What about Apple defense with the 4g patents acquired from Nortel?
Should be interesting how Apple fights back via Rockstar/Nortel patents. If Samsung already had a license agreement with Nortel, it remains valid as one of the terms of the sale approved by the Dept. of Justice.
If Samsung did not have a license from Nortel for their LTE patents, using Samsung's own LTE patents as an offensive strategy sounds like a bad move.
From theregister.co.uk
" Nortel contributed significantly to both 4G standards, WiMAX and LTE, with R&D in key areas including OFDMA and MIMO. According to Reuters, Nortel owns seven of the 105 patent families likely to be essential to LTE. By comparison, Nokia holds 57 and Ericsson 14."
Reasonable Assumptions:
Since Apple already settled with Nokia, I assume their agreement licenses LTE and future tech on FRAND terms, and won't be part of any future legal skirmishes.
Since Ericsson is a partner in Rockstar, I assume Apple is licensing their LTE at FRAND rates.
So if there really 105 patent families, Apple has access to 78 of them at "real" FRAND rates.
When Samsung and Moto make their high royalty demands on FRAND patents, it will look out of line in comparison to other (almost 80%) LTE SEP rates.
Sidenote:
In reference to the idea that it only takes one bullet (patent).
If Moto and Samsung don't have Nortel licenses, Apple has 7 families of bullets that are SEP to the LTE standard.
It's not a good idea to pick a fight with another LTE patent owner.
If you take a step back and look at the big picture, look at all the legal messes that have been caused by Google's "free" and "open" Android OS. Did Google not anticipate any of this or did they just not care about legal situations that they were potentially putting their OEMs into?
Please tell me that article was a joke. Or satire, like the Onion. Please. Because I don't think my faith in humanity and common sense can drop any lower.
Even easier, just stop putting TouchWiz on top of the standard Android interface! Oh, and stop making phones that physically look like an iPhone (which they're already doing with at least some models).
Ahh but then how will they differentiate their crap from everyone else's crap? Such a conundrum. Seriously though, isn't that why a lot of Android OEMs make these UI layers in the first place? So they can differentiate?
Samsung now deploying old men and teenagers to defend the company. The CEO is hunkered down in his Seoul bunker, having just married his mistress Eva Kim Braun.
. . . come on, someone had to be the first to get the Nazi analogy into this somehow. ;-)
Ahh but then how will they differentiate their crap from everyone else's crap? Such a conundrum. Seriously though, isn't that why a lot of Android OEMs make these UI layers in the first place? So they can differentiate?
Just wait until Samsung adds their garbage into Windows Phone, again violating Apple's patents. They just don't seem to care who says what about whatever they do. I hope they are leveled by Apple in a series of patent wins and business acquisitions.
It's the name Sammy gave the new W8 phone -- and Sammy pointed out the 'Ativ is "Vita" spelled backward'.
...I suppose that vita means something to somebody???
What are you reaching at here? Apple came up with the Sony clone "Jony" phone (that rhymes in such a fun way). Apple is the copycat. Samsung would never try to copy anyone and then "cleverly" try to hide the fact by reversing the name of another product from another product category (that interestingly enough hasn't sold very well) and trying to make bank off of it.
What about Apple defense with the 4g patents acquired from Nortel?
As I recall, Microsoft, RIM, Ericsson, and Sony joined with Apple on those patents purchased for LTE and much, much, more, with Apple covering the bulk of the costs and thus being the controlling party in this licensing deal.
Just wait until Samsung adds their garbage into Windows Phone, again violating Apple's patents. They just don't seem to care who says what about whatever they do. I hope they are leveled by Apple in a series of patent wins and business acquisitions.
Ahh yes, but then that destroys the concept of "choices". We can't have that. Samsung makes too many amazing choices...you've got the...the...Galaxy...and then um...the Galaxy somethingorother...then the Galaxy 3GS...the Galaxy 4S...the New Galaxy which was in development for years before the upcoming iPhone but won't be released till Apple releases what is likely to be called the "New iPhone". If we have to live in a world where for Apple to win, Samsung has to lose, then I want no part of it.
Samesung is desperate now, there's very little proof available that they are actually able to innovate, so now that their game is up, they are resorting to desperate measures.
THEY WILL ALL look the same eventually. They are ALL already converging into "rectangle with rounded edges". How different do you think they will become? Has anyone at IBM's Zurich Lab or Watson Lab came up with a Googolgon shape phone yet?
Cars don't all look the same, cereal boxes don't look the same - despite all being box shaped!, receivers and amps don't all look the same, speakers don't all look the same, computers (when not blatantly copying the MacBook/Air) don't all look the same, remote controls, books, magazines, glasses (drinking and vision-correcting), etc... - yet those all perform similar-to-the-same functions within their respective categories.
