Samsung patent countersuits seek to sow confusion in Apple patent fights

Posted:
in iPhone edited January 2014
In response to Apple's patent infringements cases against it, Samsung is seeking to create confusion with countersuits that attempt to leverage patents tied to open standards and encumbered by FRAND licensing terms



According to a report by the Wall Street Journal, "it appears that Samsung is trying to sow confusion among courts world-wide over different types of patents."



The report contrasts Apple's design and technical patents with "standards patents" held by Samsung, which have already been committed to licensing under FRAND ("fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory") terms.



In South Korea, for example, Samsung has publicly alleged that Apple was using its patented technologies without authorization, while Apple has countered that Samsung's patent rights in question were contributed to pools of standards Apple had in fact already licensed.



The report notes that "Samsung's legal strategy appears to turn to a large degree on claiming that such standards patents haven't been sufficiently valued," essentially seeking to discriminate against Apple by raising the terms of its pre negotiated royalty fees as a bargaining chip to counter Apple's claims that Samsung has actually copied its designs or used its patented technologies.



Apple previously complained that Nokia was similarly trying to use FRAND-encumbered patents linked to WiFi or 3G standards to force Apple to share its proprietary designs. Apple and Nokia have since settled.



In its patent disputes with both Samsung and Motorola Mobility, Apple again called attention to its competitors' use of FRAND encumbered patents that have been declared essential to implementing open standards, noting that both companies are deceptively monopolizing markets to "harm or eliminate competition."



FRAND patents less valuable, less powerful



FRAND-encumbered patents involved with open industry standards are assigned a lower value to help standards find widespread adoption, the report noted.



Apple has contributed some of its patented technologies to open standards pools, including video technologies in H.264 (which it earns minor royalties from) and elements of Canvas in HTML5 (which is offered for free to anyone who chooses to implement it).



However, Apple holds other patents as a way to differentiate its products, and these patents are being used to stop what the company has described as "slavish" copying by Samsung of its iPhone and iPad line.



"While having patents that are standards-based is great because you get revenue, you can't control what competitors do with them," said Jonathan Radcliffe, an intellectual-property attorney at Mayer Brown in London told the Journal. "The really powerful intellectual-property rights are the patents that are not part of standards."







The report cited patent blogger Florian Mueller as observing, "It's all about them [Samsung] really not having the depth and strength to say 'Here are three or four killer patents and we'll use them and scare the daylights out of Apple.' They don't seem to have that.



"So what they try to do with FRAND and by going all around the globe is to create a minimum level of legal uncertainty for Apple in the hopes they will settle," Mueller added.



Samsung appears to be banking on the premise that it may be able to convince at least some jurisdictions to balance Apple's patent claims with its own FRAND-encumbered patents, given that the matter is not legally settled in every market. But Samsung is also wary of actually settling the matter, the report notes, saying that Samsung also owns patents that, like Apple's, have not been committed to FRAND licensing.



Instead, Samsung "is raising the issues to create uncertainty so Apple settles to avoid risking a ruling that devalues its innovations," the report stated.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 20
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    As soon as I read the byline I knew we were in for another awesome Dilger article, yet again he has delivered the goods.



    Brought to you in the interests of balance, let the whining begin.
  • Reply 2 of 20
    Quote:

    ``The report notes that `Samsung's legal strategy appears to turn to a large degree on claiming that such standards patents haven't been sufficiently valued,' essentially seeking to discriminate against Apple by raising the terms of its pre negotiated royalty fees as a bargaining chip to counter Apple's claims that Samsung has actually copied its designs or used its patented technologies.''



    That's the angle they are aiming to present? If correct, then it's position is DOA.
  • Reply 3 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,584member
    The title gave you away.
  • Reply 4 of 20




    Meet Mr. Geesung Choi, CEO & Vice Chairman of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. This is the man who wants to sue Apple on the day the iPhone5 is released and sow confusion in the patent fights.



    I want to ask the question first. Could he he a smiling idiot?



