The problem with your entire commentary is that we have no idea and we don't know what the terms of the Apple/HTC deal are.
Everyone is assuming that the settlement was of monetary nature (i.e. HTC paid off Apple in licensing fees). Why make this assumption?
What if the settlement said that HTC can no longer use Android in future HTC devices and HTC would pay a fee for the past infringement? Remember, Windows 8 Mobile is out now and there is no reason for HTC to stick with Android if an alternative that is free of future Apple litigation is available from Microsoft.
As a matter of fact, based on Apple's statements from the past and based on Jobs's thermonuclear statement, I think the settlement is more of a "Stop using Android and pay us for past infringement" nature. If that is indeed the case then Samsung is in for a huge amount of pain once the judge sees the settlement terms.
HTC is failing as an Android handset maker. With Windows Phone 8, the only real competition is Nokia (The Samsung ATIV is trash), so this might seem as a possible strategy for HTC. However I don't think Apple told HTC to stop using Android, as that might raise a red flag for anti-competitive and monopolistic practice.
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee. And since Samsung's patents are almost exclusively FRAND patents, they have to license them to Apple anyway.
Eric, that's not even close to true. I'm guessing you think that based on the very few infringement claims Samsung has made so far, many of them based on SEP's? That would be akin to assuming Apple's IP is almost exclusively touch or design patents.
I like your middle of the road take, bc it can definitely come down either way.
Couple of things to note:
All Apple vs HTC vs Apple federal court cases were either stayed or in limbo.
Apple won some ITC (different rules than federal courts) against HTC in 2011. Both had other pending ITC cases against each other but the withdrew and settled.
Samsung decided not to take a admittedly pricey license to Apple IP, and dragged the situation through lengthy federal court (2 years) and caused public awareness.
Apple excels at marketing and business strategy, Samsung is reactive, for this reason I wonder if Apple intentionally set a trap?
I think Jobs thermonuclear quote was more aimed at Samsung than Android, although he disliked both. It's like Dell and Asus, where Asus was a supplier that became a competitor.
The whole Apple vs Samsung UK court debacle was clearly purposeful but journalists are to stupid to know that they got PLAYED.. Apple wanted to get the the story rewritten many times, regardless of bad press. Apple want everyone to know that Samsung obviously copied Apple since the iPad came out to market first and Apple was playing to the general UK publics "Asian copying" syndrome.
The point is that everyone knows that Samsung copies Sony, Apple, etc.... Only a diehard Android fan can deny that.
Is it legal, and how much is it legal is another question..
Good read. And I so agree with "The point is that everyone knows that Samsung copies Sony, Apple, etc.... Only a diehard Android fan can deny that." And Apple dare to challenge their business model of copying successful products.. Ask Sony & others what happened to them when they did not challenge Samsung.
With Samsung being on record "we won't negotiate a license", what relevance would a license agreement with another company be?
Samsung may not "negotiate" a license, but they probably would be amenable to a court forcing a license upon Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
I doubt Apple "sold the farm" in their deal with HTC so I don't think Samsung is going to get anything useful from seeing the agreement
It doesn't appear that HTC removed any core features from the Droid DNA so my guess is that it is comprehensive. That said, we also don't know what IP HTC licensed to Apple. Perhaps there were patented design elements or software techniques in Sense that Apple now has access to and plans to use in future products. If that's the case, then a court may not necessarily see many parallels if most of what Samsung has to license are FRAND patents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
5 days ago this is exactly what I said would happen, tho I must admit it happened faster that I thought it would.
But the details will be made available to some court at some injunction hearing, offered as proof that Apple can be made whole with money rather than a sales ban on some competitors product. It will also probably be redacted so that the public doesn't know the licensing details."
I'm guess Apple was quite aware of that possibility when they struck the HTC deal. My guess is that they are aware that they are highly unlikely to win a permanent injunction on new products and won't significantly dent Samsung's market share or profits through litigation alone. They may welcome a $6-8 per phone cross licensing agreement. With HTC, it's peanuts, but with Samsung it would be about $1.0-$1.5 billion per year. That's like winning a lawsuit every year.
What if the settlement said that HTC can no longer use Android in future HTC devices and HTC would pay a fee for the past infringement? Remember, Windows 8 Mobile is out now and there is no reason for HTC to stick with Android if an alternative that is free of future Apple litigation is available from Microsoft.
