x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • "Reject Samsung's appeal," Apple says to the U.S. Supreme Court

"Reject Samsung's appeal," Apple says to the U.S. Supreme Court

Posted: , by Alan F.

Tags :

Samsung is trying to push the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its appeal of the patent suit Apple won against the company. In its filing, Samsung says that U.S. patent laws are archaic and are from an outdated time period when a device like the smartphone couldn't have been fathomed. Samsung has focused its appeal on what it says are ancient laws surrounding design patents. Considering the importance of the issue on a national level, it is possible that the Supreme Court will decide to hear the case.

On Thursday, Apple filed its argument with the Supreme Court, writing that the Court has no business getting involved in the case. While Apple has already been paid $548 million by its rival, if the verdict is overturned Samsung will get its money back. Apple says that the method for awarding damages for infringing on design patents has been settled on for a long time and that it is not an issue that requires the Supreme Court to intervene.

Google, Facebook, Dell and HP have submitted amicus briefs on behalf of Sammy. And had Apple not been involved as the plaintiff in the case, it too might have been eager to join Samsung's clarion call for patent reform. After all, Apple itself must pay $625 million to VirnetX after a jury ruled that Apple had infringed on the company's VPN patent with its Face Time video chat. After the jury ruled in favor of VirnetX earlier this week, Apple said "We are surprised and disappointed by the verdict. Cases like this simply reinforce the desperate need for patent reform."

Check out the Supreme Court filings from both Samsung and Apple, which are embedded below.
   Samsung vs Apple - Samsung's Appeal to the Supreme Court by inafried

   Samsung vs Apple - Samsung's Appeal to the Supreme Court by inafried

source: Scribd (1), (2) via Re/code, AndroidCentral

  • Options

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 01:17

1. jesus_sheep (Posts: 257; Member since: 18 Apr 2015)

Why can't all the companies just get along?

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 05:32 17

22. Finalflash (Posts: 3096; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)

They largely did until Apple decided to sue people for their invalid patents.

posted on 06 Feb 2016, 21:12

59. cheetah2k (Posts: 1578; Member since: 16 Jan 2011)

Its about time the other major players in the market stood by Samsung and fight Apple.

Apple = greedy asssssh0lef**ks

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 01:34 23

2. joey_sfb (Posts: 5744; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)

Apple is a two headed serpents.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 01:36 21

3. SirYar (Posts: 351; Member since: 02 Jul 2014)

Court's reply - "Stop being greedy assholes"

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 01:54 13

5. NoToFanboys (Posts: 1563; Member since: 03 Oct 2015)

Sadly people on the court are also "greedy assholes"

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 02:29 2

8. TerryTerius (Posts: 1789; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)

Some of them are. For example, I can't really fathom how you could say Ruth Bader Ginsberg is a greedy asshole.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 03:35 7

14. NoToFanboys (Posts: 1563; Member since: 03 Oct 2015)

Okay, I stand corrected.
"Some" if not "Most"

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 04:09 1

16. senseiJ (Posts: 155; Member since: 02 May 2015)

Antonin Scalia looks like a mafia thug.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 01:44 16

4. johanbiff (Posts: 403; Member since: 31 Mar 2015)

Apple are some greedy MF`s! that`s one of the reasons I don`t buy Apple devices.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 02:32 3

11. TerryTerius (Posts: 1789; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)

Apple charges what people are willing to pay. Look at it this way, if you don't want a Mercedes, Jaguar, Cadillac, etc. You are more than free to buy a Volkswagen, Ford, Honda, or any other lower market car. Apple works on the same principle.

But I'm not surprised they are being hypocritical. Acting in your self-interest and ignoring what may be the greater good often results in hypocrisy.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 07:04 4

25. willard12 (Posts: 1686; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)

You are correct with the idea that Apple charges what people are willing to pay. However, your comparison falls when looking at the fact that Mercedes, Jaguar, Cadillac spend more on its components in building their products than the others you mentioned. That definitely is not the case with Apple.

