Samsung obtains March 2012 hearing against Apple in Australian patent case
Samsung has successfully obtained a full hearing with an Australian court for its patent case against rival Apple's iPhone 4S, with the hearing scheduled to take place in March 2012.
Justice Annabelle Bennett told the court on Tuesday that the three-week hearing will begin next March, adding that she plans to fix the exact date on Friday. Apple had requested that the hearing take place next August, but Bennett said the timing was too late, Reuters reports.
"They [Samsung] are trying to expand the Android market. The longer it's left the harder it will be for Samsung," she remarked.
In the meantime, Apple will be allowed to continue sales of its latest iPhone, which launched in the country on Oct. 14. According to the report, Samsung's case against Apple in Australia accuses the company of infringing on three patents and carries more than 25 claims.
Samsung has opposed the iPhone 4S in several countries across the globe. For instance, the company filed preliminary injunction requests against the device in France and Italy almost immediately after Apple announced the handset. However, an Italian judge denied the South Korean electronics maker's request late last month and allowed Apple to launch its latest smartphone in the country.
Interestingly enough, Samsung has decided not to seek an injunction in its home country. A Korean newspaper revealed on Monday that the company opted not to file at the last minute because of public relations concerns.
"We concluded that we should engage in legal battles with Apple only in the global market," a spokesperson for Samsung reportedly said, "but not in order to gain more market share in Korea."
The two companies' fierce legal battle spans 10 countries and encompasses more than 20 complaints. Apple has seen some success against Samsung in Australia, winning an injunction against its rival's Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet in the region. But, Samsung is appealing the decision, arguing that it was based on "irrelevant considerations" and that the judge made "errors of law in her approach." A formal hearing regarding the injunction is expected to be held next week.
Justice Annabelle Bennett told the court on Tuesday that the three-week hearing will begin next March, adding that she plans to fix the exact date on Friday. Apple had requested that the hearing take place next August, but Bennett said the timing was too late, Reuters reports.
"They [Samsung] are trying to expand the Android market. The longer it's left the harder it will be for Samsung," she remarked.
In the meantime, Apple will be allowed to continue sales of its latest iPhone, which launched in the country on Oct. 14. According to the report, Samsung's case against Apple in Australia accuses the company of infringing on three patents and carries more than 25 claims.
Samsung has opposed the iPhone 4S in several countries across the globe. For instance, the company filed preliminary injunction requests against the device in France and Italy almost immediately after Apple announced the handset. However, an Italian judge denied the South Korean electronics maker's request late last month and allowed Apple to launch its latest smartphone in the country.
Interestingly enough, Samsung has decided not to seek an injunction in its home country. A Korean newspaper revealed on Monday that the company opted not to file at the last minute because of public relations concerns.
"We concluded that we should engage in legal battles with Apple only in the global market," a spokesperson for Samsung reportedly said, "but not in order to gain more market share in Korea."
The two companies' fierce legal battle spans 10 countries and encompasses more than 20 complaints. Apple has seen some success against Samsung in Australia, winning an injunction against its rival's Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet in the region. But, Samsung is appealing the decision, arguing that it was based on "irrelevant considerations" and that the judge made "errors of law in her approach." A formal hearing regarding the injunction is expected to be held next week.
Comments
http://www.zdnet.com.au/apple-keeps-...-339326002.htm
Apple lawyers claimed they needed until August to prepare for trial. So much for an open and shut case.
Apple probably wanted the extra time so that they could bring into evidence the results of the EU Commission anti-trust investigation into FRAND monopoly abuse by Samsung! Apple can afford the delay because they already have an injunction against Samsung.
Having obtained an injunction in Germany, apparently based on FRAND essential patents, Motorola will now probably be drawn into the EU investigation.
Google, as the "moving hand" behind Motorola and Samsung will also probably be subject of the EU investigation, which may also look again at Google's anti-competitive and IP piracy behaviour generally.
This EU investigation has very serious, potentially devastating, implications for Google and their pirate OEMs. The EU can not only impose fines of 10% of global turnover on each the companies (which will help with EU finances
(FRAND - Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory essential patents - are a waiver to allow participants to create a monopoly - in this case 3G standard - ON THE EXPLICIT CONDITION THAT THOSE COMPANIES THAT CONTRIBUTE THE ESSENTIAL PATENTS DO NO ACT IN THE WAY SAMSUNG & MOTOROLA HAVE. FRAND comes under the jurisdiction of French Courts, which are subsidiary, or subject to, EU Commission and EU Court rulings)
IMO the fact that these companies are clutching at straws misusing FRAND shows that they have very weak defences against Apple's claims.
As far as the EU is concerned Google is an IP serial offender, so the penalties against them may this time be the maximum available.
It is interesting to see that Samsung have decided not to use this illegal FRAND defence in its home country of South Korea, where on the face of it Samsung would have had home advantage, where it enjoys huge influence. I can only think that the South Korean Government, who are no fools, may have warned Samsung off this abuse of process! Bear in mind that the next step in this process might be an investigation by the WTO (World Trade Organisation) who have been vigorously pursuing IP theft and piracy - something that the South Korean government would like to avoid at all costs, given how dependant they are on exports!