Well a few days after signing the agreement with Apple, HTC announced a new flagship Droid DNA with much fanfare at a joint presentation with Verizon, so I doubt the agreement said "stop using Android." HTC's lawyers were better than Samsung's at throwing wrenches into Apple's lawsuit plans. While Apple likely would have ultimately prevailed, it would have taken a lot longer before the cases even got to trial. By settling, Apple propped up another competitor of Samsung (the Droid DNA looks to be targeted squarely at the Galaxy SIII and Galaxy Note crowds rather than iPhone 5 fans), and got some money to boot.
I smell a clever trap laid by Apple for Samsung. In fact, I think that immediately after the HTC settlement was announced, Apple lawyers were fervently hoping that Samsung would make exactly this type of request.
Here is what I think Apple's strategy is:
1) Strike a settlement deal with HTC
2) Construct the terms of the settlement in a way that would work OK for HTC but would be harmful to Samsung
3) Seal the settlement and hope that the secrecy of the settlement would entice Samsung to request the court to unseal it.
4) The court accepts Samsung's request and compels Apple to unseal the settlement terms.
5) After the settlement terms are revealed, the Samsung lawyers faint at the implications of the terms for Samsung.
6) The judge orders Apple to give the exact or similar terms to Samsung in lieu of an injunction and orders Samsung to comply with said terms.
7) Apple wins!
The above strategy sounds plausible precisely because Apple reached the settlement with HTC a month BEFORE the Dec. 6th hearing, thus giving the Samsung lawyers time to file the motion to compel which is precisely what Apple wanted.
Otherwise, if the terms would be actually beneficial to Samsung, Apple would have delayed the settlement until well after the Dec. 6th hearing!! The timing of the settlement was fully in Apple's control.
I smell a clever trap laid by Apple for Samsung. In fact, I think that immediately after the HTC settlement was announced, Apple lawyers were fervently hoping that Samsung would make exactly this type of request.
Here is what I think Apple's strategy is:
1) Strike a settlement deal with HTC
2) Construct the terms of the settlement in a way that would work OK for HTC but would be harmful to Samsung
3) Seal the settlement and hope that the secrecy of the settlement would entice Samsung to request the court to unseal it.
4) The court accepts Samsung's request and compels Apple to unseal the settlement terms.
5) After the settlement terms are revealed, the Samsung lawyers faint at the implications of the terms for Samsung.
6) The judge orders Apple to give the exact or similar terms to Samsung in lieu of an injunction and orders Samsung to comply with said terms.
7) Apple wins!
The above strategy sounds plausible precisely because Apple reached the settlement with HTC a month BEFORE the Dec. 6th hearing, thus giving the Samsung lawyers time to file the motion to compel which is precisely what Apple wanted.
Otherwise, if the terms would be actually beneficial to Samsung, Apple would have delayed the settlement until well after the Dec. 6th hearing!! The timing of the settlement was fully in Apple's control.
You may be on to something. Item 2 may be the key. For example, Apple might have agreed to pay $0.10 per device for HTC's LTE patents, but $2-4 per device for some Sense-related software patents, and in exchange licensed back its iOS-related software patents for $10 per device getting us to the net $6-8 per phone that's been bandied about. Most of what Samsung has against Apple are 3G FRAND or LTE-related patents that it might offer the same rate for, meaning the "same terms" would be more costly to Samsung than to HTC.
The problem with your entire commentary is that we have no idea and we don't know what the terms of the Apple/HTC deal are.
Everyone is assuming that the settlement was of monetary nature (i.e. HTC paid off Apple in licensing fees). Why make this assumption?
What if the settlement said that HTC can no longer use Android in future HTC devices and HTC would pay a fee for the past infringement? Remember, Windows 8 Mobile is out now and there is no reason for HTC to stick with Android if an alternative that is free of future Apple litigation is available from Microsoft.
As a matter of fact, based on Apple's statements from the past and based on Jobs's thermonuclear statement, I think the settlement is more of a "Stop using Android and pay us for past infringement" nature. If that is indeed the case then Samsung is in for a huge amount of pain once the judge sees the settlement terms.
karvel, you are right. I have not actually read, nor have I even seen the agreement. It might not even exist. I have to rely on what I read and based on the source make my own judgement as to whether it may or may not be true.
