• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

apple wants samsung to pay 40 per phone

Apple's phone tapping number feature, unified search, data synchronization, slide-to-unlock, and autocomplete.
Click to expand...

another proof of how corrupt the US Patent system is 😵
 
Samsung should first delay their hardware supplies to Apple and then cancel it indefinately when Apple starts running short. Oh, and they should drug an Apple employee and inject him with Ebola, so the whole company is infected before it's discovered. Apple is the Al Qaida of technology.
 
Skyclad1uhm1 said:
Samsung should first delay their hardware supplies to Apple and then cancel it indefinately when Apple starts running short. Oh, and they should drug an Apple employee and inject him with Ebola, so the whole company is infected before it's discovered. Apple is the Al Qaida of technology.
Click to expand...

seems that apple is possibly going over to tsmc
 
gevorg said:
another proof of how corrupt the US Patent system is 😵
Click to expand...

:thumbsdown:

Have you read the patents in question?'

Do you understand them?

Do you understand anything (yes anything) about U.S. patent law or the U.S. patent system?

No? That is what I thought. You are just making blanket statements based on third party information that happens to be incorrect as well.

Also - the linked articles incredulity about the asserted value of "only 5" patents is ridiculous. The number of patents involved has no bearing on their value. Apple does not have to license their patented technology to Samsung at all, after all. That is one of the salient reasons businesses pursue patents at all.
 
remembering that the last jury foreman said and what his history with samsung was. and also some of what i have read about lucy koh as well as throwing out the stuff from samsung and not apple. wondering if there is major corruption going on here.

can some outside organizations do some research as to what is really going on?
 
Skyclad1uhm1 said:
Samsung should first delay their hardware supplies to Apple and then cancel it indefinately when Apple starts running short. Oh, and they should drug an Apple employee and inject him with Ebola, so the whole company is infected before it's discovered. Apple is the Al Qaida of technology.
Click to expand...

Or, OR, Samsung can quit ripping Apple off. But we all know that won't happen, so they better lawyer up.

Apple should bury Samsung for blatantly ripping them off time and time again. If Apple wasn't around, Samsung would be making the Razor 10 knockoff now.
 
Last edited:
Sho'Nuff said:
:thumbsdown:

Have you read the patents in question?'

Do you understand them?

Do you understand anything (yes anything) about U.S. patent law or the U.S. patent system?

No? That is what I thought. You are just making blanket statements based on third party information that happens to be incorrect as well.

Also - the linked articles incredulity about the asserted value of "only 5" patents is ridiculous. The number of patents involved has no bearing on their value. Apple does not have to license their patented technology to Samsung at all, after all. That is one of the salient reasons businesses pursue patents at all.
Click to expand...
YOU!

Maybe you can help us plebes understand the validity of the patents in play here. Most of us don't understand, for example, why slide to unlock, or even data synchronization were allowed a patents.
 
baydude said:
Why isn't Apple sueing HTC, Motorola/Google, BlackBerry, and LG well?
Click to expand...

MotoGoogle has enough cell phone patents that they could countersue with to keep Apple in court for years.

HTC isn't doing so well right now, so there isn't much profit in suing them. Same with Blackberry.

LG? Not sure.
 
I look at this as Apple trying to get what money they can while they can. If Samsung can put together a product and sell a ton of them then it goes to show that Apple has an inability to capture those customers that Samsung has.

Also, the value ($40 per phone) seems a bit high, but then they know this and are probably basing their demands on previous successes. Considering how much money is out there, I'd fight the case over and over. I would then cease all business with Apple on the hardware level, and discount hardware to Apple's competition.

We know Apple likes anal sex so its time to give it to them from both the front and back doors. Hell, my next phone will be a Samsung JUST TO SPITE APPLE.
 
BarkingGhostar said:
I look at this as Apple trying to get what money they can while they can. If Samsung can put together a product and sell a ton of them then it goes to show that Apple has an inability to capture those customers that Samsung has.

Also, the value ($40 per phone) seems a bit high, but then they know this and are probably basing their demands on previous successes. Considering how much money is out there, I'd fight the case over and over. I would then cease all business with Apple on the hardware level, and discount hardware to Apple's competition.

We know Apple likes anal sex so its time to give it to them from both the front and back doors. Hell, my next phone will be a Samsung JUST TO SPITE APPLE.
Click to expand...

It's more than just a 'bit' high - it's so far beyond any past precedent that it's ludicrous.

I like this paragraph from Foss Patents regarding this:

-----------

I still believe that SEP and non-SEP issues must not be mixed up in connection with injunctive relief. But when it comes to the FR part of FRAND ("fair and reasonable"), the question of double standards is legitimate (of course, provided that one takes into consideration any relevant differences between the patents or portfolios compared, but few people would probably think that patents relating to things like autocomplete are inherently more valuable than wireless SEPs).

----------

I agree that SEP and non-SEP are not the same, but fair and reasonable cut both ways. If Apple legitimately wants to make a case their patents are worth that much, it should directly impact the value of SEP as well. Samsung should allow Apple to use their SEPs, but be able to 'fairly' price them in relation to the value of other patents.
 