The idea of greed isn't based simply on the mark-up, but how many of these types of law suits existed before 2007, when Apple went after HTC, Motorola, and Samsung seeking bans to create a monopoly? All of these companies went out and started buying patents left and right like it was an arms race after Apple started suing them for things that they themselves copied. Apple supporters still ignore or dance around the "slide to unlock" justification.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 10:19 1

36. TerryTerius (Posts: 1789; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)

How much a company spends on engineering or making their cars as complicated as possible isn't necessarily connected to how reliable they are. Market segment has nothing to do with how well a car will hold up over time. It is absolutely true that higher end brands generally spend more on engineering and refinement. The flipside of that, is that it generally means there is more to go wrong and it will only be more expensive once it does. I can tell you that from personal experience with my Jaguar XF, and my previous BMW 3 series.


There are a hell of a lot of premium brands that are not as reliable as cars from brands that cost significantly less. True, you are getting something that is generally quieter, has more features and is more stylish. But that doesn't necessarily mean they are mechanically superior.

That being said, you are right about Apple's unsavory legal practices. But as I said on a different post, morality often has little place in business.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 07:31 1

28. marorun (Posts: 3597; Member since: 30 Mar 2015)

With a single difference thats mercedes , jaguar ect are not the most sold cars wich make them more unique and make ppl want it.

Iphone are very common so for me thats alone make it lost its magic.
Vertu phone on other hand thats real high end phone thats are special and rare.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 10:26

37. TerryTerius (Posts: 1789; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)

Depending on which models were talking about, BMWs, Mercedes, and Audis are hardly uncommon. They may not be the highest sellers, but they are far from being rare. They each sell well over 1 million cars every year. It is exactly like the relationship of iOS and Android. There are a hell of a lot more android devices. But it is not at all uncommon to see an iPhone despite the higher price tag it carries than most Android phones. A huge part of the reason Mercedes, BMW, Jaguar and Audi charge what they do is because of brand cachet. That is partly what Apple operates on. The perception of premium is nearly more important then the reality of the product.

Vertu, Tonino, Gresso and the like would be more analogous to Aston Martin, Bentley, Rolls Royce, Ferrari, Pagani, etc.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 08:05

32. NoToFanboys (Posts: 1563; Member since: 03 Oct 2015)

While I'm no hater like that guy you replied to, I would say that your analogy is bad.

posted on 06 Feb 2016, 05:54

56. Inotamira (Posts: 173; Member since: 06 Feb 2016)

Why exactly is stating facts equatable to "hater" exactly?

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 02:26 17

6. Carbo (Posts: 26; Member since: 07 Aug 2015)

Most patents of this case was invalidated, that's why Apple doesn't want the supreme court to look at it.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 09:31

35. shm224 (Posts: 56; Member since: 19 Mar 2015)

@carbo : this particular SCOTUS petition has to do with Apple design patents that are still valid, but allowed Apple to take away Samsung's entire profit. Samsung is basically the damage should be apportioned like how every damage award is calculated.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 02:28 9

7. Ashoaib (Posts: 3229; Member since: 15 Nov 2013)

when money is coming, apple is saying supreme court should not hear this case because it is fair to get money... when apple lost, it is saying that court is unfair and should hear the case again

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 02:30 6

9. TerryTerius (Posts: 1789; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)

Well, yes. They're acting in whatever way they feel is in their best interest. That is entirely predictable even if it isn't necessarily moral. Then again, capitalism is in no way shape or form about morality.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 07:32 3

29. marorun (Posts: 3597; Member since: 30 Mar 2015)

And i personally wont buy devices from the most immoral one of the lot.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 02:31 1

10. AlikMalix (Posts: 5887; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)

How many times does Samsung have to loose the case before they stop appealing? Its time Samsung just pays up. I'm so tired of this case. Samsung looses, Samsung files for appeal, looses again, appeals again, and again and again. Not just with Apple - Samsung does this crap with everyone who sued them. Time to make them stop and own up.

