Samsung loses 3G wireless patent case against Apple's iPhone in Japan [u]

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
A Japanese court on Thursday handed down a favorable ruling for Apple in a lawsuit filed by Samsung, which alleged the Cupertino company misused certain 3G wireless patents in versions of the iPhone.

Update: According to a follow-up report from The Times of India, the case in question deals with Samsung's assertion of data transmission patents against a number of iPhone models. This article has been updated to reflect the new information.

iPhone


Samsung first filed suit against Apple in April of 2011, seeking an injunction against Apple's handset over unauthorized use of certain data transmission patents. Thursday's ruling found that the Korean company does not have the right to assert the 3G technologies in court.

"We are disappointed by today's court decision," Samsung said in a prepared statement first reported by Reuters. "Following a thorough review of the ruling, we will take the measures necessary to protect our intellectual property rights."

Most recently, Samsung lodged a request with a California court to subpoena documents from the Apple v. Samsung patent trial to be used toward discovery in similar litigation being heard in Japan. At the time, Apple opposed the motion, arguing that action was an attempt at sidestepping normal Japanese court procedures. The U.S. court agreed and denied the subpoena request.

Samsung did find success in Japan last August when the Tokyo District Court ruled against an Apple patent claim regarding infringement of a property relating to the synchronization of music and video data with off-site servers. That case is currently under appeal with the Intellectual Property High Court in Tokyo.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 17
    Wonderful. There is actually a shred of honesty and proper judgement left in this world.

    But lol at Samsung pretending to try to protect their ip. When reality is that "their ip" is actually Apple's.

    It's called stealing, Samsung. And you should stop. Now.
  • Reply 2 of 17
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,542member
    Keep hammering on Samsung Apple. Samsung needs to have a reality check hammered into its skull that innovating means coming up with your own stuff, instead of using Apple as their own R&D department.

  • Reply 3 of 17
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,788member
    Samsung: "We are disappointed by today's court decision."

    Apple: "Get used to it."
  • Reply 4 of 17


    I cannot believe how Samsung shamelessly copied Apple's PassBook application.

  • Reply 5 of 17
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member


    In further news one of the UK Judges who denied Apple's appeal and forced them to publicly make statements about Samsung not infringing on their website, is now working for...


     


    ...Samsung.


     


     



     


    Source


     


    That idiot tosser ex-judge has revealed his true colours, of course everything was "above board" and there was no "undue influence" on that limey sleaze bag.

  • Reply 6 of 17
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,447member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    In further news one of the UK Judges who denied Apple's appeal and forced them to publicly make statements about Samsung not infringing on their website, is now working for...


     


    ...Samsung.


     


     



     


    Source


     


    That idiot tosser ex-judge has revealed his true colours, of course everything was "above board" and there was no "undue influence" on that limey sleaze bag.



    Yup, Sir Jacob who had come from retirement to hear the Apple Samsung case. According to FOSSPatents he really is considered an expert in patents and it's perfectly above board for the UK, but like you I don't particularly care for the smell of it. Mueller didn't care for it either but no surprise there.

  • Reply 7 of 17

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    In further news one of the UK Judges who denied Apple's appeal and forced them to publicly make statements about Samsung not infringing on their website, is now working for...


     


    ...Samsung.


     


     



     


    Source


     


    That idiot tosser ex-judge has revealed his true colours, of course everything was "above board" and there was no "undue influence" on that limey sleaze bag.



     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Yup, Sir Jacob who had come from retirement to hear the Apple Samsung case. According to FOSSPatents he really is considered an expert in patents and it's perfectly above board for the UK, but like you I don't particularly care for the smell of it. Mueller didn't care for it either but no surprise there.




     


    "You cannot hope to bribe or twist (thank God!) the British jurist. But, seeing what the man will do unbribed, there's no occasion to!"


     


    Humbert Wolfe, (1885 - 1940) with a little revision (the original read "British journalist")




     


     




     


     




     


     




     


     




     


     




     


     




     


     




     


     


  • Reply 8 of 17
    Data transmission over 3G? This sounds frivolous to sue over a wireless standard
  • Reply 9 of 17
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,165member
    hill60 wrote: »
    In further news one of the UK Judges who denied Apple's appeal and forced them to publicly make statements about Samsung not infringing on their website, is now working for...

    ...Samsung.


    <img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="21276" data-type="61" height="307" src="http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/21276/width/350/height/700/flags/LL" style="; width: 350px; height: 307px;" width="350">


    Source

    That idiot tosser ex-judge has revealed his true colours, of course everything was "above board" and there was no "undue influence" on that limey sleaze bag.

    This should be investigated. If he had the slightest inkling about this then future position at the time there should be criminal charges brought.
  • Reply 10 of 17

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post



    But lol at Samsung pretending to try to protect their ip. When reality is that "their ip" is actually Apple's.


     


    Samsung does have some IP that is theirs and yes that includes 3G related patents. 


     


    Just be because they 'stole' some design items doesn't mean the same is true for everything 

  • Reply 11 of 17


    I guess Samsung did not open the innovative and original Samsung Wallet wide enough for these judges.

  • Reply 12 of 17
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,165member
    jollypaul wrote: »
    I guess Samsung did not open the innovative and original Samsung Wallet wide enough for these judges.

    ROFL
  • Reply 13 of 17
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    charlituna wrote: »
    Samsung does have some IP that is theirs and yes that includes 3G related patents. 

    Just be because they 'stole' some design items doesn't mean the same is true for everything 

    True, but their 3G patents are FRAND. They can't arbitrarily refuse to license them and try to get an injunction against products because of them.
  • Reply 14 of 17
    Apple wins: "we are disappointed, this stifles innovation"

    Samesung loses: "we will take measures to protect our intellectual property rights"

    What a bunch of idiots
  • Reply 15 of 17
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,679member
    Sammy should innovate rather than litigate. What? That can be only used against Apple?
  • Reply 16 of 17
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    This should be investigated. If he had the slightest inkling about this then future position at the time there should be criminal charges brought.


     


    Yep, although it's seems unlikely that someone of his stature would get into a situation like that.  More likely, he was approached later on.


     


    Even in the US, retired judges are usually allowed to act as a paid expert witness in other cases. 


     


    After all, he's not being a witness in a Samsung v. Apple case.  Now THAT would be bad.


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    True, but their 3G patents are FRAND. They can't arbitrarily refuse to license them and try to get an injunction against products because of them.


     


    Right, but if someone refuses to license them, then an injunction is a possible tool.


     


    The valuable thing about a FRAND patent is that it has usually already been found valid, and others have licensed it.  So the only things a potential licensee can do is either try to prove that they don't use it, or negotiate a rate.

  • Reply 17 of 17
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,165member
    kdarling wrote: »
    Yep, although it's seems unlikely that someone of his stature would get into a situation like that.  More likely, he was approached later on.

    Even in the US, retired judges are usually allowed to act as a paid expert witness in other cases. 
     
    After all, he's not being a witness in a Samsung v. Apple case.  Now THAT would be bad.


    Right, but if someone refuses to license them, then an injunction is a possible tool.

    The valuable thing about a FRAND patent is that it has usually already been found valid, and others have licensed it.  So the only things a potential licensee can do is either try to prove that they don't use it, or negotiate a rate.

    Your most likely right, he was probably approached precisely because they realized how much he preferred Scamsung ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.