BarkingGhostar said:
Hell, my next phone will be a Samsung JUST TO SPITE APPLE.
Click to expand...

Prior to dating me my girlfriend had every iPhone since the iPhone 1 on up to the 4. I got her on the android (Droid Maxx first which sucked, then the SAMSUNG Note 3 which she absolutely loves). She has no intention of going back to Crabble.
 
I'm a huge Apple fanboy, but come on...enough is enough. Obviously the first Galaxy was a rip-off:

http://i.imgur.com/nkLe5DI.jpg

Yes, fine, sue them for that. And yes, the naming scheme is dumb - S4 vs. 4S? S5 vs. 5S? Okay. But let's get real: all touchscreen phones are going to work the same & pretty much look the same. But I don't see Apple selling a competitor to the 5" S4 or a waterproof iPhone like the Active. And competition is a Good Thing because it fosters innovation & drives new designs and keeps the marketplace fresh - people like to buy new stuff! As much as I love Apple, the 5/5S was a huge disappointment...gee, a slightly taller screen by 0.5"? No jumbo screen? No waterproofing? No gesture support? Only an 8 MP camera instead of 16 MP camera? No 1080p resolution? No IR transmitter? No, X, Y, or Z features?

Samsung is the one keeping up with the times here and Apple seems to be retaliating by going to court instead of innovating. Everyone I know with an iPhone is super jealous of the larger, easier-to-read, easier-to-use BIG screens on the Android phones - and yet here we are in 2014 and we still only have a 4" non-wide iPhone with none of the extra bells & whistles of the Androids, like water resistance. To me, the Apple vs. Samsung thing has gotten to the point where it is now as dumb as Candy Crush suing everyone for having the word "candy" in their names, even the apps that came before them. Our legal system can be a real joke at times.
 
Kaido said:
And yes, the naming scheme is dumb - S4 vs. 4S? S5 vs. 5S?
Click to expand...

Samsung has had it's "S" series phone since June 2010, while Apple's first usage of the "S" was on the 3GS in 2009. Then they went to iPhone 4, and then the 4S in late 2011. Samsung already had their SII out by then, and have been on an almost yearly schedule since.

The names don't coincide because of one trying to copy the other, it is just coincidence.
 
JackBurton said:
Or, OR, Samsung can quit ripping Apple off. But we all know that won't happen, so they better lawyer up.

Apple should bury Samsung for blatantly ripping them off time and time again. If Apple wasn't around, Samsung would be making the Razor 10 knockoff now.
Click to expand...

Oh look, it's the resident Apple Fanboi Club president.

Ripping off technologies... Now that's funny right there, I don't care who you are.
 
Kaido said:
I'm a huge Apple fanboy, but come on...enough is enough. Obviously the first Galaxy was a rip-off:

http://i.imgur.com/nkLe5DI.jpg

Yes, fine, sue them for that. And yes, the naming scheme is dumb - S4 vs. 4S? S5 vs. 5S? Okay. But let's get real: all touchscreen phones are going to work the same & pretty much look the same. But I don't see Apple selling a competitor to the 5" S4 or a waterproof iPhone like the Active. And competition is a Good Thing because it fosters innovation & drives new designs and keeps the marketplace fresh - people like to buy new stuff! As much as I love Apple, the 5/5S was a huge disappointment...gee, a slightly taller screen by 0.5"? No jumbo screen? No waterproofing? No gesture support? Only an 8 MP camera instead of 16 MP camera? No 1080p resolution? No IR transmitter? No, X, Y, or Z features?

Samsung is the one keeping up with the times here and Apple seems to be retaliating by going to court instead of innovating. Everyone I know with an iPhone is super jealous of the larger, easier-to-read, easier-to-use BIG screens on the Android phones - and yet here we are in 2014 and we still only have a 4" non-wide iPhone with none of the extra bells & whistles of the Androids, like water resistance. To me, the Apple vs. Samsung thing has gotten to the point where it is now as dumb as Candy Crush suing everyone for having the word "candy" in their names, even the apps that came before them. Our legal system can be a real joke at times.
Click to expand...

Some of what you say is likely true, but I don't agree that Apple isn't innovating. I think they take their time to make sure the changes aren't a failure. That's the main reason I stick with Apple; my phone always works.
 
And Xerox should sue every major electronics and software maker as they pretty much invented most of everything, and had the patents to all this, long before most of these companies were around. But they don't.

Instead we get douchie companies battling each other out of stupid shit.
 
Phynaz said:
It's a negotiating tactic. Start high and work your way down.

Really nothing to see here.
Click to expand...

No, I think there is.

You see, when Apple started on this crusade under Jobs, the intention wasn't to make money on Android. The intention was to crush Android and force it off the market.

The judge in the case has sided with Apple often but won't even consider an injunction. That means the horse will never go back in the barn and Apple will have to compete with derivatives of its iPhone concept forever. I am happy that the judge is willing to put consumers above Apple getting its way.

I see the $40 a phone as a retaliation for this failure. And I don't think they will get half of that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top