I know bunch of you will disagree, but all ya hate Apple anyway - that's your problem.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 02:38 26

12. TerryTerius (Posts: 1789; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)

You have any idea how many companies that is applicable to? To put it another way, if you ran any given company being sued why in the hell would you just say f*** it and pay when you have a chance to have the entire case overturned and not have to deal with the financial loss? That's basic sense

But as the article pointed out, in the grand scheme of things Samsung is ABSOLUTELY right even if they are mostly pursuing this to avoid that payment. Apple itself would actually benefit if they lost this case with Samsung and it resulted in a change to patent law. Honestly, Apple itself knows that and I can guarantee you they are going to be in the position Samsung is currently in one day.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 08:04

31. VZWuser76 (Posts: 4210; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)

If they were smart, Samsung would use Apple's own words against them. In the article the other day about Apple losing the case regarding Facetime, didn't someone associated with Apple say that that instance was an example of the need for patent reform. So apparently both companies are in agreement with that notion, but Apple just wants to get paid before the changes are made.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 08:58

33. AlikMalix (Posts: 5887; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)

It's fine to appeal, but not so many times for the same trial. Samsung is just buying time in hopes that the patents It infringed on are no longer matter. It's petty and it must stop.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 10:51

39. tedkord (Posts: 11700; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)

Exactly how many appeals should one file if he's unjustly fined?

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 15:47

44. VZWuser76 (Posts: 4210; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)

Three. The number you're looking for is three. ;-)

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 15:47

43. VZWuser76 (Posts: 4210; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)

Who are we to say that it must stop? And if the patents they were found guilty on get invalidated, how is that bad for them? And if they just paid Apple from the start, how fast do you think Apple would be to pay them back?

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 15:53

45. AlikMalix (Posts: 5887; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)

Ted and VZ, I respect your input here on PA... But you guys missing the point in making. Samsung should have the patents invalidated first then make their products not the other way around. It's not samsungs fault or apples for filing patents and being granted some of them - it's the USPO that need to get their s**t together - and stop validating and invalidating at whim - how the hell does someone protect their profits? Please retread this without thinking I'm biased toward Apple.

I'm trying to explain this in post #41 as well. Apple sued because they were granted a patent for which (while it was valid) Samsung has infinginged upon. If it was invalidated - that's fine - it probaly shouldn't have been granted to begin with - but it was and Samsung knowingly infringed.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 15:57

47. VZWuser76 (Posts: 4210; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)

And like said below, Apple has done the same thing that Samsung has, using other IP without paying. So why nothing about that? You make it sound like Samsung is the only one doing this FFS.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 02:59 18

13. FluffyBled (Posts: 515; Member since: 10 Sep 2014)

Why would you be tired of it ... it's not like you're involved in the case anyway!

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 03:40 6

15. Norris (Posts: 121; Member since: 26 Jun 2015)

You are an Apple butt sniffing idiot.No one cares if you are tired of this case.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 04:33 4

17. JumpinJackROMFlash (Posts: 450; Member since: 10 Dec 2014)

You should ask how many times will Apple misuse the patent system before they get a clue. As apparent by the likes below everyone disagrees with your silly opinion.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 04:48 2

19. Podrick (Posts: 733; Member since: 19 Aug 2015)

Why should Samsung pay for the invalidated Apple patents?

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 07:18 4

26. willard12 (Posts: 1686; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)

Don't worry, all of Apple's patents have been invalidated so the days of Samsung having to appeal Apple's patents for their copied features are coming to an end.

Also, because you aren't a complete hypocrite, I assume you are going to send your ranting on appeals the other way. The law suit Apple lost yesterday to VirnetX was an APPEAL. Apple originally lost $300 million, they APPEALED, and then the jury doubled it $600 million.

I know you will disagree, but you're a lemming who supports anything Apple does without any regards to the facts even if you contradict yourself, that's your problem.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 10:53 1

40. tedkord (Posts: 11700; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)

And, Apple has stated they will appeal again.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 07:36 4

30. marorun (Posts: 3597; Member since: 30 Mar 2015)

In fact Apple doing the exact same thing all the time but its okay if Apple do it but not if Samsung do it?

They loose a patent case they ask for patent system to be changed.
They win a patent case they are happy to get the money and say nothing about the broken patent system.

If you are ok with this thats your problem but we are not!

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 09:27 4

34. Techist (Posts: 242; Member since: 27 Jan 2015)

"Its time Samsung just pays up."

Typical Apple fanboy statement. Doesn't even know that Samsung already paid, even when it is explicitly stated in the article and was widely reported when it happened. An example of the kind of blind, uninformed loyalty that Apple loves.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 10:49 1

38. tedkord (Posts: 11700; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)

Samsung should appeal until justice is done. The patents the were sued over have been invalidated. Why should they pay for patents that aren't valid?

