The trolls sweep in quickly! Samsung is not banned after willingly, knowingly, purposefully copying nearly every single aspect of the iPhone and iPad and doesn't get immediately banned, and Apple is accused of using standard essential patents and they will get banned? Not a chance in hell. Apple actually has the right to use standard essential patents, its merely a case of licensing fees. Where did you go to law school?
And you sweep right in to feed that a$$hat. Obvoiusly, he was doing that to get a rise out of someone.
I'll do you one better. I'll never purchase or use another Samsung product in my life. Nor will my children. Nor theirs. Nor theirs. Hopefully by the time I'm bouncing my great grandchildren on my knee, Samsung will have been bankrupted and its executives dragged into the street.
With absolutely no punishment for them, of course.
How about all the Samsung products within Apple devices? This will amount to nothing considering there's a 60 review period plus appeals.
This is total bull! Apple is using Qualcomm product which provides the wireless technology. So the onus is on them. And what I understand that are clear with that. This is no difference than what they are doing in e-book situation. In past two weeks the Government is getting after Apple from every direction and they haven't done anything illegal. They are destroying a gem of the company that this country has!
Note that the ITC also deemed a cease and desist order appropriate too. That means any new stock already in the US could not be sold. Practically of course the economic harm to Apple will be nil. Two years ago when it was filed would have been different.
The biggest news at the end of the day was the ITC affirming the availability of injunctions for SEP infringement. That really surprised me. Coming on the heel of patent reform comments made by the White House today I think this will garner one of the rare Presidential vetos.
The whole thing begs some questions: 1. If it's all cut and clear, how come the previous judge decision did not find any infringement? 2. Is an invitation for Morola to reopen their case? 3. Is it time to fire some Apple lawyers? Losing several high profile cases in Europe and now this? 4. And where the heck is 1.5 bln dollars?
Note that the ITC also deemed a cease and desist order appropriate too. That means any new stock already in the US could not be sold. Practically of course the economic harm to Apple will be nil. Two years ago when it was filed would have been different.
The biggest news at the end of the day was the ITC affirming the availability of injunctions for SEP infringement. That really surprised me. Coming on the heel of patent reform comments made by the White House today I think this will garner one of the rare Presidential vetos.
Not sure about the economic harm being nil. First, it's gonna spook a lot of investors. Second, it's really embarrassing to get such a kick right before the upcoming WWDC.
What I don't understand is how " Samsung's U.S. Patent No. 7,706,348 for "Apparatus and method for encoding/decoding transport format combination indicator in CDMA mobile communication system," " applies to GSM phones.
GSM phones use a second radio .. a CDMA one... for 3G. You might know it as UMTS-3G / WCDMA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
The biggest news at the end of the day was the ITC affirming the availability of injunctions for SEP infringement. That really surprised me. Coming on the heel of patent reform comments made by the White House today I think this will garner one of the rare Presidential vetos.
No surprise here. I've been repeating in my posts for months that the ITC's sole power is injunctions, and they want to keep that power. However, this ban doesn't have a big impact, so it's also politically safe.
The last major time the ITC did this with phones was in 2007 when they banned CDMA devices using a Broadcom patent from coming in... and Verizon almost ran out phones to sell. The President refused to intervene in an IP matter, so Verizon ended up paying a $6 per device royalty themselves (instead of Qualcomm doing it) just to import stock.
(Six dollars to Broadcom! And Apple complains about even paying one dollar to Motorola.)
Likewise, many people are still confused about injunctions vs. FRAND abuse. Multiple world courts have said (and STILL say) that injunctions are a fair weapon for use by any patent holder, SEP or not, if a licensee refuses to negotiate in good faith. (The judgements against Samsung so far have been when Apple was able to convince the court that they had started real negotiations.)
Here's Samesung's official response, reported on AllThingsD. How pathetic. I''ve officially joined the "No Samsung in my house" movement
“We believe the ITC’s Final Determination has confirmed Apple’s history of free-riding on Samsung’s technological innovations,” Samsung said in a statement to AllThingsD. “Our decades of research and development in mobile technologies will continue, and we will continue to offer innovative products to consumers in the United States.”
