Remember what I said: Apple's market growth for new cellphones has been spectacular, and they could approaching 1/3 of the entire world's market for "smart" cellphones within two years.
There's a famous quote from an early Spider-Man comic, "With great power comes great responsibility." Apple now wields tremendous influence in the cellphone market, but it needs to act as a responsible corporation with such a fast-growing market share. Apple in its suit against HTC is essentially a "shot across the bow" against Google and the four major cellphone manufacturers--LG, Nokia, Samsung and Sony Ericsson--in an attempt to stop the widespread distribution of "smart" touchscreen cellphones based on Google Android cellphone OS. That is approaching the point of potential patent abuse to eliminate a potential competitor, and I don't think Google, the four cellphone manufacturers I mentioned, or antitrust authorities in the USA and the EU will stand by idly!
You still haven't answered why your assertion doesn't apply to Nokia, who has an even larger market share and sued Apple first.
Until you do, I see no reason to entertain any other assertions you make.
insike - seriously do you even know what the Nokia suit and the Apple counter suit are about?? Any idea? At ALL??
Yes, as a matter of fact.
Quote:
The issues and allegations are plain - Nokia wants Apple to pay above and beyond the "fair, reasonable and non-discrimintory" fees required by being part of the patent pool for GSM technologies, up to and including proprietary patents that Apple holds that are of interest to Nokia.
No, this is false. FRAND applies to the other companies who added their patents to the GSM patent pool. Apple did no such thing, but wanted special treatment. Despite not having contributed, they wanted to get away with not having to pay up for the IP they blatantly stole.
Other mobile manufacturers are cross-licensing patents. Apple refused to. Apple also refused to pay up. Apple blatantly stole Nokia's IP. Nokia sued Apple for their theft of IP.
If you had read it, you'd know that Apple claims that Nokia is attempting to charge Apple (and only Apple) higher rates than it's charging others for use of its patented technology, AND that Nokia's not allowed to do this since they submitted this technology to a standards body to be included in the GSM Standards, which requires that they offer licensing on a Fair, Reasonable and Non Discriminatory (FRAND) basis. Thus, Apple has refused to agree to pay the higher rates. And that's why Nokia sued.
See the post above:
Apple did no such thing, but wanted special treatment. Despite not having contributed, they wanted to get away with not having to pay up for the IP they blatantly stole.
Other mobile manufacturers are cross-licensing patents. Apple refused to. Apple also refused to pay up. Apple blatantly stole Nokia's IP. Nokia sued Apple for their theft of IP.
Quote:
Apple made it very clear that they are willing to pay FRAND rates - so that there is no intent to "rip off Nokia's IP."
The problem is that if Apple never contributed to the GSM patent pool, but still wanted to have the exact same terms as companies that did, leaving other companies at a huge disadvantage. Simply put: Apple wanted special treatment, and didn't give a crap about stealing the IP of other companies.
Apple did no such thing, but wanted special treatment. Despite not having contributed, they wanted to get away with not having to pay up for the IP they blatantly stole.
That's false. Are you just trying to bullshit your way through this?
If Apple isn't supposed to get FRAND rates when they haven't contributed to the patent pool, they'd be laughed out of court for even bringing it up.
By that reasoning no one should ever seek legal redress for having their innovations copied. They should just "compete in the market" against, well, effectively themselves, since anyone should be free to do wholesale cloning of whatever seems to be popular.
Hope you felt that way when Nokia launched its suit. After all, they're entitled to protect their IP too (yes, I do know what the dispute is about...just saying). Some lawsuits are just plain stupid and are not done to protect IP but just to hinder the opposition. It's clear which category this (and Nokia's lawsuit) falls under. Heck, there are patents here that are in dispute with Nokia and embroiled in the courts on that front.
I sincerely hope Apple get's back to making great products as opposed to going patent crazy and deciding that the best way to compete is just to sue everybody else.
There has to be some wrongdoing for there to be any antitrust action. If Apple has truly been victimized, they've simply defended their patents successfully. If a good chunk of the competition victimized Apple, their liability to suffer consequences is incidental.
At the current moment, yes, there has been no wrongdoing. Despite the fact that some of these patents shouldn't have been awarded for being so broad in the first place, they were and Apple has the right to sue.
