EU regulators call for more Samsung concessions to end antitrust case
Regulators in the European Union are calling for Samsung to offer greater concessions in order to head off a fine over antitrust violations in its ongoing patent disputes with Apple.
"The Commission can confirm that Samsung has submitted proposals," EU spokesman Jonathan Todd told Reuters, "the Commission has assessed them and asked Samsung to improve them."
EU regulators hold that Samsung breached antitrust rules when it brought suit against Apple in several EU countries beginning in 2011. Samsung sought injunctions against Apple's iPhone and other products, partially in response to Apple filing suit alleging Samsung's willful violation of its own intellectual property and design patents.
The patents Samsung sought to enforce, though, were standards-essential patents, including some related to mobile telephony. Those companies that hold standards-essential patents are required under international law to extend fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) offers to willful licensees.
Hitting Samsung with a complaint last year, the European Commission claimed that the firm did not adhere to its FRAND responsibilities when it filed suit against Apple and, further, that that violation of FRAND principles also constituted anti-competitive action. Samsung has been in discussions with the Commission since June 25 to settle the issue.
The EU spokesman did not go into detail with regard to what concessions Samsung has offered so far. If the South Korean tech giant is unable to persuade the Commission that it will abandon anti-competitive practices, it could face a fine of up to 10 percent of its 2012 revenues, or $18.3 billion.
"The Commission can confirm that Samsung has submitted proposals," EU spokesman Jonathan Todd told Reuters, "the Commission has assessed them and asked Samsung to improve them."
EU regulators hold that Samsung breached antitrust rules when it brought suit against Apple in several EU countries beginning in 2011. Samsung sought injunctions against Apple's iPhone and other products, partially in response to Apple filing suit alleging Samsung's willful violation of its own intellectual property and design patents.
The patents Samsung sought to enforce, though, were standards-essential patents, including some related to mobile telephony. Those companies that hold standards-essential patents are required under international law to extend fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) offers to willful licensees.
Hitting Samsung with a complaint last year, the European Commission claimed that the firm did not adhere to its FRAND responsibilities when it filed suit against Apple and, further, that that violation of FRAND principles also constituted anti-competitive action. Samsung has been in discussions with the Commission since June 25 to settle the issue.
The EU spokesman did not go into detail with regard to what concessions Samsung has offered so far. If the South Korean tech giant is unable to persuade the Commission that it will abandon anti-competitive practices, it could face a fine of up to 10 percent of its 2012 revenues, or $18.3 billion.
Comments
MORE concessions! MORE!
And then fine them anyway!
MORE concessions! MORE!
And then fine them anyway!
No kidding! What the hell is it about "asking" Samsung to "improve" their concessions??? They are the ones in charge. Slap some serious fines on them!! Like what is Samsung going to do?!
Oh, and I would demand that Samsung post an apology on their main home page in 50pt font size. A$$h***s!!
And considering how Apple is winning its litigation against Samsung, this is going to be a one-sided boxing match.
The game is going to be over soon, and it is going to be bloody!
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Regulators in the European Union are calling for Samsung to offer greater concessions in order to head off a fine over antitrust violations in its ongoing patent disputes with Apple.
"The Commission can confirm that Samsung has submitted proposals," EU spokesman Jonathan Todd told Reuters, "the Commission has assessed them and asked Samsung to improve them."
...
Hitting Samsung with a complaint last year, the European Commission claimed that the firm did not adhere to its FRAND responsibilities when it filed suit against Apple and, further, that that violation of FRAND principles also constituted anti-competitive action. Samsung has been in discussions with the Commission since June 25 to settle the issue.
....
About time they 'at least attempt to' resolve this issue but I won't hold my breath waiting for the final resolution.
Unfortunately I am concerned that when all the various lawsuits are resolved, even if Samsung loses them all and Samsung isn't winning many at this point, is that the fines and penalties will be insignificant when compared to the billions that Samsung has already made. Samsung's competitors, excluding Apple, have problems making any money so it appears Samsung's strategy, copy, sue, countersue, eventually pay mostly irrelevant fines/penalties, will be proved to be even better than even Apple's as Samsung will have netted billions and established a brand when others could not.
While still a long way from being totally resolved it appears that Samsung's strategy, to ask or negotiate for forgiveness rather than asking or negotiating permission up front, might be better, faster and cheaper.