I don't think they can appeal it. the President can overrule it, but that's the end of the line AFAIK.
They certainly can appeal this to United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. This is not over by a long shot. They can do this even if Obama does not veto it.
I like how people keep creeping the number up. Maybe it will eventually hit the amount they should have been fined.
I've lost track of when that case gets revisited... Wasn't Koh supposed to re-review the amount lopped off the awarded total to possibly increase or decrease the total amount?
I've lost track of when that case gets revisited... Wasn't Koh supposed to re-review the amount lopped off the awarded total to possibly increase or decrease the total amount?
They certainly can appeal this to United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. This is not over by a long shot. They can do this even if Obama does not veto it.
Yep, there's a lot of ITC decisions being appealed by all sides.
I got curious and looked up the most recent stats of ITC decisions overturned by the CAFC:
2008 - 7%
2009 - 0%
2010 - 15%
2011 - 27%
2012 - 15%
Additionally, it's apparently rare for major ITC computer patent decisions to get changed.
I think many people don't understand that there's a difference between Apple and Samsung's patents.
Apple's patents are mainly broad, generic designs that take $0 in R&D costs.
Samsung's patents deal with REAL technological progress such as 4G LTE and wireless communication. This is why Samsung's patents are VALID while Apple's isn't, and why courts are upholding Samsung's patents while rejecting Apple's.
I think many people don't understand that there's a difference between Apple and Samsung's patents.
Apple's patents are mainly broad, generic designs that take $0 in R&D costs.
Samsung's patents deal with REAL technological progress such as 4G LTE and wireless communication. This is why Samsung's patents are VALID while Apple's isn't, and why courts are upholding Samsung's patents while rejecting Apple's.
Apple's R&D is mainly assembling Samsung's tech. Apple is in no way involved in creating 5G, the next generation memory architecture or the next generation IC or a working flexible display. All Apple does is wait until Samsung does all the hard work for the R&D and then implements it in their devices. Nothing difficult. It's not different than what Dell does.
Comments
Like Big Worm said in Friday it's the "principalities". :smokey:
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRange
The trolls sweep in quickly! Samsung is not banned after willingly, knowingly, purposefully copying nearly every single aspect of the iPhone and iPad and doesn't get immediately banned, and Apple is accused of using standard essential patents and they will get banned? Not a chance in hell. Apple actually has the right to use standard essential patents, its merely a case of licensing fees. Where did you go to law school?
And you sweep right in to feed that a$$hat. Obvoiusly, he was doing that to get a rise out of someone.
How about all the Samsung products within Apple devices? This will amount to nothing considering there's a 60 review period plus appeals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by radster360
This is total bull! Apple is using Qualcomm product which provides the wireless technology. So the onus is on them. And what I understand that are clear with that. This is no difference than what they are doing in e-book situation. In past two weeks the Government is getting after Apple from every direction and they haven't done anything illegal. They are destroying a gem of the company that this country has!
Did you read the article first?
The biggest news at the end of the day was the ITC affirming the availability of injunctions for SEP infringement. That really surprised me. Coming on the heel of patent reform comments made by the White House today I think this will garner one of the rare Presidential vetos.
1. If it's all cut and clear, how come the previous judge decision did not find any infringement?
2. Is an invitation for Morola to reopen their case?
3. Is it time to fire some Apple lawyers? Losing several high profile cases in Europe and now this?
4. And where the heck is 1.5 bln dollars?
Originally Posted by Plagen
4. And where the heck is 1.5 bln dollars?
I like how people keep creeping the number up. Maybe it will eventually hit the amount they should have been fined.
Not sure about the economic harm being nil. First, it's gonna spook a lot of investors. Second, it's really embarrassing to get such a kick right before the upcoming WWDC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirgaHyatt
What I don't understand is how " Samsung's U.S. Patent No. 7,706,348 for "Apparatus and method for encoding/decoding transport format combination indicator in CDMA mobile communication system," " applies to GSM phones.
