wasn't there a mention previously about a possible cancellation clause on the contract in event of 3rd party takeover or "change of power"?
Moot in this case.
Samsung is looking for how much money HTC is paying for SEP patents that Apple holds and/or evidence that Apple is cross licensing/licensing non SEP to HTC to try to somehow force Apple to do the same with them.
That there is a clause in the deal that says it doesn't care over if HTC or Apple is bought by another party doesn't matter for this particular situation
There was no such leak ever. QE provided a summary of the evidence rejected by the court when asked by reporters. Nope, these are for "attorney eyes only." As judge magistrate Grewal noted there is a little reason why this motion should be rejected, considering that "<span style="background-color:rgb(238,238,238);font-family:verdana, arial, sans-serif;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;">Many third parties to this case have had their licensing agreements disclosed.."</span>
Are you actually stupid enough to believe that? Judge Koh was "livid" when she found out and she was forced to pause and question jurors to see if they were tainted or had seen the evidence.
Amazing the spin haters will try to put on an event to trivialize it.
Samsung is looking for how much money HTC is paying for SEP patents that Apple holds and/or evidence that Apple is cross licensing/licensing non SEP to HTC to try to somehow force Apple to do the same with them.
That there is a clause in the deal that says it doesn't care over if HTC or Apple is bought by another party doesn't matter for this particular situation
My understanding is that these are non-SEP patents held by Apple. Apple's desire is for the [alleged] infringers to stop using the patents and invent/innovate new methods.
Samsung is trying to use this settlement between Apple and HTC to show that Apple did not suffer irreparable damage by Samsung's [and others'] infringement thus negating the necessity of a permanent injunction. Remember, the stated goal of Samsung is to license Apple's patents, thus allowing them to continue "fast-following" with impugnity. The result of this would probably look much like Apple's attempt to license Classic OS prior to Jobs return.
Are you actually stupid enough to believe that? Judge Koh was "livid" when she found out and she was forced to pause and question jurors to see if they were tainted or had seen the evidence.
Amazing the spin haters will try to put on an event to trivialize it.
Not their smartest move. I still have no idea what they had to gain by annoying the judge.
Absolutely!!! Apple vs. HTC patent war has been in courts for a long time. Is it a coincidence that both would enter a licensing agreement in the midst of the Samsung war when the US judges seem to side with Apple? Only a fool would think so….This is well planned without any speculative doubt.
Comments
jus' sayin'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fillie
wasn't there a mention previously about a possible cancellation clause on the contract in event of 3rd party takeover or "change of power"?
Moot in this case.
Samsung is looking for how much money HTC is paying for SEP patents that Apple holds and/or evidence that Apple is cross licensing/licensing non SEP to HTC to try to somehow force Apple to do the same with them.
That there is a clause in the deal that says it doesn't care over if HTC or Apple is bought by another party doesn't matter for this particular situation
Amazing the spin haters will try to put on an event to trivialize it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Moot in this case.
Samsung is looking for how much money HTC is paying for SEP patents that Apple holds and/or evidence that Apple is cross licensing/licensing non SEP to HTC to try to somehow force Apple to do the same with them.
That there is a clause in the deal that says it doesn't care over if HTC or Apple is bought by another party doesn't matter for this particular situation
My understanding is that these are non-SEP patents held by Apple. Apple's desire is for the [alleged] infringers to stop using the patents and invent/innovate new methods.
Samsung is trying to use this settlement between Apple and HTC to show that Apple did not suffer irreparable damage by Samsung's [and others'] infringement thus negating the necessity of a permanent injunction. Remember, the stated goal of Samsung is to license Apple's patents, thus allowing them to continue "fast-following" with impugnity. The result of this would probably look much like Apple's attempt to license Classic OS prior to Jobs return.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
Are you actually stupid enough to believe that? Judge Koh was "livid" when she found out and she was forced to pause and question jurors to see if they were tainted or had seen the evidence.
Amazing the spin haters will try to put on an event to trivialize it.
Not their smartest move. I still have no idea what they had to gain by annoying the judge.
not at all, they will just produce a report for Samsung management entitled "what we think numbers should be"
any similarity to the numbers in the HTC document will be purely coincidental, and not caused by copying or infringing on the rights of HTC/Apple
Absolutely!!! Apple vs. HTC patent war has been in courts for a long time. Is it a coincidence that both would enter a licensing agreement in the midst of the Samsung war when the US judges seem to side with Apple? Only a fool would think so….This is well planned without any speculative doubt.