The $8 estimate I cited was based on analysts estimates at Sterne Agee and as reported by the Wall Street Journal (their estimate was between $6-8 so I gave Apple the benefit and used the higher $8 valuation). Your speculation is that the deal might involve HTC agreeing to not make any more Android devices. I'd certainly give that somewhat higher probability than, say, hell freezing over- but given a choice between Sterne Agee and the Wall Street Journal, or what 'kharvel on Appleinsider said'- Im going to take a chance and run with the former.
First off how can you make the ridiculous claim that "the exact same patents are covered in the HTC deal"? You don't know that and are making facts up to support an argument.
Second, Samsung was offered a deal and didn't take it. Once you go to court and lose you can't go back and say "we changed our mind and would now like to make a deal." Where's the deterrent to copying if you can lose a lawsuit and then go back and get the same deal you were offered previously?
Thirdly, Microsoft also made a deal. Where's Samsung's application to get the details of that license?
Fourthly, there's a cross licensing deal in place with HTC. That means the rumored $6-8 per device HTC "might" be paying Apple can't be applied directly to Samsung unless Samsung has patents Apple needs. And since Samsung's patents are almost exclusively FRAND patents, they have to license them to Apple anyway.
Lastly, fredaroony, why the alt account with the obvious name?
Eric. The agreement is widely being reported as 'comprehensive' and also that HTC is paying Apple. Why is it ridiculous to speculate that HTC would insist on the patents that Apple just sued the pants off Samsung for would be included in any comprehensive deal? Secondly, I'm not making up facts (actually, that is not even possible)- I am openly speculating based on what little information is available. What I do think would be ridiculous would be for HTC to pay Apple for a comprehensive patent settlement and exclude the major ones. Do you disagree?
Secondly I'm not really making an argument for either side. Is it Taboo on this site to even hint that Samsung might have something to gain? The first part of my speculation is what Apple stands to gain. I admire your passion for Apple and its pretty clear you would not have a problem with that outcome. The second part is what I think Samsung is after. If you don't believe Samsung has any chance of gaining anything what would your guess be as to why Samsung wants the terms of the HTC deal opened? They want the terms revealed because they are dumb and want to be forced into a similar deal with Apple? That's your argument?
Apple will be a huge winner if they can get similar terms imposed on Samsung. I think that is indeed Apples strategy and it is not going to be a big surprise when they file for similar terms against Samsung. It is certainly not going to surprise Samsung. I don't see there being a real 'trap' layed by Apple because the HTC deal will have the same legal weight when the terms are revealed, whether forced by Samsung or voluntarily revealed by Apple when they file suit against Samsung. That latter would give Apple the initiative in determining the timing of when they want to sue Samsung. They may very well go after a few of the other smaller fish first before going after Samsung. Samsung's interest is in getting the terms revealed before Apple is ready to sue them because the agreement is pertinent to their existing ongoing litigation with Apple.
As to the fredaroony bit I'll just chuckle to myself and give you a pass on that one.
I'm 100% certain that Apple will settle with Samsung if they agree to pay Apple $40 for every single phone sold since 2008.
I am too, but that wouldn't necessarily make it a reasonable outcome. I also doubt their investors would be happy with the decision. I'm sure you realize this, but that would mean the inclusion of a very wide range of handsets including those that don't even qualify as feature phones. That would include Bada based hardware. It would include a lot of things.
Eric, that's not even close to true. I'm guessing you think that based on the very few infringement claims Samsung has made so far, many of them based on SEP's? That would be akin to assuming Apple's IP is almost exclusively touch or design patents.
It's absolutely true. Samsung has a large patent pool, but their problem is they primarily fall into two categories: SEP's and component manufacturing. Samsung doesn't have any IP that is of any use to Apple. Samsung's extensive patents regarding semiconductor and LCD manufacturing are useless as anyone who buys those components already gets to use them without licensing - the licensing is built into the component cost.
Are you implying Samsung has numerous patents that could be used against Apple and they just decided not to use them? What could they possibly be saving them for? They risked a billion dollar lawsuit because the "smoking gun patents" that would have forced Apple's hand are being saved for a rainy day? Seriously, that's your argument?
The main reason Samsung has been using SEP's is because they haven't got anything else of value. Their gas tank is empty. No wait, they have one. They sued Apple over the emoticon patent.
Maybe not literally, but in spirit the same. A subtle troll. But the use of characters and similarity are uncanny.
Really? Ol' fred didn't seem to have that level of… well, when we banned him, he made a new account called "fredaroony2". All the same information and everything.