However, you can clearly see a precedent that can form here. If Apple wins, then they can use this case as leverage against the contracted hardware manufacturers for its competitors across the board. Take out the competitor's ability to actually manufacture and sell their software on a smartphone, and you essentially kill their business. And that's when you get into the antitrust action.
I personally hope that Steve Jobs and Apple don't get power crazy to that point and everyone can happily settle out of court.
I think most of the people on here are hypocrites. I didn't see you people so happy when Nokia filled suit for their innovations.
We don't even know what patents HTC has supposedly infringed. But 20 infringements is a bit suspect. Even Multitouch is suspect since Apple didn't invent it, just bought a company who was working on an implementation meanwhile other companies like Microsoft Research were working on the same ideas (that became the Microsoft Surface).
And if it is all Google/Android related then sue Motorola (their Android devices have multitouch in Europe). Or see Google directly. Or sue Microsoft over the Zune HD.
No they have picked the potentially weekest link and sued them. Hardly classy when HTC only includes software that Microsoft or Google approves (beyond HTC Sense). Unless it is 100% HTC Sense they are after, when I don't see how that is anything Apple like or iPhone like.
<<<<< This.
What's going to happen here eventually is HTC, LG, Nokia, Samsung, Kodak, Motorola and Google are going to pull together and freaking demolish the most over-rated, over-priced and over-branded corporation we've ever seen much to the dismay of their sycophantic fan base. If you know anything about computers and technology and pricing you'd stay the hell away from Apple. Lockdown, money money money and more lockdown.
I certainly wouldn't call Microsoft any better but just as was said above HTC is an easy target and much more of an innovator than Apple. The only thing the other companies lack that Apple have is brand power plain and simple, it's nothing to do with innovation and if people are too stupid to step back and see this then they can mosey on being overcharged for underpowered hardware in pretty cases, targeted at people too dumb to use more than one mouse button (until absurdly recently) who can only relate to technology through personification of it via teletubby ads.
Imagine what would be left of the iPhone if Google pulled their support? Bye bye maps, bye bye search, by bye youtube bye bye internet. Bye bye crApple. Apple want to prey that Google don't get involved in this.
Man I'm disproportionately cross about the whole thing.
Hope you felt that way when Nokia launched its suit. After all, they're entitled to protect their IP too (yes, I do know what the dispute is about...just saying). Some lawsuits are just plain stupid and are not done to protect IP but just to hinder the opposition. It's clear which category this (and Nokia's lawsuit) falls under. Heck, there are patents here that are in dispute with Nokia and embroiled in the courts on that front.
I sincerely hope Apple get's back to making great products as opposed to going patent crazy and deciding that the best way to compete is just to sue everybody else.
I actually have no opinion about the merits of these lawsuits because I don't know enough about the technical particulars. And yes, I think that Nokia has a right to protect its IP, although from what I've read that doesn't seem to be the actual matter in dispute, involving as it does some cross licensing demands from Nokia.
In general, I don't think it's a good idea to posit anthropomorphized, emotional motivations for huge legal actions, I don't think it's a good idea to simply dismiss all such lawsuits out of hand as being baseless, or to assume that every such lawsuit is an ironclad case. I think it's pretty obvious that companies can and do bring suit for strategic and leverage reasons.
or prove that Apple is using more than a combination of the technology it licensed from Qualcomm, SonyEricsson, others and in-house developed solutions.
Apple is a member of the WiFi standards group, which is one of the issues Nokia is suing over.
I guess we'll have to wait until it gets to court to prove your unsubstantiated claims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by insike
Yes, as a matter of fact.
No, this is false. FRAND applies to the other companies who added their patents to the GSM patent pool. Apple did no such thing, but wanted special treatment. Despite not having contributed, they wanted to get away with not having to pay up for the IP they blatantly stole.
Other mobile manufacturers are cross-licensing patents. Apple refused to. Apple also refused to pay up. Apple blatantly stole Nokia's IP. Nokia sued Apple for their theft of IP.
If Apple isn't supposed to get FRAND rates when they haven't contributed to the patent pool, they'd be laughed out of court for even bringing it up.
The point here is that Apple wants special treatment. They want the same as the companies who have actually contributed to the GSM standard. But since they didn't contribute, they do not deserve the same terms as those who actually submitted their IP to the standard.