Apple can be found guilty in the UK of something they were found innocent in the US, so don't hold your breath.
The EU spokesman did not go into detail with regard to what concessions Samsung has offered so far. If the South Korean tech giant is unable to persuade the Commission that it will abandon anti-competitive practices, it could face a fine of up to 10 percent of its 2012 revenues, or $18.3 billion.
It's like a parent asking a child to determine their own punishment for wrongdoing, which seems to me odd for the government/business environment. Are they going to ask them what they did wrong and put them in timeout as well?
Apple can be found guilty in the UK of something they were found innocent in the US, so don't hold your breath.
And vice versa. Apple was found guilty of infringing on Samsung's 3g patent in the US while the EU has decided to go after Samsung for patent abuse. Neither of the courts are perfect.
It's like a parent asking a child to determine their own punishment for wrongdoing, which seems to me odd for the government/business environment. Are they going to ask them what they did wrong and put them in timeout as well?
No, the EU is simply giving Samsung the opportunity to make suggestions. If their suggestions aren't tough enough the EU will soon get fed up and impose their own version of what Samsung needs to do (fines, change of business practices and so on).
The funniest part about all of this? Samsung never did get anywhere in Europe with these cases. They had several filed (I think 4-5) against the iPhone 5 seeking an injunction based on SEP's. They then suddenly dropped all requests for injunctions, coincidentally around the time the EU decided Samsung hadn't honored their FRAND committment.
So Samsung will get punished for ATTEMPTING to do something, not ACTUALLY doing it. Apple has suffered no harm at all since the items at issue were dropped before the court cases went anywhere.
And vice versa. Apple was found guilty of infringing on Samsung's 3g patent in the US while the EU has decided to go after Samsung for patent abuse. Neither of the courts are perfect.
Please show me the court decision in the US where Apple was found guilty of violating a 3G patent belonging to Samsung.
That was the ITC Judge wasn't it? The case where US Trade Rep overturned the ITC import ban saying they couldn't bar old Apple devices even tho infringement was identified.
Please show me the court decision in the US where Apple was found guilty of violating a 3G patent belonging to Samsung.
ITC case number 337-794
It received lots of coverage so I'm sure you know of it.
Actually, asking a child to recommend the punishment isn't a bad idea under some circumstances. When you have a kid who is basically a good kid but makes a mistake, that can be quite effective. OTOH, when you have a kid who's trouble from the start, it's not such a good plan.
Unfortunately, Samsun clearly falls more into the latter category.
If Samsung is stupid enough to go through a US court for an injunction then see what happens. All Samsung can do is sue Apple for licensing fees Apple admits they already owe. And I don't think Samsung wants a court to decide - look what happened to Motorola.
That was the ITC Judge wasn't it? The case where US Trade Rep overturned the ITC import ban saying they couldn't bar old Apple devices even tho infringement was identified.
ITC Judge != U.S. COURT.
Standards-Essential Patents != Non-Standards Essential patents.
Punishment for infringement of standards-essential patents != punishment for non-standards essential patents.
PATENTS UNDERSTANDING FAIL.
Not going to derail the conversation here even further but no court or even US Trade Representative has said injunctions for SEP infringement aren't permitted.
You might be right. Now isn't the best time to be an SEP licensor. What was common and acceptable licensing and royalties five years or more ago when the standards were established isn't as acceptable any longer. When the EU was asked to deal with Qualcomms aggressive SEP policies and relatively sky-high royalties just a very few years ago they gave them a pass saying that "The Qualcomm case has raised important issues about the pricing of technology after its adoption as part of an industry standard. In practice, such assessments may be very complex, and any antitrust enforcer has to be careful about overturning commercial agreements. "
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-09-516_en.htm
Now the times they are a'changin. Less than 5 years later Samsung won't be as lucky.
Actually, asking a child to recommend the punishment isn't a bad idea under some circumstances. When you have a kid who is basically a good kid but makes a mistake, that can be quite effective. OTOH, when you have a kid who's trouble from the start, it's not such a good plan.
Unfortunately, Samsun clearly falls more into the latter category.
I agree, asking a child to do that can be good. Not sure if it makes sense in the world of business? It seems the EU commission does this as standard practice so perhaps i'm off in left field by myself
I guess it would at least give them insight into how far apart the expectations are between the company and the commission.