All Apple has to do, is sign up all the minnows to licensing agreements, isolation samscum giving Apple leverage in any court cases, displaying how they've been able to come to terms with all the payers bar one. If for one second samscum believes it can use a third party's agreement to argue its case, they're in cookoo land. But then again, they will do ANYTHING to save face. It's the arrogance and stupidity of the Korean mafia like company that keeps this thing going. You only have to read this to understand this beast. http://www.kernelmag.com/features/report/3028/samsung-power-corruption-and-lies/
I wonder when Apple will fire back and ask Samsung to provide ALL their contracts regarding standards essential patents, in order to establish a "fair and reasonable" base.
I wonder when Apple will fire back and ask Samsung to provide ALL their contracts regarding standards essential patents, in order to establish a "fair and reasonable" base.
Quid pro quo!
Is there any question that Samsung will either voluntarily or otherwise submit SEP contracts with other vendors to the court if they haven't already in discovery? It goes without saying IMHO. Just look to the Moto/Apple or Moto/MS lawsuits if you have any question about it. Lots of contracts submitted, and every involved company from RIM to IBM to Qualcomm to Nokia, and yes even Apple and Microsoft, want the terms of those contracts kept under wraps.
EDIT: Hill60, this quote from Mr. Mueller might get a raised eyebrow from you:
"In a subsequent post I'll talk about Apple's patent strategy in light of its huge challenges to preserve shareholder value after already having strategically lost such key markets as China and Germany to Android. As AFP wrote today, "Google's Android is eating Apple's lunch", and my opinion is that if Apple can't fend off Android, it won't even be a top five IT company (by volume as well as value) in five years' time."
Is your faith in him as an unbiased source wavering just a bit? That's at least the third unfavorable Apple comment at FOSSPatents in the past two weeks since MS Windows 8 starting shipping. Connection?
^ More useless redirects from you. Where is it mentioned that Apple licensed SEP's to HTC? hill60 asked about "ALL their contracts" and you changed it up to SEP.
That Forbes article is likewise useless drivel. No facts and a lot of assumptions. Click bait and nothing more.
AFP says Apple is eating Apple's lunch? Do BMW or Mercedes care that Toyota or Ford sell more vehicles? No, since they're competing in different markets. I tell you who cares - developers. And developers are still targeting iOS over Android by more than 2:1. Developers have no interest in writing for gazillions of low-end phones that don't even have enough power to run a decent modern App. Apple will eventually level off and remain a very valuable company selling large volumes of its products year-after-year.
Apple has already gone through all this with Samsung previously over Samsung's use of SEP's against them and Apple claiming their license with Qualcomm proved they had a valid agreement in place. In one case Samsung filed court papers to force Apple to hand over their Qualcomm agreements. Do you actually think after all the legal wrangling and court filings over those cases that Apple didn't know this was all coming?
Samsung is going to be in for a very nasty surprise, I'm sure.
I wonder when Apple will fire back and ask Samsung to provide ALL their contracts regarding standards essential patents, in order to establish a "fair and reasonable" base.
Quid pro quo!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
^ More useless redirects from you. Where is it mentioned that Apple licensed SEP's to HTC? hill60 asked about "ALL their contracts" and you changed it up to SEP.
Hill60 specified SEP's. I have no inkling how you missed it.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by kharvel
The problem with your entire commentary is that we have no idea and we don't know what the terms of the Apple/HTC deal are.
Everyone is assuming that the settlement was of monetary nature (i.e. HTC paid off Apple in licensing fees). Why make this assumption?
What if the settlement said that HTC can no longer use Android in future HTC devices and HTC would pay a fee for the past infringement? Remember, Windows 8 Mobile is out now and there is no reason for HTC to stick with Android if an alternative that is free of future Apple litigation is available from Microsoft.
As a matter of fact, based on Apple's statements from the past and based on Jobs's thermonuclear statement, I think the settlement is more of a "Stop using Android and pay us for past infringement" nature. If that is indeed the case then Samsung is in for a huge amount of pain once the judge sees the settlement terms.
HTC is failing as an Android handset maker. With Windows Phone 8, the only real competition is Nokia (The Samsung ATIV is trash), so this might seem as a possible strategy for HTC. However I don't think Apple told HTC to stop using Android, as that might raise a red flag for anti-competitive and monopolistic practice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
Eric, that's not even close to true. I'm guessing you think that based on the very few infringement claims Samsung has made so far, many of them based on SEP's? That would be akin to assuming Apple's IP is almost exclusively touch or design patents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetDon
With Samsung being on record "we won't negotiate a license", what relevance would a license agreement with another company be?