Phones will only all look the same if they all copy Apple. You could make a phone that is flat, has no buttons, and there's no reason it has to come out looking indistinguishable from an iPhone unless you're just trying to capitalize on Apple's design work and reputation. There's no other reason. Clearly the jury came to the same conclusion. And Samsung's 'suit man' is no visionary leading the industry to new product types and better designs, he looks more like a clone himself. Shocking.
(And I'm not saying Samsung's mobile division isn't talented. Being really good at copying other people's work is a talent too!)
What I don't understand here is (just like in the Nokia settlement) how Apple should have any responsibility whatsoever.
Apple did not develop their own LTE chipset, nor have they developed any of the associated tech. They buy LTE chips, amplifiers, transmitters, etc. from other companies. If those companies have license to manufacture and sell the parts, why should Apple have to buy a license to assemble them into a product? If there are any royalties to be paid, shouldn't the component manufacturers be paying them (and presumably passing the costs along to their customers.)
Am I missing something fundamental about international patent law here? Or has Apple actually developed some of the LTE tech used in their products?
Ahh yes, but then that destroys the concept of "choices". We can't have that. Samsung makes too many amazing choices...you've got the...the...Galaxy...and then um...the Galaxy somethingorother...then the Galaxy 3GS...the Galaxy 4S...the New Galaxy which was in development for years before the upcoming iPhone but won't be released till Apple releases what is likely to be called the "New iPhone". If we have to live in a world where for Apple to win, Samsung has to lose, then I want no part of it.
Sadly, movie quotes won't prevent this war. It's already started...and I think the first thermonuclear munitions have been successfully lobbed by Apple. Now only one company can make iPhones. It's not only not fair, but it's also very discriminatory. Too bad. I really liked the Galaxy iPhone.
Comments
Should be interesting how Apple fights back via Rockstar/Nortel patents. If Samsung already had a license agreement with Nortel, it remains valid as one of the terms of the sale approved by the Dept. of Justice.
If Samsung did not have a license from Nortel for their LTE patents, using Samsung's own LTE patents as an offensive strategy sounds like a bad move.
From theregister.co.uk
" Nortel contributed significantly to both 4G standards, WiMAX and LTE, with R&D in key areas including OFDMA and MIMO. According to Reuters, Nortel owns seven of the 105 patent families likely to be essential to LTE. By comparison, Nokia holds 57 and Ericsson 14."
Reasonable Assumptions:
Since Apple already settled with Nokia, I assume their agreement licenses LTE and future tech on FRAND terms, and won't be part of any future legal skirmishes.
Since Ericsson is a partner in Rockstar, I assume Apple is licensing their LTE at FRAND rates.
So if there really 105 patent families, Apple has access to 78 of them at "real" FRAND rates.
When Samsung and Moto make their high royalty demands on FRAND patents, it will look out of line in comparison to other (almost 80%) LTE SEP rates.
Sidenote:
In reference to the idea that it only takes one bullet (patent).
If Moto and Samsung don't have Nortel licenses, Apple has 7 families of bullets that are SEP to the LTE standard.
It's not a good idea to pick a fight with another LTE patent owner.
If you take a step back and look at the big picture, look at all the legal messes that have been caused by Google's "free" and "open" Android OS. Did Google not anticipate any of this or did they just not care about legal situations that they were potentially putting their OEMs into?
I'm surprised that nobody has pointed oit that 'Ativ is "Vita" spelled backward'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Yet another example of Samsung trying to abuse the FRAND system. I can't wait to see it bite them HARD.
BTW, just when you think that the Apple haters' arguments couldn't get any more bizarre, there's this:
http://www.macworld.co.uk/apple-business/news/?newsid=3378531&olo=rss
Please tell me that article was a joke. Or satire, like the Onion. Please. Because I don't think my faith in humanity and common sense can drop any lower.
Yes... and Adam has a patent on the joystick!
Originally Posted by TheUnfetteredMind
I almost shot tomato soup out of my nose while reading that! LOL
… ConradJoe?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I'm surprised that nobody has pointed oit that 'Ativ is "Vita" spelled backward'.
What is the significance of that name? I see what they did, but what is the meaning?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
… ConradJoe?
Wasn't ConradJoe just another Teckstud?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheUnfetteredMind
Even easier, just stop putting TouchWiz on top of the standard Android interface! Oh, and stop making phones that physically look like an iPhone (which they're already doing with at least some models).
Ahh but then how will they differentiate their crap from everyone else's crap? Such a conundrum. Seriously though, isn't that why a lot of Android OEMs make these UI layers in the first place? So they can differentiate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I'm surprised that nobody has pointed oit that 'Ativ is "Vita" spelled backward'.
What is the significance of that name? I see what they did, but what is the meaning?
It's the name Sammy gave the new W8 phone -- and Sammy pointed out the 'Ativ is "Vita" spelled backward'.
...I suppose that vita means something to somebody???
Samsung now deploying old men and teenagers to defend the company. The CEO is hunkered down in his Seoul bunker, having just married his mistress Eva Kim Braun.
