there is a rumor (http://www.etnews.com/news/detail.ht...mc=m_012_00001) in s. korea that samsung will use the same courts that apple used to get its injunctions to ban the sale of the iphone 5 in europe. it looks like samsung is going to put on a show.
It just seems like an admission of guilt on Samsung's part.
That's like saying every criminal who pleads guilty in court is, well, guilty.
Small problem. A lot of criminals plead guilty just to get lighter sentences even though we'll learn later on they never did the crime. They know their chances of getting off the hook are slim to none.
Nice opinion. Any real evidence, or just a nice story you have devloped?
Currently Apple has no benefit to get this over with urgently. as the current situation is the one they want. No Samsung sales.
Getting it over urgenty may end up with what htey dont want, Samsung sales.
What are you talking about? Apple is attempting to convey a sense of urgency regarding the possible damage done by what they are arguing is an infringing design, in order expedite a ruling in their favor.
The only "getting over" would be the permanent ban on Galaxy Tab sales.
Apple is big. Samsung is big. They need to exist in this world together. I say let Samsung sell their device above the retail cost of apples. Lets say $99.00 higher than Apples iPad. That gives Apple the advantage and lets samsung sell their device.
So Samsung won't sell as many but they will make $99 MORE PROFIT PER UNIT. How does this help Apple or hurt Samsng? Stupid idea IMO.
What are you talking about? Apple is attempting to convey a sense of urgency regarding the possible damage done by what they are arguing is an infringing design, in order expedite a ruling in their favor.
The only "getting over" would be the permanent ban on Galaxy Tab sales.
Assumption of a positive result for an injunction is a big assumption. They are not judging a permanent ban.
Samsung should try to offer engrave "Designed by Apple in California Assembled in Korea" at the back of Galaxy Tab. It may work.
If Samsung had Designed in Korea Made in Australia then it might have a better chance. Then again commodity electronics manufacturing can't compete with banking and mining in terms of "importance" to the Australian economy, at least from what I can see.
there is a rumor (http://www.etnews.com/news/detail.ht...mc=m_012_00001) in s. korea that samsung will use the same courts that apple used to get its injunctions to ban the sale of the iphone 5 in europe. it looks like samsung is going to put on a show.
A show indeed - must be a lot of money at stake for Samsung to go to all the trouble.
Banned over a drawing of a non existent product :-\\
Not in Australia.
I know, it can be hard to keep all these lawsuits straight. But in Australia, the major legal obstacle that would impede Samsung from selling its product is apparently the potential infringement of several technological patents, rather than issues of form factor and physical appearance.
I know, it can be hard to keep all these lawsuits straight. But in Australia, the major legal obstacle that would impede Samsung from selling its product is apparently the potential infringement of several technological patents, rather than issues of form factor and physical appearance.
oh, in that case (depending on the validity of the patents - pro apple or not, a lot of patents are overly broad yet still granted) go Apple.
I'm against the Germany case BECAUSE the object that Samsung infringed upon doesn't look like an iPad...and doesn't even exist.
You do realize that apple has to make this sound urgent so that the court will act in a timely manner, it doesn't really mean that apple is worried about samsung, only that damage will be done if an infringer is allowed to sell through.
Apple have said that any sale to a competing platform is viewed as a permanent loss of a customer largely because that customer is unlikely to change platforms once they have invested in applications. Turning that around, Apple must believe that they have a customer for life if they make the first sale. With that as a background is it any wonder that Apple have assumed a 'take no prisoners' approach to competitors in general and specifically when dealing with intellectual property issues. Samsung is the leader in the competition not just because of the size of the company, but because it has substantial knowledge of the technical particulars of the Apple product and the cost of components and hence Apple's margins. That knowledge and Samsung's willingness to accept lower margins makes Samsung a formidable competitor. One should not forget that Samsung makes a profit on the manufacture of their components used in the product and benefit from the production volume to amortize costs of their component R&D as well as the production facility. In short, Samsung is even more vertically integrated than Apple.