Samsung may not "negotiate" a license, but they probably would be amenable to a court forcing a license upon Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
I doubt Apple "sold the farm" in their deal with HTC so I don't think Samsung is going to get anything useful from seeing the agreement
It doesn't appear that HTC removed any core features from the Droid DNA so my guess is that it is comprehensive. That said, we also don't know what IP HTC licensed to Apple. Perhaps there were patented design elements or software techniques in Sense that Apple now has access to and plans to use in future products. If that's the case, then a court may not necessarily see many parallels if most of what Samsung has to license are FRAND patents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
5 days ago this is exactly what I said would happen, tho I must admit it happened faster that I thought it would.
But the details will be made available to some court at some injunction hearing, offered as proof that Apple can be made whole with money rather than a sales ban on some competitors product. It will also probably be redacted so that the public
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/154218/apple-and-htc-settle-all-patent-litigation-agree-to-10-year-licensing-deal#post_2230773
I'm guess Apple was quite aware of that possibility when they struck the HTC deal. My guess is that they are aware that they are highly unlikely to win a permanent injunction on new products and won't significantly dent Samsung's market share or profits through litigation alone. They may welcome a $6-8 per phone cross licensing agreement. With HTC, it's peanuts, but with Samsung it would be about $1.0-$1.5 billion per year. That's like winning a lawsuit every year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kharvel
What if the settlement said that HTC can no longer use Android in future HTC devices and HTC would pay a fee for the past infringement? Remember, Windows 8 Mobile is out now and there is no reason for HTC to stick with Android if an alternative that is free of future Apple litigation is available from Microsoft.
Well a few days after signing the agreement with Apple, HTC announced a new flagship Droid DNA with much fanfare at a joint presentation with Verizon, so I doubt the agreement said "stop using Android." HTC's lawyers were better than Samsung's at throwing wrenches into Apple's lawsuit plans. While Apple likely would have ultimately prevailed, it would have taken a lot longer before the cases even got to trial. By settling, Apple propped up another competitor of Samsung (the Droid DNA looks to be targeted squarely at the Galaxy SIII and Galaxy Note crowds rather than iPhone 5 fans), and got some money to boot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kharvel
I smell a clever trap laid by Apple for Samsung. In fact, I think that immediately after the HTC settlement was announced, Apple lawyers were fervently hoping that Samsung would make exactly this type of request.
Here is what I think Apple's strategy is:
1) Strike a settlement deal with HTC
2) Construct the terms of the settlement in a way that would work OK for HTC but would be harmful to Samsung
3) Seal the settlement and hope that the secrecy of the settlement would entice Samsung to request the court to unseal it.
4) The court accepts Samsung's request and compels Apple to unseal the settlement terms.
5) After the settlement terms are revealed, the Samsung lawyers faint at the implications of the terms for Samsung.
6) The judge orders Apple to give the exact or similar terms to Samsung in lieu of an injunction and orders Samsung to comply with said terms.
7) Apple wins!
The above strategy sounds plausible precisely because Apple reached the settlement with HTC a month BEFORE the Dec. 6th hearing, thus giving the Samsung lawyers time to file the motion to compel which is precisely what Apple wanted.
Otherwise, if the terms would be actually beneficial to Samsung, Apple would have delayed the settlement until well after the Dec. 6th hearing!! The timing of the settlement was fully in Apple's control.
another tin-foil hat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kharvel
I smell a clever trap laid by Apple for Samsung. In fact, I think that immediately after the HTC settlement was announced, Apple lawyers were fervently hoping that Samsung would make exactly this type of request.
Here is what I think Apple's strategy is:
1) Strike a settlement deal with HTC
2) Construct the terms of the settlement in a way that would work OK for HTC but would be harmful to Samsung
3) Seal the settlement and hope that the secrecy of the settlement would entice Samsung to request the court to unseal it.
4) The court accepts Samsung's request and compels Apple to unseal the settlement terms.
5) After the settlement terms are revealed, the Samsung lawyers faint at the implications of the terms for Samsung.
6) The judge orders Apple to give the exact or similar terms to Samsung in lieu of an injunction and orders Samsung to comply with said terms.