. . . come on, someone had to be the first to get the Nazi analogy into this somehow. ;-)
Anybody been watching Network? There's a subplot about trolls. Kinda cool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by carmelapple
Ahh but then how will they differentiate their crap from everyone else's crap? Such a conundrum. Seriously though, isn't that why a lot of Android OEMs make these UI layers in the first place? So they can differentiate?
Just wait until Samsung adds their garbage into Windows Phone, again violating Apple's patents. They just don't seem to care who says what about whatever they do. I hope they are leveled by Apple in a series of patent wins and business acquisitions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
It's the name Sammy gave the new W8 phone -- and Sammy pointed out the 'Ativ is "Vita" spelled backward'.
...I suppose that vita means something to somebody???
What are you reaching at here? Apple came up with the Sony clone "Jony" phone (that rhymes in such a fun way). Apple is the copycat. Samsung would never try to copy anyone and then "cleverly" try to hide the fact by reversing the name of another product from another product category (that interestingly enough hasn't sold very well) and trying to make bank off of it.
Or would they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98
What about Apple defense with the 4g patents acquired from Nortel?
As I recall, Microsoft, RIM, Ericsson, and Sony joined with Apple on those patents purchased for LTE and much, much, more, with Apple covering the bulk of the costs and thus being the controlling party in this licensing deal.
http://www.tuaw.com/2011/07/11/courts-approve-sale-of-nortel-patents-to-apple-others/
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Just wait until Samsung adds their garbage into Windows Phone, again violating Apple's patents. They just don't seem to care who says what about whatever they do. I hope they are leveled by Apple in a series of patent wins and business acquisitions.
Ahh yes, but then that destroys the concept of "choices". We can't have that. Samsung makes too many amazing choices...you've got the...the...Galaxy...and then um...the Galaxy somethingorother...then the Galaxy 3GS...the Galaxy 4S...the New Galaxy which was in development for years before the upcoming iPhone but won't be released till Apple releases what is likely to be called the "New iPhone". If we have to live in a world where for Apple to win, Samsung has to lose, then I want no part of it.
I want choices.
Bring it on Samesung, Apple is not afraid of you.
Samesung is desperate now, there's very little proof available that they are actually able to innovate, so now that their game is up, they are resorting to desperate measures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs
THEY WILL ALL look the same eventually. They are ALL already converging into "rectangle with rounded edges". How different do you think they will become? Has anyone at IBM's Zurich Lab or Watson Lab came up with a Googolgon shape phone yet?
Cars don't all look the same, cereal boxes don't look the same - despite all being box shaped!, receivers and amps don't all look the same, speakers don't all look the same, computers (when not blatantly copying the MacBook/Air) don't all look the same, remote controls, books, magazines, glasses (drinking and vision-correcting), etc... - yet those all perform similar-to-the-same functions within their respective categories.
Phones will only all look the same if they all copy Apple. You could make a phone that is flat, has no buttons, and there's no reason it has to come out looking indistinguishable from an iPhone unless you're just trying to capitalize on Apple's design work and reputation. There's no other reason. Clearly the jury came to the same conclusion. And Samsung's 'suit man' is no visionary leading the industry to new product types and better designs, he looks more like a clone himself. Shocking.
(And I'm not saying Samsung's mobile division isn't talented. Being really good at copying other people's work is a talent too!)
What I don't understand here is (just like in the Nokia settlement) how Apple should have any responsibility whatsoever.
Apple did not develop their own LTE chipset, nor have they developed any of the associated tech. They buy LTE chips, amplifiers, transmitters, etc. from other companies. If those companies have license to manufacture and sell the parts, why should Apple have to buy a license to assemble them into a product? If there are any royalties to be paid, shouldn't the component manufacturers be paying them (and presumably passing the costs along to their customers.)
Am I missing something fundamental about international patent law here? Or has Apple actually developed some of the LTE tech used in their products?
Or am I right and this suit is purely frivolous?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
… ConradJoe?
God, is that you? :P
No, I'm not ConradJoe (whomever that is). Although interestingly, my brother's name is Conrad
Quote:
Originally Posted by carmelapple
Ahh yes, but then that destroys the concept of "choices". We can't have that. Samsung makes too many amazing choices...you've got the...the...Galaxy...and then um...the Galaxy somethingorother...then the Galaxy 3GS...the Galaxy 4S...the New Galaxy which was in development for years before the upcoming iPhone but won't be released till Apple releases what is likely to be called the "New iPhone". If we have to live in a world where for Apple to win, Samsung has to lose, then I want no part of it.
I want choices.
''To prevent war the galaxy is on Orion's belt.''
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
''To prevent war the galaxy is on Orion's belt.''
Sadly, movie quotes won't prevent this war. It's already started...and I think the first thermonuclear munitions have been successfully lobbed by Apple. Now only one company can make iPhones. It's not only not fair, but it's also very discriminatory. Too bad. I really liked the Galaxy iPhone.