IMO Samsung, Motorola and Google have been extremely naive and foolish using illegal monopolistic powers related to essential FRAND patents, provoking very serious anti-trust and anti-competetive investigations from the EU, and possibly soon the US and WTO. A serial offender like Google is extremely vulnerable to very serious penalties.
Apple probably wanted the extra time so that they could bring into evidence the results of the EU Commission anti-trust investigation into FRAND monopoly abuse by Samsung! Apple can afford the delay because they already have an injunction against Samsung.
Having obtained an injunction in Germany, apparently based on FRAND essential patents, Motorola will now probably be drawn into the EU investigation.
Google, as the "moving hand" behind Motorola and Samsung will also probably be subject of the EU investigation, which may also look again at Google's anti-competitive and IP piracy behaviour generally.
This EU investigation has very serious, potentially devastating, implications for Google and their pirate OEMs. The EU can not only impose fines of 10% of global turnover on each the companies (which will help with EU finances
(FRAND - Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory essential patents - are a waiver to allow participants to create a monopoly - in this case 3G standard - ON THE EXPLICIT CONDITION THAT THOSE COMPANIES THAT CONTRIBUTE THE ESSENTIAL PATENTS DO NO ACT IN THE WAY SAMSUNG & MOTOROLA HAVE. FRAND comes under the jurisdiction of French Courts, which are subsidiary, or subject to, EU Commission and EU Court rulings)
IMO the fact that these companies are clutching at straws misusing FRAND shows that they have very weak defences against Apple's claims.
As far as the EU is concerned Google is an IP serial offender, so the penalties against them may this time be the maximum available.
It is interesting to see that Samsung have decided not to use this illegal FRAND defence in its home country of South Korea, where on the face of it Samsung would have had home advantage, where it enjoys huge influence. I can only think that the South Korean Government, who are no fools, may have warned Samsung off this abuse of process! Bear in mind that the next step in this process might be an investigation by the WTO (World Trade Organisation) who have been vigorously pursuing IP theft and piracy - something that the South Korean government would like to avoid at all costs, given how dependant they are on exports!
IMO Samsung, Motorola and Google have been extremely naive and foolish using illegal monopolistic powers related to essential FRAND patents, provoking very serious anti-trust and anti-competetive investigations from the EU, and possibly soon the US and WTO. A serial offender like Google is extremely vulnerable to very serious penalties.
So much speculative unsubstantiated shit.
Not even saying you're wrong...but it's allllllllll guesswork on your end.
PS...what does Google have to do with this other than being behind Android?
Apple probably wanted the extra time so that they could bring into evidence the results of the EU Commission anti-trust investigation into FRAND monopoly abuse by Samsung! Apple can afford the delay because they already have an injunction against Samsung.
Having obtained an injunction in Germany, apparently based on FRAND essential patents, Motorola will now probably be drawn into the EU investigation.
Google, as the "moving hand" behind Motorola and Samsung will also probably be subject of the EU investigation, which may also look again at Google's anti-competitive and IP piracy behaviour generally.
This EU investigation has very serious, potentially devastating, implications for Google and their pirate OEMs. The EU can not only impose fines of 10% of global turnover on each the companies (which will help with EU finances
(FRAND - Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory essential patents - are a waiver to allow participants to create a monopoly - in this case 3G standard - ON THE EXPLICIT CONDITION THAT THOSE COMPANIES THAT CONTRIBUTE THE ESSENTIAL PATENTS DO NO ACT IN THE WAY SAMSUNG & MOTOROLA HAVE. FRAND comes under the jurisdiction of French Courts, which are subsidiary, or subject to, EU Commission and EU Court rulings)
IMO the fact that these companies are clutching at straws misusing FRAND shows that they have very weak defences against Apple's claims.
As far as the EU is concerned Google is an IP serial offender, so the penalties against them may this time be the maximum available.
It is interesting to see that Samsung have decided not to use this illegal FRAND defence in its home country of South Korea, where on the face of it Samsung would have had home advantage, where it enjoys huge influence. I can only think that the South Korean Government, who are no fools, may have warned Samsung off this abuse of process! Bear in mind that the next step in this process might be an investigation by the WTO (World Trade Organisation) who have been vigorously pursuing IP theft and piracy - something that the South Korean government would like to avoid at all costs, given how dependant they are on exports!
IMO Samsung, Motorola and Google have been extremely naive and foolish using illegal monopolistic powers related to essential FRAND patents, provoking very serious anti-trust and anti-competetive investigations from the EU, and possibly soon the US and WTO. A serial offender like Google is extremely vulnerable to very serious penalties.
Good capture of the key points under fire in these cases, but I hesitate to widely condemn as "monopolistic abuses" Google's use of Android to leverage the platform. However I roundly dismiss their claim of just wanting to provide an open platform against the Apple "juggernaut" in the smartphone space. It was not altruism that brought Google to buy Android - it was realising the truth in the vision that Apple had for future computing as mobile devices, and they wanted in on the ground floor of that movement. The whole open thing was just a PR move to ignite the passions of the geek world to support their efforts. An easier task than sweating the small details and taking the development hours to get it right before releasing it to the consuming public.