7) Apple wins!
The above strategy sounds plausible precisely because Apple reached the settlement with HTC a month BEFORE the Dec. 6th hearing, thus giving the Samsung lawyers time to file the motion to compel which is precisely what Apple wanted.
Otherwise, if the terms would be actually beneficial to Samsung, Apple would have delayed the settlement until well after the Dec. 6th hearing!! The timing of the settlement was fully in Apple's control.
You may be on to something. Item 2 may be the key. For example, Apple might have agreed to pay $0.10 per device for HTC's LTE patents, but $2-4 per device for some Sense-related software patents, and in exchange licensed back its iOS-related software patents for $10 per device getting us to the net $6-8 per phone that's been bandied about. Most of what Samsung has against Apple are 3G FRAND or LTE-related patents that it might offer the same rate for, meaning the "same terms" would be more costly to Samsung than to HTC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kharvel
The problem with your entire commentary is that we have no idea and we don't know what the terms of the Apple/HTC deal are.
Everyone is assuming that the settlement was of monetary nature (i.e. HTC paid off Apple in licensing fees). Why make this assumption?
What if the settlement said that HTC can no longer use Android in future HTC devices and HTC would pay a fee for the past infringement? Remember, Windows 8 Mobile is out now and there is no reason for HTC to stick with Android if an alternative that is free of future Apple litigation is available from Microsoft.
As a matter of fact, based on Apple's statements from the past and based on Jobs's thermonuclear statement, I think the settlement is more of a "Stop using Android and pay us for past infringement" nature. If that is indeed the case then Samsung is in for a huge amount of pain once the judge sees the settlement terms.
karvel, you are right. I have not actually read, nor have I even seen the agreement. It might not even exist. I have to rely on what I read and based on the source make my own judgement as to whether it may or may not be true.
The $8 estimate I cited was based on analysts estimates at Sterne Agee and as reported by the Wall Street Journal (their estimate was between $6-8 so I gave Apple the benefit and used the higher $8 valuation). Your speculation is that the deal might involve HTC agreeing to not make any more Android devices. I'd certainly give that somewhat higher probability than, say, hell freezing over- but given a choice between Sterne Agee and the Wall Street Journal, or what 'kharvel on Appleinsider said'- Im going to take a chance and run with the former.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
Bull.
First off how can you make the ridiculous claim that "the exact same patents are covered in the HTC deal"? You don't know that and are making facts up to support an argument.
Second, Samsung was offered a deal and didn't take it. Once you go to court and lose you can't go back and say "we changed our mind and would now like to make a deal." Where's the deterrent to copying if you can lose a lawsuit and then go back and get the same deal you were offered previously?
Thirdly, Microsoft also made a deal. Where's Samsung's application to get the details of that license?
Fourthly, there's a cross licensing deal in place with HTC. That means the rumored $6-8 per device HTC "might" be paying Apple can't be applied directly to Samsung unless Samsung has patents Apple needs. And since Samsung's patents are almost exclusively FRAND patents, they have to license them to Apple anyway.
Lastly, fredaroony, why the alt account with the obvious name?
Eric. The agreement is widely being reported as 'comprehensive' and also that HTC is paying Apple. Why is it ridiculous to speculate that HTC would insist on the patents that Apple just sued the pants off Samsung for would be included in any comprehensive deal? Secondly, I'm not making up facts (actually, that is not even possible)- I am openly speculating based on what little information is available. What I do think would be ridiculous would be for HTC to pay Apple for a comprehensive patent settlement and exclude the major ones. Do you disagree?
Secondly I'm not really making an argument for either side. Is it Taboo on this site to even hint that Samsung might have something to gain? The first part of my speculation is what Apple stands to gain. I admire your passion for Apple and its pretty clear you would not have a problem with that outcome. The second part is what I think Samsung is after. If you don't believe Samsung has any chance of gaining anything what would your guess be as to why Samsung wants the terms of the HTC deal opened? They want the terms revealed because they are dumb and want to be forced into a similar deal with Apple? That's your argument?