  • Reply 5 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,584member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by King of Beige View Post






    Meet Mr. Geesung Choi, CEO & Vice Chairman of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. This is the man who wants to sue Apple on the day the iPhone5 is released and sow confusion in the patent fights.



    I want to ask the question first. Could he he a smiling idiot?







    Your point?
  • Reply 6 of 20
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,583member
    Anyone have a link to these Samsung-filed lawsuits that DED is referencing? Curious as to the actual claims.
  • Reply 7 of 20
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Anyone have a link to these Samsung-filed lawsuits that DED is referencing? Curious as to the actual claims.



    http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/29/s...atents-closer/



    btw in the first paragraph "seeking to" implies that it is yet to happen, no doubt some time after the 4th of October, the article is also based on a report on possible legal strategies that Samsung executives have publicly announced they will follow.
  • Reply 8 of 20
    They crapped on an 8 billion client... Brilliant strategy (and it keeps on showing).
  • Reply 9 of 20
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,583member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/29/s...atents-closer/



    btw in the first paragraph "seeking to" implies that it is yet to happen, no doubt some time after the 4th of October, the article is also based on a report on possible legal strategies that Samsung executives have publicly announced they will follow.



    Oh. . .

    So it's all still a rumor then. \ Anyone have a link to the public announcement Samsung made on their plans to sue? Perhaps that will give us more to go on.
  • Reply 10 of 20
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Oh. . .

    So it's all still a rumor then. \ Anyone have a link to the public announcement Samsung made on their plans to sue? Perhaps that will give us more to go on.



    cbf



    knock yourself out
  • Reply 11 of 20
    I'm really beginning to dislike samsung. I'll think twice before buying anything samsung. Just admit it and change your designs! Doesn't it bother your(Samsung) self-esteem to copy Apple so much?
  • Reply 12 of 20




    Meet Darl McBride, FORMER CEO of the SCO Group.



    How did that litigation work for ya?
  • Reply 13 of 20
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,583member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    cbf



    knock yourself out



    Oh. . . not any links for that either then. So it's all still rumors, and Samsung hasn't stated anything officially or publicly?
  • Reply 14 of 20
    All the BS and propaganda from fanboys, about how Apple is maliciously using patents (playing patent games) because they are "running scared" ... now we know the truth.



    Apple was just defending their proprietary IP and have for most part take such IP lawsuits when it's against them in stride - no big announcements of how they will sue or whatever, just quietly deal with it in court.



    Samsung here is the one "running scared", a situation of their own making mind you, and are the ones playing patent games. They were stupid enough to think they can step on Apple's proprietary design patents and get away with it. Perhaps they are used to getting their way in SKorea, where they have ties to the government, but are now learning they can't push people around in the court rooms of other countries.
  • Reply 15 of 20
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Oh. . . not any links for that either then. So it's all still rumors, and Samsung hasn't stated anything officially or publicly?



    You even read the article? Every suit Samsung has filed against Apple regarding patents has been related to FRAND patents, largely because that's all they have. They don't do much original design work, do they?



    Like LG, they're just a big company that poops out licensed stuff (Symbian, then WinMob, then Android, then WP7). Except that now both are trying to clone the iPhone, which they can't license because Apple doesn't use a licensing model. So they're just copying. But that's a bad strategy because Apple patented various elements of its design and technology.



    This isn't conjecture, it's what the WSJ is reporting. It's pretty much common knowledge. It's been reported by AI before, and FOSS Patents is explaining this all the time.



    When a notorious troll like you shows up and says, "hey where are DED's sources?" and tries to suggest that its all a conspiracy to make Apple look good, it reminds me of how extremist muslims and christians doubt global warming because the corporations that don't want to pay the social costs of generating greenhouse gasses are telling their affiliated political parties that science is bad.
  • Reply 16 of 20
    Can anybody point out the exact definition used by the relevant standards body, for the term "F/RAND"?