Apple is at a point where the iPhone is at risk because it is falling further behind the competition both in terms of 4G implementation and pricing of products whic cost the consumer and the carrier a good bit less. Recent data indicate that the sales of smart phones to younger users, even those whose parents have iPhones, have been largely Android based products. Apple's traditional method of justifying the price premium has been to differentiate it's products by quality, device integration and technology incorporated. If rumors are to be believed, Apple is about to introduce new function and features to the new iPhone and will probably have a lower priced model to try to get the new user who they hope will remain with Apple in the future. That still leaves the 4G problem. Thus, the question is whether this new interim model will be enough to keep people carrying them ot the door at retail. We shall see.
What are you talking about? Apple is attempting to convey a sense of urgency regarding the possible damage done by what they are arguing is an infringing design, in order expedite a ruling in their favor.
The only "getting over" would be the permanent ban on Galaxy Tab sales.
Please. I have a Galaxy smartphone. I have a Tab. My wife has an iPad and an iPhone. They don't look like each other except that they are rectangular, have a touch screen and are largely all glass covers. This needs to go away and there's room for both. If this ends up in a protected patent IP fight, things can go sideways in a second.
When I read about a deal proposed by Samsung in Australian court, I got impression that Samsung offerd Apple a deal like droping concerned functions. It turned out it there was no such deal.
"Samsung had offered to agree to a quick trial on Apple?s patent claim if Apple agreed to drop its demand for a ban on the sale of the Galaxy 10.1, Young said. Apple rejected the proposal, he said"
Comments
there is a rumor (http://www.etnews.com/news/detail.ht...mc=m_012_00001) in s. korea that samsung will use the same courts that apple used to get its injunctions to ban the sale of the iphone 5 in europe. it looks like samsung is going to put on a show.
It just seems like an admission of guilt on Samsung's part.
That's like saying every criminal who pleads guilty in court is, well, guilty.
Small problem. A lot of criminals plead guilty just to get lighter sentences even though we'll learn later on they never did the crime. They know their chances of getting off the hook are slim to none.
Samsung just realizes they're at a disadvantage.
Or an olive branch.
I like figs more than olives.
It just seems like an admission of guilt on Samsung's part.
Agreeing to remove/change two parts before the case went to trial is more of an admission.
Nice opinion. Any real evidence, or just a nice story you have devloped?
Currently Apple has no benefit to get this over with urgently. as the current situation is the one they want. No Samsung sales.
Getting it over urgenty may end up with what htey dont want, Samsung sales.
What are you talking about? Apple is attempting to convey a sense of urgency regarding the possible damage done by what they are arguing is an infringing design, in order expedite a ruling in their favor.
The only "getting over" would be the permanent ban on Galaxy Tab sales.
As I said in the prior thread Apple has the upper hand or Samsung wouldn't have offered a fig leaf.
Olive branch? Unless you meant that Sammy is trying to cover up something that it is ashamed of.
Apple is big. Samsung is big. They need to exist in this world together. I say let Samsung sell their device above the retail cost of apples. Lets say $99.00 higher than Apples iPad. That gives Apple the advantage and lets samsung sell their device.
So Samsung won't sell as many but they will make $99 MORE PROFIT PER UNIT. How does this help Apple or hurt Samsng? Stupid idea IMO.
What are you talking about? Apple is attempting to convey a sense of urgency regarding the possible damage done by what they are arguing is an infringing design, in order expedite a ruling in their favor.
The only "getting over" would be the permanent ban on Galaxy Tab sales.
Assumption of a positive result for an injunction is a big assumption. They are not judging a permanent ban.
The reason Apple see it as the main competitor is that it's the most blatant copy, hence the bans on Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales in two countries so far.
Perhaps go back to see what the bans are based upon, and the current situation in Australia.
Or an olive branch.
Perhaps an eucalyptus leaf. Ah, I miss the smell.
Samsung should try to offer engrave "Designed by Apple in California Assembled in Korea" at the back of Galaxy Tab. It may work.
