations who have the time and money to seek such patents, which is why they want them to continue to exist.
 

There are groups who suggest a middle ground:  allow software patents, but limit them to two years.

post #33 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

Demonstrably false.

 

  • The US didn't really have software patents until the early to mid 1990s.  There was plenty of innovation before then, and plenty since then that has not been patented.
  • There are hundreds of thousands of apps available, and I'd bet almost none have patent protection, yet there they are.
  • Apple has made incredible piles of money even without getting injunctions.

 

 

Trade dress and copyright used to be the only way that software was protected in the US.  The good thing about those is that they really are unique manifestations and implementations of ideas, unlike the generalized ideas we see getting patents.

 
Software patents favor huge corporations who have the time and money to seek such patents, which is why they want them to continue to exist.
 

There are groups who suggest a middle ground:  allow software patents, but limit them to two years.

 

Only thing demonstrably false is your post.

 

Software patents were around a lot longer than the "early to mid 1990's" as you state. In fact, decisions and court cases regarding them were taking place back in the early 80's. What you should have said was that by the mid 1990's software patents were commonplace.

 

Then you go and contradict yourself. How can software patents only benefit large corporations when by your own admission there are hundreds of thousands of Apps that exist without patent protection? How are all these small developers being harmed by software patents? How can they even survive with all these large corporations patenting everything is sight?

 

Limiting patents to two years is an idea that only an idiot (or infringer like Google or Samsung) would like. Samsung is already abusing the court system by copying Apple knowing it takes years to get to a decision, at which time the penalty is less than the gains made by copying.

 

Here's a better idea: if software patents are limited to two years, then court cases are heard within 30 days from filing, infringers have to pay 3X the awarded amount and owners of IP can get an injunction granted immediately after the court decision. And anyone found guilty would be banned from using the IP for another 2 years after the patent expires. That'll stop infringement pretty damn fast.

post #34 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

Well as it was shown in the hearing the other day on capital hill, Samsung as whole makes more revenue than Apple paid less total taxes worldwide than Apple did and Apple can not being the money home for the simple reason they would pay far more taxes than all their competitors.

 

Well, yesterday's hearing on capital hill didn't say much. 

 

You pay taxes on profit, not on revenue. In 2012, Samsung paid $4B in gov't taxes & dues on $16 profit (or about 25% -- slightly below South Korean national average of 30%).  See Samsung's 2012 financial statement or 2012 sustainability report.


Edited by tooltalk - 5/23/13 at 9:42pm
post #35 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

Demonstrably false.

 

  • The US didn't really have software patents until the early to mid 1990s.  There was plenty of innovation before then, and plenty since then that has not been patented.
  • There are hundreds of thousands of apps available, and I'd bet almost none have patent protection, yet there they are.
  • Apple has made incredible piles of money even without getting injunctions.

 

 

Trade dress and copyright used to be the only way that software was protected in the US.  The good thing about those is that they really are unique manifestations and implementations of ideas, unlike the generalized ideas we see getting patents.

 
Software patents favor huge corporations who have the time and money to seek such patents, which is why they want them to continue to exist.
 

There are groups who suggest a middle ground:  allow software patents, but limit them to two years.

 

Yep. I believe it was Bruce Lehman, Bill Clinton's USPTO appointee and a former corporate lobbyist, who expanded the scope of software patents throughout the 90's. 

post #36 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Longtime Apple fan here.
Nevertheless, Apple's recent strategy of "competing by lawsuits" leaves an increasingly sour taste in my mouth.
Especially, when viewed in light of their unwillingness to pay their fair share on taxes.
I sure wish the Apple of old back.

Then you should know that they are sued as much as they sue and do very happily pay their legal share, which can't be said about some of the competition

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #37 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

 

What's with your rude and bully-like attitude? I have as much right as you to voice my opinion. 

 

Well everybody has their own opinion and I respect that, but stating an opinion as fact when it's not is a different matter.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Longtime Apple fan here.

Nevertheless, Apple's recent strategy of "competing by lawsuits" leaves an increasingly sour taste in my mouth.

Especially, when viewed in light of their unwillingness to pay their fair share on taxes.

I sure wish the Apple of old back.

 

Mr. pretender, where did Apple's unwillingness to pay fair taxes came from? Do you understand the issue, or just making an opinion?

 

Since it looks you despise bad corporate practices, I wonder your views regarding Google's tax practices and Samsung's corrupt practices and Samsung's unethical practices like paying bloggers/forums to damage their competition.

post #38 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleWins View Post

Longtime Apple fan here.

You mean long time anti-Apple troll? Bye!
post #39 of 43
Originally Posted by Mike Eggleston View Post
I couldn't agree more. Software Patents are unenforcable and just pure poppy-cock. (This coming from a software developer.) 

 

I can't tell if that makes you insanely unintelligent or if you're just trolling.


Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post
You mean long time anti-Apple troll? Bye!

 

Who was he, returning, Jeff? I'd take care of all this crap, but…

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #40 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I can't tell if that makes you insanely unintelligent or if you're just trolling.

Who was he, returning, Jeff? I'd take care of all this crap, but…

I don't recognize the user names, but lots of banned IDs. AppleWill being just one of them. LGprada being another, in 2012, no less, nothing like referencing a long past dud, I guess.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple: Samsung shirked FRAND obligations, filed suit before making a licensing offer