GSM phones use a second radio .. a CDMA one... for 3G. You might know it as UMTS-3G / WCDMA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
The biggest news at the end of the day was the ITC affirming the availability of injunctions for SEP infringement. That really surprised me. Coming on the heel of patent reform comments made by the White House today I think this will garner one of the rare Presidential vetos.
No surprise here. I've been repeating in my posts for months that the ITC's sole power is injunctions, and they want to keep that power. However, this ban doesn't have a big impact, so it's also politically safe.
The last major time the ITC did this with phones was in 2007 when they banned CDMA devices using a Broadcom patent from coming in... and Verizon almost ran out phones to sell. The President refused to intervene in an IP matter, so Verizon ended up paying a $6 per device royalty themselves (instead of Qualcomm doing it) just to import stock.
(Six dollars to Broadcom! And Apple complains about even paying one dollar to Motorola.)
Likewise, many people are still confused about injunctions vs. FRAND abuse. Multiple world courts have said (and STILL say) that injunctions are a fair weapon for use by any patent holder, SEP or not, if a licensee refuses to negotiate in good faith. (The judgements against Samsung so far have been when Apple was able to convince the court that they had started real negotiations.)
“We believe the ITC’s Final Determination has confirmed Apple’s history of free-riding on Samsung’s technological innovations,” Samsung said in a statement to AllThingsD. “Our decades of research and development in mobile technologies will continue, and we will continue to offer innovative products to consumers in the United States.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
I don't think they can appeal it. the President can overrule it, but that's the end of the line AFAIK.
They certainly can appeal this to United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. This is not over by a long shot. They can do this even if Obama does not veto it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Ah. thanks for that.
Do they have to wait until the Presidential review period is over before appealing to the Fed Circuit?
No they can file an appeal right now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StruckPaper
Did you read the article first?
Yes, I did! The issue is on the older products, so this doesn't matter - But it is the principal of things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I like how people keep creeping the number up. Maybe it will eventually hit the amount they should have been fined.
I've lost track of when that case gets revisited... Wasn't Koh supposed to re-review the amount lopped off the awarded total to possibly increase or decrease the total amount?
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
I've lost track of when that case gets revisited... Wasn't Koh supposed to re-review the amount lopped off the awarded total to possibly increase or decrease the total amount?
Needs to be a different judge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanic
They certainly can appeal this to United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. This is not over by a long shot. They can do this even if Obama does not veto it.
Yep, there's a lot of ITC decisions being appealed by all sides.
I got curious and looked up the most recent stats of ITC decisions overturned by the CAFC:
2008 - 7%
2009 - 0%
2010 - 15%
2011 - 27%
2012 - 15%
Additionally, it's apparently rare for major ITC computer patent decisions to get changed.
I think many people don't understand that there's a difference between Apple and Samsung's patents.
Apple's patents are mainly broad, generic designs that take $0 in R&D costs.
Samsung's patents deal with REAL technological progress such as 4G LTE and wireless communication. This is why Samsung's patents are VALID while Apple's isn't, and why courts are upholding Samsung's patents while rejecting Apple's.
Originally Posted by JoshKar426
I think many people don't understand that there's a difference between Apple and Samsung's patents.
Apple's patents are mainly broad, generic designs that take $0 in R&D costs.
Samsung's patents deal with REAL technological progress such as 4G LTE and wireless communication. This is why Samsung's patents are VALID while Apple's isn't, and why courts are upholding Samsung's patents while rejecting Apple's.
lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
lol.
The courts seem to disagree with you.
Apple's R&D is mainly assembling Samsung's tech. Apple is in no way involved in creating 5G, the next generation memory architecture or the next generation IC or a working flexible display. All Apple does is wait until Samsung does all the hard work for the R&D and then implements it in their devices. Nothing difficult. It's not different than what Dell does.