So part of Nokia's patents cover codecs, Apple has done a lot of work on codecs and compression for transmission over networks, in partnership with Qualcomm who recently obtained a largish settlement off Nokia.
Prove that Apple is using ANY of Nokia's technology in their phones.
That will happen in COURT.
Have you ever heard of the presumption of innocence?
It's what most civilised countries have in their legal system to protect people and other legal entities from unfounded accusations.
The first suit by Nokia covers the GSM patents, it is not before the ITC.
The SECOND suit by Nokia, WHICH DOES NOT INVOLVE the GSM patents is before the ITC AND involves patents relating to almost everything Apple makes.
So why don't you f@#k off with your kangaroo court bulls#@t and let the legal system get on with it's job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by insike
Nokia is just asking for what's right. That means that Apple will not get special treatment..
No, Apple wants to pay less, and get a lot for free, since they didn't contribute to the GSM pool.
Fact is, Nokia's patents have been accepted by other companies who have been willing to act honestly. Not so with Apple.
AFAIK the issue centers on Nokia demanding much higher licensing fees from Apple, allegedly in an effort to force cross licensing on some Apple tech. That being the case, what other companies have "accepted" wouldn't be relevant.
Again, I don't know enough about these matters to make any definitive proclamations about the technicalities or the merits, but then again neither do you. So bald assertions of what the "facts" aren't really persuasive.
Comments
Remember what I said: Apple's market growth for new cellphones has been spectacular, and they could approaching 1/3 of the entire world's market for "smart" cellphones within two years.
There's a famous quote from an early Spider-Man comic, "With great power comes great responsibility." Apple now wields tremendous influence in the cellphone market, but it needs to act as a responsible corporation with such a fast-growing market share. Apple in its suit against HTC is essentially a "shot across the bow" against Google and the four major cellphone manufacturers--LG, Nokia, Samsung and Sony Ericsson--in an attempt to stop the widespread distribution of "smart" touchscreen cellphones based on Google Android cellphone OS. That is approaching the point of potential patent abuse to eliminate a potential competitor, and I don't think Google, the four cellphone manufacturers I mentioned, or antitrust authorities in the USA and the EU will stand by idly!
You still haven't answered why your assertion doesn't apply to Nokia, who has an even larger market share and sued Apple first.
Until you do, I see no reason to entertain any other assertions you make.
The end result of the Apple vs Nokia & Apple vs HTC cases will be the same. A cross-licensing agreement and maybe some other shared technologies.
A rational post at last!
Many people see these patent disputes as corporate warfare.
When as often as not, this is how large companies exchange their intellectual DNA.
It's not so much war. More a sort of clumsy mating.
C.
Examples, please?
You just quoted the post where I mentioned Nokia.
insike - seriously do you even know what the Nokia suit and the Apple counter suit are about?? Any idea? At ALL??
Yes, as a matter of fact.
The issues and allegations are plain - Nokia wants Apple to pay above and beyond the "fair, reasonable and non-discrimintory" fees required by being part of the patent pool for GSM technologies, up to and including proprietary patents that Apple holds that are of interest to Nokia.
No, this is false. FRAND applies to the other companies who added their patents to the GSM patent pool. Apple did no such thing, but wanted special treatment. Despite not having contributed, they wanted to get away with not having to pay up for the IP they blatantly stole.
Other mobile manufacturers are cross-licensing patents. Apple refused to. Apple also refused to pay up. Apple blatantly stole Nokia's IP. Nokia sued Apple for their theft of IP.
If you had read it, you'd know that Apple claims that Nokia is attempting to charge Apple (and only Apple) higher rates than it's charging others for use of its patented technology, AND that Nokia's not allowed to do this since they submitted this technology to a standards body to be included in the GSM Standards, which requires that they offer licensing on a Fair, Reasonable and Non Discriminatory (FRAND) basis. Thus, Apple has refused to agree to pay the higher rates. And that's why Nokia sued.
See the post above:
Apple did no such thing, but wanted special treatment. Despite not having contributed, they wanted to get away with not having to pay up for the IP they blatantly stole.
Other mobile manufacturers are cross-licensing patents. Apple refused to. Apple also refused to pay up. Apple blatantly stole Nokia's IP. Nokia sued Apple for their theft of IP.
