Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.

View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21
411 posts

Ultimate Geek


  Reply # 679638 31-Aug-2012 11:17 Send private message

kiwitrc: Samsung fires back http://phandroid.com/2012/08/30/samsung-threatens-to-sue-apple-if-next-iphone-has-lte/


For all those Apple fans out there eagerly waiting on the next release, if Apple hadnt really thought of this and gone ahead with implementing 4G-LTE.. then this would have made them rethink and possibly delay the announcement and shipment which may result in it the Apple fans waiting even longer..

Or if they are bold enough.. which they probably think they are.. they would go ahead with the release anyway..

1840 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 68

Subscriber

  Reply # 679682 31-Aug-2012 12:23 Send private message

ibuksh:
kiwitrc: Samsung fires back http://phandroid.com/2012/08/30/samsung-threatens-to-sue-apple-if-next-iphone-has-lte/


For all those Apple fans out there eagerly waiting on the next release, if Apple hadnt really thought of this and gone ahead with implementing 4G-LTE.. then this would have made them rethink and possibly delay the announcement and shipment which may result in it the Apple fans waiting even longer..

Or if they are bold enough.. which they probably think they are.. they would go ahead with the release anyway..


They may release but what if Samsung go for market bans like Apple have done in the past. At least it is hardware patent based this time. Still, it is the consumer that will suffer in the long run. An interesting comment about LTE and industry standards though. Things like Dolby Digital are industry standards but Dolby Labs still get royalties. So maybe Apple are happy to pay for licenced use of the LTE technology. More money for the lawyers I guess.




Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

512 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 31


  Reply # 679709 31-Aug-2012 13:00 Send private message

kiwitrc: Samsung fires back http://phandroid.com/2012/08/30/samsung-threatens-to-sue-apple-if-next-iphone-has-lte/

I guess it will all come down to whether the LTE patents have to be issued under FRAND terms, seeing as how they're part of a standard. There are only 2 ways I can see Samsung getting away with this: the LTE standards group don't have a FRAND clause on their patents, allowing each holder to assert them individually; or LTE is not seen as an essential technology in the same way that UMTS is, and therefore not subjected to FRAND licensing at all.

411 posts

Ultimate Geek


  Reply # 680886 3-Sep-2012 15:08 Send private message

The idea of using a device to communicate on GSM cell towers, that was Apples' idea. The idea of using a numerical keypad to dial outgoing numbers, also Apples. The idea to have a camera attached to the device, another brilliant Apple innovation. Having a screen on the phone so you can see what you are doing, thanks for that as well Apple. A rechargeable battery, also Apple. A headphone plug, Apple again. Apple also invented the touchscreen. Would you believe it, gestures on the touchscreen itself are also patents? Rounded corners on a icon also patents. Apple is just the greatest..


Gotta love this comment.. got it from GSMArena..


3450 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 341

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 682129 6-Sep-2012 08:58 Send private message

The Jury Foreman speaks again and Uh Oh Groklaw Comments

411 posts

Ultimate Geek


  Reply # 682135 6-Sep-2012 09:22 Send private message

kiwitrc: The Jury Foreman speaks again and Uh Oh Groklaw Comments


Lets just hope the judge sees more common sense than the jurors..

2460 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 69

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 682145 6-Sep-2012 09:34 Send private message

I am sure the appeal will address some of these issues. I doubt that the injunctions will succeed, and why should they if the damages were half patent fee and half punitive. I beleive if Samsung paid the licence it would have been about $535 M. However, the case was to try the infringment, not try the patent system. The patents in question and the system existed prior to this case, others could have sought legal redress on the patent system or particular patents in the past. Taking that stance once they got bitten certainly dilutes those claims I feel.

If nothing else, this case will bring to light the need to patent and the need to pay licence fees. AND what should and should not be patented.

3450 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 341

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 682153 6-Sep-2012 09:41 Send private message

tdgeek: I am sure the appeal will address some of these issues. I doubt that the injunctions will succeed, and why should they if the damages were half patent fee and half punitive. I beleive if Samsung paid the licence it would have been about $535 M. However, the case was to try the infringment, not try the patent system. The patents in question and the system existed prior to this case, others could have sought legal redress on the patent system or particular patents in the past. Taking that stance once they got bitten certainly dilutes those claims I feel.

If nothing else, this case will bring to light the need to patent and the need to pay licence fees. AND what should and should not be patented.


Groklaw states " The law is that the jurors are supposed to decide whether or not a patent is infringed, which *includes* whether or not the patent is valid, because if it is not valid, it can't be infringed."

384 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 4

Subscriber

  Reply # 682162 6-Sep-2012 09:55 Send private message

If the jury is not allowed to consider whether a patent is invalid, why would samsung waste time on introducing prior art as evidence? And furthermore why would the judge allow such evidence to be entered if it is not allowed to be considered? (I know the judge threw out some prior art evidence for no apparent reason, but I was under the impression a lot of prior art was entered into evidence to show the patents were invalid)

And what do the injunctions have to do with the damages awarded? Last I heard they were asking for an injunction on the S3 which wasn't even part of the case IIRC.

1743 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 49


  Reply # 682167 6-Sep-2012 09:57 Send private message

tdgeek: If nothing else, this case will bring to light the need to patent and the need to pay licence fees. AND what should and should not be patented.


...and, one would hope, that Jurors should not be setting the damages. As clearly if they fail. in even a minor way, in their interpretations of any aspect of the case they are basing their damages decisions on there own inabilities to understand the law (and perhaps the actual issues).