If Samsung had Designed in Korea Made in Australia then it might have a better chance. Then again commodity electronics manufacturing can't compete with banking and mining in terms of "importance" to the Australian economy, at least from what I can see.
Samsung should try to offer engrave "Designed by Apple in California Assembled in Korea" at the back of Galaxy Tab. It may work.
Best solution yet!
i'm no fan of samsung.
there is a rumor (http://www.etnews.com/news/detail.ht...mc=m_012_00001) in s. korea that samsung will use the same courts that apple used to get its injunctions to ban the sale of the iphone 5 in europe. it looks like samsung is going to put on a show.
A show indeed - must be a lot of money at stake for Samsung to go to all the trouble.
Samsung should try to offer engrave "Designed by Apple in California Assembled in Korea" at the back of Galaxy Tab. It may work.
or "Designed and Assembled in Korea and loosely resembles a drawing by Apple that has never and will never be an actual product."
Banned over a drawing of a non existent product :-\\
Not in Australia.
I know, it can be hard to keep all these lawsuits straight. But in Australia, the major legal obstacle that would impede Samsung from selling its product is apparently the potential infringement of several technological patents, rather than issues of form factor and physical appearance.
Not in Australia.
I know, it can be hard to keep all these lawsuits straight. But in Australia, the major legal obstacle that would impede Samsung from selling its product is apparently the potential infringement of several technological patents, rather than issues of form factor and physical appearance.
oh, in that case (depending on the validity of the patents - pro apple or not, a lot of patents are overly broad yet still granted) go Apple.
I'm against the Germany case BECAUSE the object that Samsung infringed upon doesn't look like an iPad...and doesn't even exist.
You do realize that apple has to make this sound urgent so that the court will act in a timely manner, it doesn't really mean that apple is worried about samsung, only that damage will be done if an infringer is allowed to sell through.
Apple have said that any sale to a competing platform is viewed as a permanent loss of a customer largely because that customer is unlikely to change platforms once they have invested in applications. Turning that around, Apple must believe that they have a customer for life if they make the first sale. With that as a background is it any wonder that Apple have assumed a 'take no prisoners' approach to competitors in general and specifically when dealing with intellectual property issues. Samsung is the leader in the competition not just because of the size of the company, but because it has substantial knowledge of the technical particulars of the Apple product and the cost of components and hence Apple's margins. That knowledge and Samsung's willingness to accept lower margins makes Samsung a formidable competitor. One should not forget that Samsung makes a profit on the manufacture of their components used in the product and benefit from the production volume to amortize costs of their component R&D as well as the production facility. In short, Samsung is even more vertically integrated than Apple.
Apple is at a point where the iPhone is at risk because it is falling further behind the competition both in terms of 4G implementation and pricing of products whic cost the consumer and the carrier a good bit less. Recent data indicate that the sales of smart phones to younger users, even those whose parents have iPhones, have been largely Android based products. Apple's traditional method of justifying the price premium has been to differentiate it's products by quality, device integration and technology incorporated. If rumors are to be believed, Apple is about to introduce new function and features to the new iPhone and will probably have a lower priced model to try to get the new user who they hope will remain with Apple in the future. That still leaves the 4G problem. Thus, the question is whether this new interim model will be enough to keep people carrying them ot the door at retail. We shall see.
What are you talking about? Apple is attempting to convey a sense of urgency regarding the possible damage done by what they are arguing is an infringing design, in order expedite a ruling in their favor.
The only "getting over" would be the permanent ban on Galaxy Tab sales.
Please. I have a Galaxy smartphone. I have a Tab. My wife has an iPad and an iPhone. They don't look like each other except that they are rectangular, have a touch screen and are largely all glass covers. This needs to go away and there's room for both. If this ends up in a protected patent IP fight, things can go sideways in a second.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...-persists.html
It says
"Samsung had offered to agree to a quick trial on Apple?s patent claim if Apple agreed to drop its demand for a ban on the sale of the Galaxy 10.1, Young said. Apple rejected the proposal, he said"