Apple made it very clear that they are willing to pay FRAND rates - so that there is no intent to "rip off Nokia's IP."
The problem is that if Apple never contributed to the GSM patent pool, but still wanted to have the exact same terms as companies that did, leaving other companies at a huge disadvantage. Simply put: Apple wanted special treatment, and didn't give a crap about stealing the IP of other companies.
See the post above:
Apple did no such thing, but wanted special treatment. Despite not having contributed, they wanted to get away with not having to pay up for the IP they blatantly stole.
That's false. Are you just trying to bullshit your way through this?
If Apple isn't supposed to get FRAND rates when they haven't contributed to the patent pool, they'd be laughed out of court for even bringing it up.
Instead, I'm laughing at you.
The end result of the Apple vs Nokia & Apple vs HTC cases will be the same. A cross-licensing agreement and maybe some other shared technologies.
Probably no cross-licensing in Apple vs Nokia, as Nokia is in the wrong by asking for more money from Apple than from any other manufacturers.
Remember, Apple WANTS to pay Nokia the money they are entitled to (which happens to be less than Nokia is DEMANDING).
Well, Nokia is still about 40% of the smartphone market, so if Apple got to 30%, well, they'd still be less!
Apple don't care about selling fewer units than Nokia. They care about making more profits. (as a commercial entity, they should).
So when will Apple pass Nokia in terms of profits?
Sometime in the middle of last year.
C.
By that reasoning no one should ever seek legal redress for having their innovations copied. They should just "compete in the market" against, well, effectively themselves, since anyone should be free to do wholesale cloning of whatever seems to be popular.
Hope you felt that way when Nokia launched its suit. After all, they're entitled to protect their IP too (yes, I do know what the dispute is about...just saying). Some lawsuits are just plain stupid and are not done to protect IP but just to hinder the opposition. It's clear which category this (and Nokia's lawsuit) falls under. Heck, there are patents here that are in dispute with Nokia and embroiled in the courts on that front.
I sincerely hope Apple get's back to making great products as opposed to going patent crazy and deciding that the best way to compete is just to sue everybody else.
There has to be some wrongdoing for there to be any antitrust action. If Apple has truly been victimized, they've simply defended their patents successfully. If a good chunk of the competition victimized Apple, their liability to suffer consequences is incidental.
At the current moment, yes, there has been no wrongdoing. Despite the fact that some of these patents shouldn't have been awarded for being so broad in the first place, they were and Apple has the right to sue.
However, you can clearly see a precedent that can form here. If Apple wins, then they can use this case as leverage against the contracted hardware manufacturers for its competitors across the board. Take out the competitor's ability to actually manufacture and sell their software on a smartphone, and you essentially kill their business. And that's when you get into the antitrust action.
I personally hope that Steve Jobs and Apple don't get power crazy to that point and everyone can happily settle out of court.
I think most of the people on here are hypocrites. I didn't see you people so happy when Nokia filled suit for their innovations.
We don't even know what patents HTC has supposedly infringed. But 20 infringements is a bit suspect. Even Multitouch is suspect since Apple didn't invent it, just bought a company who was working on an implementation meanwhile other companies like Microsoft Research were working on the same ideas (that became the Microsoft Surface).
And if it is all Google/Android related then sue Motorola (their Android devices have multitouch in Europe). Or see Google directly. Or sue Microsoft over the Zune HD.
No they have picked the potentially weekest link and sued them. Hardly classy when HTC only includes software that Microsoft or Google approves (beyond HTC Sense). Unless it is 100% HTC Sense they are after, when I don't see how that is anything Apple like or iPhone like.
<<<<< This.
What's going to happen here eventually is HTC, LG, Nokia, Samsung, Kodak, Motorola and Google are going to pull together and freaking demolish the most over-rated, over-priced and over-branded corporation we've ever seen much to the dismay of their sycophantic fan base. If you know anything about computers and technology and pricing you'd stay the hell away from Apple. Lockdown, money money money and more lockdown.
I certainly wouldn't call Microsoft any better but just as was said above HTC is an easy target and much more of an innovator than Apple. The only thing the other companies lack that Apple have is brand power plain and simple, it's nothing to do with innovation and if people are too stupid to step back and see this then they can mosey on being overcharged for underpowered hardware in pretty cases, targeted at people too dumb to use more than one mouse button (until absurdly recently) who can only relate to technology through personification of it via teletubby ads.
