Apple and HTC offer to show agreement to Samsung, but heavily redacted
The documents of the agreement Apple and HTC will provide to Samsung will be heavily redacted (blacked out), offering just 33 words for Samsung to actually read. The rest is related to the fees that been agreed to between HTC and Apple and will be marked as “Highly Confidential – Attorney’s Eyes Only.” Apparently, the “Attorney’s Eyes Only” designation was Samsung’s idea, so HTC accepted that in lieu of limiting access of the agreement altogether.
Of course, Samsung’s lawyers want to see an un-redacted agreement, including the royalty rate. HTC has previously stated that rumors about what the license fees being paid were baseless. It also serves HTC to not have to reveal its costs from such agreements, so we can expect that HTC will challenge such motions. For Apple’s part, they state that Samsung has offered “no reason…why the consideration amount is relevant…”
It seems that curiosity is driving the request to see the fee structure, whereas it is the restrictions that Apple and HTC agreed to that would have a more practical bearing on Samsung’s strategy. The next hearing is scheduled for December 6th. We know you will be watching.
source: FOSS Patents
2 January Samsung will have to reveal sales data in Apple patent lawsuit
7 December Judge Koh pleas for 'global peace' between Apple and Samsung for the sake of consumers, incites laughter
6 December Samsung and Apple meet with Judge Lucy Koh for post-trial hearing
6 December Apple and Samsung return to court for hearing in front of Judge Koh
5 December Google's Eric Schmidt on the relationship with Apple: the adults are talking now
19. tedkord (Posts: 3388; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Admitting your problem is the first step. Congratulations.
23. AnTuTu (Posts: 593; Member since: 14 Oct 2012)
Mxyzptlk:- Go n work in a fruit store dude. Definitely you have got some serious mentally issues.
26. -box- (Posts: 3470; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Wow, apple doesn't think these terms are relevant?
Greedy and narrowminded, typical apple.
At least Microsoft licenses its patents at the same rate for all the OEMs, most pay $5-15 per handset for them depending on what all all patents are utilized. Apple should learn from this.
2. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 2434; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
If they cared about fair business, Samsung would do the agreement. It would actually save more money than getting crushed in lawsuits.
4. ajac09 (Posts: 1105; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)
they do care about fair business hence why they want to see it hence why they are not letting apple wallk all over them
5. chaoticrazor (Posts: 2346; Member since: 28 Aug 2012)
mate your so one sided its unbelievable, you must be the most unreasonable and biased person on here. considering apple fired the first shot shouldnt you be saying ''apple needs to apologize, drop all these petty patents and court battles and use that money to re-invent the iphone''
8. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 2434; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Why should Apple apologize for Samsung copying their ideas and designs?
11. XPERIA-KNIGHT (Posts: 2375; Member since: 08 Aug 2012)
apple has copied too man......accept that
12. chaoticrazor (Posts: 2346; Member since: 28 Aug 2012)
im sorry but apple never have there own idea's they repackage and market other peoples ideas to make it look like theres. besides by your logic the maker of the first ever mobile phone should sue every other company as they have copied right?
with apple way of doing things innovation and tech are dead, no company will have any room to play and develop there idea's in fear of breaching some stupid vague patent
besides as mentioned before by others lg and the prada came out before the iphone so lg should be suing
14. plgladio (Posts: 311; Member since: 05 Dec 2011)
Hey Mxzyzptlk one thing about you is even Cook would not be a die hard fan of Apple but you are, fans and lovers are blind always on the attracted thing..
16. MistB (Posts: 508; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)
Sorry, you aren't KA from Germancarforum are you? Same about of bias and one sided blindness in his argument, it's ridiculous. Blinded by badge, nothing more. That's what Apple has become in the end.
22. tedkord (Posts: 3388; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
I'll ask you again. How much is Apple paying LG for the Prada design? How much are they paying Palm for the icon grid? How much are they paying Neonode for swipe to unlock?
Samsung didn't copy Apple any more than Apple copied others.
And, if and when Apple come out with a TV, and its a rectangle with thin bezels with apps (like every Samsung, LG, etc...) TV out there, what will they pay for copying that design? And, where will be your cries of outrage over it. Were all know the answer to that one.
15. GeekMovement (Posts: 1082; Member since: 09 Sep 2011)
chaoticrazor is so very true. mxyzptlk has nothing in his/her head except for that avatar.
lol talk about fairness because Apple has always been fair as we all know..
6. _Bone_ (Posts: 1735; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)
So how much should they ask for the LTE patents, in fairness?
7. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 2434; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
They got in trouble with the government for trying that.
21. tedkord (Posts: 3388; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
No, they didn't, because Samsung's LTE patents are not FRAND, and to quote Apple, they are not required to license them at all.
9. dsDoan (Posts: 203; Member since: 28 Dec 2011)
Apple doesn't do "fair business." When licensing from Apple, it's going to cost big. If licensing to Apple, they'll pay $1 per device. And that is Apple being generous.
20. tedkord (Posts: 3388; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Right. Because Apple's offer of $20 per phone while only paying out $0.001 was both fair and serious.
What color is the sky in your world?
24. joey_sfb (Posts: 1473; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
You really make a good spoke man for apple just as stubborn and unreasonable.
17. Valdomero (Posts: 116; Member since: 13 Nov 2012)
Samsung's may be planning avoid and attack at any blind spot apple may have (if any), seems tough by having only 33 words available to read.
Hopes on Sammy won't let us down.
18. lyndon420 (Posts: 1358; Member since: 11 Jul 2012)
I'm betting the blacked out parts are the fees that HTC is paying for apple's amazing and innovative rectangle technology.
28. roscuthiii (Posts: 1602; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
I guess it doesn't really matter right now what fee amounts are being paid to Apple provided that Apple has agreed to any fees at all if these are the patents Apple had previously claimed they would never license in the first place citing irreparable harm.
All Samsung really needs is the patent numbers and any verbiage granting license. That might be doable in 33 words no matter how many pages the contract is.