Having the Judge determine damages, based upon a jury verdict, would surely go some way to minimising the impact of poor jury decisions. The Judge must, by virtue of the legal system, accept the Juries ruling. But as a judge would have more knowledge of the legal system (ie: the semantic nature of the legal debate versus the emotions of a legal argument) surely they are better placed to determine
a) whether the issues were actually addressed correctly by the jury (evidence of clear understanding of the issues)
b) the damages are based and awarded on legal precedents and valid arguments/facts

2460 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 69

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 682168 6-Sep-2012 10:00 Send private message

kiwitrc:
tdgeek: I am sure the appeal will address some of these issues. I doubt that the injunctions will succeed, and why should they if the damages were half patent fee and half punitive. I beleive if Samsung paid the licence it would have been about $535 M. However, the case was to try the infringment, not try the patent system. The patents in question and the system existed prior to this case, others could have sought legal redress on the patent system or particular patents in the past. Taking that stance once they got bitten certainly dilutes those claims I feel.

If nothing else, this case will bring to light the need to patent and the need to pay licence fees. AND what should and should not be patented.


Groklaw states " The law is that the jurors are supposed to decide whether or not a patent is infringed, which *includes* whether or not the patent is valid, because if it is not valid, it can't be infringed."


If that is the law, or if it is Groklaws interpratation or wish

411 posts

Ultimate Geek


  Reply # 682170 6-Sep-2012 10:02 Send private message

tdgeek:
kiwitrc:
tdgeek: I am sure the appeal will address some of these issues. I doubt that the injunctions will succeed, and why should they if the damages were half patent fee and half punitive. I beleive if Samsung paid the licence it would have been about $535 M. However, the case was to try the infringment, not try the patent system. The patents in question and the system existed prior to this case, others could have sought legal redress on the patent system or particular patents in the past. Taking that stance once they got bitten certainly dilutes those claims I feel.

If nothing else, this case will bring to light the need to patent and the need to pay licence fees. AND what should and should not be patented.


Groklaw states " The law is that the jurors are supposed to decide whether or not a patent is infringed, which *includes* whether or not the patent is valid, because if it is not valid, it can't be infringed."


If that is the law, or if it is Groklaws interpratation or wish


Its  common sense as well

2460 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 69

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 682174 6-Sep-2012 10:12 Send private message

blair003: If the jury is not allowed to consider whether a patent is invalid, why would samsung waste time on introducing prior art as evidence? And furthermore why would the judge allow such evidence to be entered if it is not allowed to be considered? (I know the judge threw out some prior art evidence for no apparent reason, but I was under the impression a lot of prior art was entered into evidence to show the patents were invalid)

And what do the injunctions have to do with the damages awarded? Last I heard they were asking for an injunction on the S3 which wasn't even part of the case IIRC.


As in all cases they bring in as much evidence as possible. Some will be strong, sone will be weak.

I feel the injunctions are related. The damages were about 50% damages (unpaid licence fees) and about 50% punitive. Why injunct further sales of Samsuns devices as well. Thats two punshments. Unless Samsung stated that they wont pay licence fees, which I had not heard was the case.

Oxnsox   I agree

To me, I agree that the jury issue is very valid, that needs to be assessed on appeal. I also feel that a key issue was intent. Samsung executives intended to copy, that is evidence. They asked their design team to design out these issues, the design team are in fact doing that over the last year, and Google told them not to copy. That I feel is the main issue. Of note is that Apple and Google are discussing matters, thats a good thing. They are both aggressive fighters in the marketplace, but are at least talking things. Samsung are the opposite, act now, fight later, that is what needs to change. Remember, this is not an Apple vs Android issue, Android and Apple have no patent issues, Android is clean. And why is there no LTE patent issue over the new iPad? Samsung said they will injunct the iPhone 5 if it has LTE, that doesnt really make sense to me if the ipad is left untouched.


419 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 98

Subscriber

  Reply # 682178 6-Sep-2012 10:17 Send private message

Thankfully Apple didn't invent the wheel... or did they? It has rounded corners, it's mobile, it looks like the top view of an apple, you have to touch it to change it... we are all doomed :)

384 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 4

Subscriber

  Reply # 682181 6-Sep-2012 10:22 Send private message

So you are saying that the jury wasn't allowed to consider prior art, but Samsung entered prior art into evidence and the judge allowed prior art to be entered into evidence because in all cases both parties bring as much evidence as possible, even evidence that is not allowed to be considered?

Seems legit.

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic




Twitter »
Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:




News »

Trending now »
Hot discussions in our forums right now:

CGA. Is it fair?
Created by BTR, last reply by bazzer on 22-Aug-2014 11:02 (86 replies)
Pages... 4 5 6


Vodafone TV multicast settings on pfSense?
Created by kenkeniff, last reply by hio77 on 23-Aug-2014 23:15 (134 replies)
Pages... 7 8 9


Warning about Pure Hosting
Created by LostBoyNZ, last reply by MichaelNZ on 23-Aug-2014 23:06 (48 replies)
Pages... 2 3 4


Lightbox press event release
Created by freitasm, last reply by Lightbox on 22-Aug-2014 17:04 (469 replies)
Pages... 30 31 32


It was hardly 'hacking' was it?
Created by CB_24, last reply by gzt on 21-Aug-2014 22:26 (97 replies)
Pages... 5 6 7


Why is there no right to compensation for wrongful imprisonment in NZ?
Created by Geektastic, last reply by networkn on 23-Aug-2014 22:40 (18 replies)
Pages... 2


Free: Smart Button for your Android device
Created by freitasm, last reply by BigHammer on 23-Aug-2014 19:04 (111 replies)
Pages... 6 7 8


Vodafone now charging you to receive a bill via post
Created by stocksp, last reply by Linuxluver on 22-Aug-2014 19:45 (86 replies)
Pages... 4 5 6



Geekzone Live »
Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.

Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.