Imagine what would be left of the iPhone if Google pulled their support? Bye bye maps, bye bye search, by bye youtube bye bye internet. Bye bye crApple. Apple want to prey that Google don't get involved in this.
Man I'm disproportionately cross about the whole thing.
Hope you felt that way when Nokia launched its suit. After all, they're entitled to protect their IP too (yes, I do know what the dispute is about...just saying). Some lawsuits are just plain stupid and are not done to protect IP but just to hinder the opposition. It's clear which category this (and Nokia's lawsuit) falls under. Heck, there are patents here that are in dispute with Nokia and embroiled in the courts on that front.
I sincerely hope Apple get's back to making great products as opposed to going patent crazy and deciding that the best way to compete is just to sue everybody else.
I actually have no opinion about the merits of these lawsuits because I don't know enough about the technical particulars. And yes, I think that Nokia has a right to protect its IP, although from what I've read that doesn't seem to be the actual matter in dispute, involving as it does some cross licensing demands from Nokia.
In general, I don't think it's a good idea to posit anthropomorphized, emotional motivations for huge legal actions, I don't think it's a good idea to simply dismiss all such lawsuits out of hand as being baseless, or to assume that every such lawsuit is an ironclad case. I think it's pretty obvious that companies can and do bring suit for strategic and leverage reasons.
or prove that Apple is using more than a combination of the technology it licensed from Qualcomm, SonyEricsson, others and in-house developed solutions.
Apple is a member of the WiFi standards group, which is one of the issues Nokia is suing over.
I guess we'll have to wait until it gets to court to prove your unsubstantiated claims.
Yes, as a matter of fact.
No, this is false. FRAND applies to the other companies who added their patents to the GSM patent pool. Apple did no such thing, but wanted special treatment. Despite not having contributed, they wanted to get away with not having to pay up for the IP they blatantly stole.
Other mobile manufacturers are cross-licensing patents. Apple refused to. Apple also refused to pay up. Apple blatantly stole Nokia's IP. Nokia sued Apple for their theft of IP.
If Apple isn't supposed to get FRAND rates when they haven't contributed to the patent pool, they'd be laughed out of court for even bringing it up.
The point here is that Apple wants special treatment. They want the same as the companies who have actually contributed to the GSM standard. But since they didn't contribute, they do not deserve the same terms as those who actually submitted their IP to the standard.
Probably no cross-licensing in Apple vs Nokia, as Nokia is in the wrong by asking for more money from Apple than from any other manufacturers.
Nokia is just asking for what's right. That means that Apple will not get special treatment..
Remember, Apple WANTS to pay Nokia the money they are entitled to (which happens to be less than Nokia is DEMANDING).
No, Apple wants to pay less, and get a lot for free, since they didn't contribute to the GSM pool.
Prove that Apple is using ANY of Nokia's technology in their phones.
That will happen in COURT.
Have you ever heard of the presumption of innocence?
It's what most civilised countries have in their legal system to protect people and other legal entities from unfounded accusations.
The first suit by Nokia covers the GSM patents, it is not before the ITC.
The SECOND suit by Nokia, WHICH DOES NOT INVOLVE the GSM patents is before the ITC AND involves patents relating to almost everything Apple makes.
So why don't you f@#k off with your kangaroo court bulls#@t and let the legal system get on with it's job.
Nokia is just asking for what's right. That means that Apple will not get special treatment..
No, Apple wants to pay less, and get a lot for free, since they didn't contribute to the GSM pool.
Fact is, Nokia's patents have been accepted by other companies who have been willing to act honestly. Not so with Apple.
Fact is, Nokia's patents have been accepted by other companies who have been willing to act honestly. Not so with Apple.
AFAIK the issue centers on Nokia demanding much higher licensing fees from Apple, allegedly in an effort to force cross licensing on some Apple tech. That being the case, what other companies have "accepted" wouldn't be relevant.
Again, I don't know enough about these matters to make any definitive proclamations about the technicalities or the merits, but then again neither do you. So bald assertions of what the "facts" aren't really persuasive.