Good capture of the key points under fire in these cases, but I hesitate to widely condemn as "monopolistic abuses" Google's use of Android to leverage the platform. However I roundly dismiss their claim of just wanting to provide an open platform against the Apple "juggernaut" in the smartphone space. It was not altruism that brought Google to buy Android - it was realising the truth in the vision that Apple had for future computing as mobile devices, and they wanted in on the ground floor of that movement. The whole open thing was just a PR move to ignite the passions of the geek world to support their efforts. An easier task than sweating the small details and taking the development hours to get it right before releasing it to the consuming public.
You mean get it right like Siri server breakdowns, battery life problems some of which were made worse by Apples ruugh fix, ir the iCloud outage a couple of days ago?
Apple lawyers claimed they needed until August to prepare for trial. So much for an open and shut case.
More likely, Apple just wanted to push potential sales of the Galaxy Tab as far back as possible. The longer the court case drags on, the greater the impact on sales.
So much speculative unsubstantiated shit.
Not even saying you're wrong...but it's allllllllll guesswork on your end.
PS...what does Google have to do with this other than being behind Android?
So you call unsubstantiated BS without any evidence to support the statement?
How can you call BS on something without being able to demonstrate that you have evidence to the contrary? Instead, you go on to say, "not even saying you're wrong"? Seriously??
And realistically, Google is complicit by supplying Android to each of the current handset makers that are involved with lawsuits against or from Apple, and by publically stating that they will provide whatever assistance needed to defend the handset maker against Apple (and apparently Microsoft). They may be more successful in defending against Apple, but Microsoft has been very successful in leveraging licensing agreements with most of the handset makers thus far.
On topic, it will be interesting to see whether the findings of the EU review of Samsung will reinforce or invalidate Samsung's suit here. I think that's why, they are trying to get as much on the table now as they can to hamper Apple before that review produces findings.
You mean get it right like Siri server breakdowns, battery life problems some of which were made worse by Apples ruugh fix, ir the iCloud outage a couple of days ago?
But we have Faith that Apple will always make everything all right someday.
Every company always has wacky problems with products. Apple is exactly the same as everybody else in that regard.
But Apple is different because we have Faith that Apple always fixes everything.
They may be more successful in defending against Apple, but Microsoft has been very successful in leveraging licensing agreements with most of the handset makers thus far.
Curious what claims Microsoft is making against Android? While MS has tried to hide the patents they say are infringed by insisting on broad Non-Disclosure agreements before opening discussions with Android device manufacturers, B&N refused to play the game under MS rules and have outed them. You'll likely be surprised at the out-dated patents they're attempting to leverage.
http://9to5google.com/2011/11/14/mic...-barnes-noble/
So you call unsubstantiated BS without any evidence to support the statement?
How can you call BS on something without being able to demonstrate that you have evidence to the contrary? Instead, you go on to say, "not even saying you're wrong"? Seriously??
And realistically, Google is complicit by supplying Android to each of the current handset makers that are involved with lawsuits against or from Apple, and by publically stating that they will provide whatever assistance needed to defend the handset maker against Apple (and apparently Microsoft). They may be more successful in defending against Apple, but Microsoft has been very successful in leveraging licensing agreements with most of the handset makers thus far.
On topic, it will be interesting to see whether the findings of the EU review of Samsung will reinforce or invalidate Samsung's suit here. I think that's why, they are trying to get as much on the table now as they can to hamper Apple before that review produces findings.
I don't have to provide evidence to debunk your speculation. That's not how it works.
So you call unsubstantiated BS without any evidence to support the statement?
How can you call BS on something without being able to demonstrate that you have evidence to the contrary? Instead, you go on to say, "not even saying you're wrong"? Seriously??
And realistically, Google is complicit by supplying Android to each of the current handset makers that are involved with lawsuits against or from Apple, and by publically stating that they will provide whatever assistance needed to defend the handset maker against Apple (and apparently Microsoft). They may be more successful in defending against Apple, but Microsoft has been very successful in leveraging licensing agreements with most of the handset makers thus far.
On topic, it will be interesting to see whether the findings of the EU review of Samsung will reinforce or invalidate Samsung's suit here. I think that's why, they are trying to get as much on the table now as they can to hamper Apple before that review produces findings.
You both can neither prove or disprove either statements.
All both of you have accomplished are expressing each personal opinions of the respective companies and bumping the view count of this thread, this website and more money for AI.
aka you both have expressed your fanboyism, nothing else.
Who is the one to have the last laugh? AI
Someone in MacRumor site said that the husband of the Judge Annabelle Bennett is a senior council member of 5 Wentworth which representing Apple in Annabelle Bennett's own court.
See this link, http://www.5wentworth.com.au/site/people/
Among the 6 senior council members, Stephen Burley SC is the barrister representing Apple in this court. And David Bennett AC QC is the husband of the Judge Annabelle Bennett. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bennett_(barrister)
I think there is no way the judge can escape from this.
Samsung must have known this, but why are they not pressing on this?
This probabley has been known to Australian authorities, but why are they keeping quite about this?