Apple will be a huge winner if they can get similar terms imposed on Samsung. I think that is indeed Apples strategy and it is not going to be a big surprise when they file for similar terms against Samsung. It is certainly not going to surprise Samsung. I don't see there being a real 'trap' layed by Apple because the HTC deal will have the same legal weight when the terms are revealed, whether forced by Samsung or voluntarily revealed by Apple when they file suit against Samsung. That latter would give Apple the initiative in determining the timing of when they want to sue Samsung. They may very well go after a few of the other smaller fish first before going after Samsung. Samsung's interest is in getting the terms revealed before Apple is ready to sue them because the agreement is pertinent to their existing ongoing litigation with Apple.
As to the fredaroony bit I'll just chuckle to myself and give you a pass on that one.
I'm 100% certain that Apple will settle with Samsung if they agree to pay Apple $40 for every single phone sold since 2008.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I'm 100% certain that Apple will settle with Samsung if they agree to pay Apple $40 for every single phone sold since 2008.
I am too, but that wouldn't necessarily make it a reasonable outcome. I also doubt their investors would be happy with the decision. I'm sure you realize this, but that would mean the inclusion of a very wide range of handsets including those that don't even qualify as feature phones. That would include Bada based hardware. It would include a lot of things.
Are you implying Samsung has numerous patents that could be used against Apple and they just decided not to use them? What could they possibly be saving them for? They risked a billion dollar lawsuit because the "smoking gun patents" that would have forced Apple's hand are being saved for a rainy day? Seriously, that's your argument?
The main reason Samsung has been using SEP's is because they haven't got anything else of value. Their gas tank is empty. No wait, they have one. They sued Apple over the emoticon patent.
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
Maybe not literally, but in spirit the same. A subtle troll. But the use of characters and similarity are uncanny.
Really? Ol' fred didn't seem to have that level of… well, when we banned him, he made a new account called "fredaroony2". All the same information and everything.
Viewed from another angle:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/11/17/links-17-nov-does-apples-htc-patents-settlement-doom-the-samsung-case/
Quid pro quo!
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
I wonder when Apple will fire back and ask Samsung to provide ALL their contracts regarding standards essential patents, in order to establish a "fair and reasonable" base.
Quid pro quo!
Is there any question that Samsung will either voluntarily or otherwise submit SEP contracts with other vendors to the court if they haven't already in discovery? It goes without saying IMHO. Just look to the Moto/Apple or Moto/MS lawsuits if you have any question about it. Lots of contracts submitted, and every involved company from RIM to IBM to Qualcomm to Nokia, and yes even Apple and Microsoft, want the terms of those contracts kept under wraps.
EDIT: Hill60, this quote from Mr. Mueller might get a raised eyebrow from you:
"In a subsequent post I'll talk about Apple's patent strategy in light of its huge challenges to preserve shareholder value after already having strategically lost such key markets as China and Germany to Android. As AFP wrote today, "Google's Android is eating Apple's lunch", and my opinion is that if Apple can't fend off Android, it won't even be a top five IT company (by volume as well as value) in five years' time."
Is your faith in him as an unbiased source wavering just a bit? That's at least the third unfavorable Apple comment at FOSSPatents in the past two weeks since MS Windows 8 starting shipping. Connection?
^ More useless redirects from you. Where is it mentioned that Apple licensed SEP's to HTC? hill60 asked about "ALL their contracts" and you changed it up to SEP.
That Forbes article is likewise useless drivel. No facts and a lot of assumptions. Click bait and nothing more.
AFP says Apple is eating Apple's lunch? Do BMW or Mercedes care that Toyota or Ford sell more vehicles? No, since they're competing in different markets. I tell you who cares - developers. And developers are still targeting iOS over Android by more than 2:1. Developers have no interest in writing for gazillions of low-end phones that don't even have enough power to run a decent modern App. Apple will eventually level off and remain a very valuable company selling large volumes of its products year-after-year.
Apple has already gone through all this with Samsung previously over Samsung's use of SEP's against them and Apple claiming their license with Qualcomm proved they had a valid agreement in place. In one case Samsung filed court papers to force Apple to hand over their Qualcomm agreements. Do you actually think after all the legal wrangling and court filings over those cases that Apple didn't know this was all coming?
Samsung is going to be in for a very nasty surprise, I'm sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
I wonder when Apple will fire back and ask Samsung to provide ALL their contracts regarding standards essential patents, in order to establish a "fair and reasonable" base.
Quid pro quo!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
^ More useless redirects from you. Where is it mentioned that Apple licensed SEP's to HTC? hill60 asked about "ALL their contracts" and you changed it up to SEP.
Hill60 specified SEP's. I have no inkling how you missed it.