    I ask, because the definition of F/RAND can vary from one standards organization to the next. For example, the ISO, ITU, and a few others have collectively adopted a definition of F/RAND that says (paraphrasing):

    You must license the patent to anybody who wants to implement the standard, either for free or for a fee at your discretion. But if anybody then turns around and files a lawsuit against you, then you are permitted to revoke that entity's patent license in retaliation.



    Such a definition would, if it were applicable in this case, release Samsung from its F/RAND obligations to Apple specifically, because Apple filed a lawsuit against Samsung.



    Does such a so-called retaliatory clause exist in the F/RAND police of the standards body in charge of the standards for which Samsung is threatening to flex its muscles?



    [edit]Actually, in fact, the ITU and ISO policy effectively says that members are actually free to opt out of the F/RAND patent policy entirely, and discriminate as much as they want against everybody. Again, I'm not clear on exactly which standards body is specifically at play for the patents Samsung is threatening to exercise.[/edit]
  • Reply 17 of 20
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,583member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Corrections View Post


    You even read the article? Every suit Samsung has filed against Apple regarding patents has been related to FRAND patents, largely because that's all they have. They don't do much original design work, do they?



    Like LG, they're just a big company that poops out licensed stuff (Symbian, then WinMob, then Android, then WP7). Except that now both are trying to clone the iPhone, which they can't license because Apple doesn't use a licensing model. So they're just copying. But that's a bad strategy because Apple patented various elements of its design and technology.



    This isn't conjecture, it's what the WSJ is reporting. It's pretty much common knowledge. It's been reported by AI before, and FOSS Patents is explaining this all the time.



    When a notorious troll like you shows up and says, "hey where are DED's sources?" and tries to suggest that its all a conspiracy to make Apple look good, it reminds me of how extremist muslims and christians doubt global warming because the corporations that don't want to pay the social costs of generating greenhouse gasses are telling their affiliated political parties that science is bad.



    Dan, it's understood the article is only based on rumblings and rumors at this point. Sure there's smoke, but do you see any fire? My questions were directed at members who may misunderstand and and consider it fact-based. Samsung has not publicly or officially stated any intention to block the iPhone5 using F/RAND patents. Simple. That makes this a rumor. If it was about a device you'd call it vaporware I believe.
  • Reply 18 of 20
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Corrections View Post


    You even read the article? Every suit Samsung has filed against Apple regarding patents has been related to FRAND patents, largely because that's all they have. They don't do much original design work, do they?



    Are you suggesting that design work that goes into technologies that ultimately end up being managed by standards bodies, are automatically and without exception less "original" than design work that ends up going into technologies for proprietary products?



    Personally, I find patents describing the electromagnetic processes by which communication protocols are achieved, much more "original" than community design registrations showing the shape and layout of a potential finished product.
  • Reply 19 of 20
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,583member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lfmorrison View Post


    Are you suggesting that design work that goes into technologies that ultimately end up being managed by standards bodies, are automatically and without exception less "original" than design work that ends up going into technologies for proprietary products?



    Personally, I find patents describing the electromagnetic processes by which communication protocols are achieved, much more "original" than community design registrations showing the shape and layout of a potential finished product.



    Actually the "Correction" inference that all of Samsung's patent assertions against Apple are F/RAND encumbered isn't even a view held by Apple's attorneys. They've only said they believe that some may be.



    In the case of the California filing, even the Apple-friendly FOSSPatents blog says "In connection with this particular dispute, note that Apple doesn't claim that all 12 patents asserted by Samsung in that particular lawsuit are subject to FRAND commitments. The exact number is not specified, but there are indications in the text that Apple means seven of the twelve asserted patents (more or less)."
  • Reply 20 of 20
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,583member
    And now there's fire. Samsung wants reasonable licensing fees for UMTS patents used in Apple mobile products. Apple doesn't agree so far, thus a lawsuit in the Netherlands today. My guess? Apple will pay the fees rather than let a Judge decide and risk a sales injunction in Europe.



    http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/09/...3g-technology/
Sign In or Register to comment.