Do you think Apple will just pay after one appeal for the VirnetX judgement?

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 13:20

41. AlikMalix (Posts: 5887; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)

I'm so sick and tired of this argument it's the same thing over and over again... You guys are buncha 12 yearolds who think the world is fair.

Apple and Samsung and everyone else file for thousands of patents, out of which only a few are granted. Once the patents are granted (no matter how silly it is) they are Protected by Law... If Samsung thinks that USPO granted Apple a patent that's invalid - they shouldn't just ignore the LAW and infringe on a silly patent - they should file a petition or w/e to revoke the patent first. Samsung just builds whatever they fit regardless of the granted patents - and that's why Apple sues - because they legally can and should.

There are patents that Samsung and Apple and others infringe on accidentally, for which they may fight or settle quietly - happens 50 times a year. But there are a lot of evidence that Samsung maliciously wanted to copy original iPhone and apples only defence was some stupid dress patent that includes f**ken rounded corners. Samsung since then has changed their designs a lot and now are recognizable on their own. But during iPhone 2/3GS Samsung told their designers and actually made phones to mimick iPhones - and that's why they got sued. They've been appealing since then... whether the patents were invalidated or not at the time Apple filed a lawsuit they were valid - and Apple had the right to sue.

All I'm saying is that Samsung drags it out to the point that it's pathetic now. And they have been found guiltily over and over and over again. I think the courts are just giving in to samsung because they're just sick of this s**t. Devices in question are no longer sold and Apple probaly just doesn't want to fight anymore - and let's Samsung win to invalidate patents. And just move one - yet the courts still find Samsung guilty and makes them pay - Samsung appeals again ffs.

The only reason why we are still having this type of argument is because samusung was found guilty still with patents that are still valid and they have appealed again. They should be sued just for wasting time!

Ofcourse there are 20 to 1 on this forum and you all holding hands against evil Apple. But get out of your Apple hating bandwagon and see the real world - Apple filed a suit because it was granted a patent and Samsung infringed. And now they keep speaking till everyone is tired of it and giving Samsung what they want just to shut them up.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 13:28

42. AlikMalix (Posts: 5887; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)

If Samsung has a problem with what is granted to Apple or anyone else - they should file against USPO - even Apple agrees that USPO needs fixing. But no one is gonna sit and wait for it - it's a cut throat society and companies are trying their best to protect their profits. If this was the other way around and Apple infringed on samsungs widget or some little crap and appealed for years and years you'd be on my side saying that Apple just needs to pay up and stop appealing like a little kid - if you disagree with me on this - you're blind fanboy.

I'm not defending Apple or against Samsung - they both need to go after USPO and change the damn thing. Because it's one thing granting a silly patent it's a big problem after a company sues for infringing spend hella money on courts and then take the patent away, "sorry". If USPO wasn't an idiot and take money from anyone for any silly thing then we wouldn't have this lawsuit.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 23:44 1

52. TerryTerius (Posts: 1789; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)

Considering your ridiculously long track record of defending Apple, you are doing just that. And there's nothing wrong with that, but you should own that instead of pretending as if you're unbiased. You like Apple and the iPhone, there's nothing wrong with that and we're free to have differing opinions. Just own it.

posted on 06 Feb 2016, 00:09

53. AlikMalix (Posts: 5887; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)

I have never said I was unbiased in my opinions, unless I really was, and I never hide that I'm iPhone fan. I'm saying that you guys are taking it out on Apple when in fact Samsung is dragging this too. But the REAL culprit here is USPO. They grant patents then invalidate them in the middle of a trial - they need to either set higher standards or own up to a patent that they granted. Samsung and Apple file for thousands of patents, not all are awarded, and some that are awarded are stupid - but they were awarded and now Apple and Samsung has a legal right to defend them. Why is it so hard to understand?

posted on 07 Feb 2016, 02:05

61. TerryTerius (Posts: 1789; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)

Some of the ones that were awarded to Apple (that this case is being fought over) were recently invalidated. And that is the basis that Samsung is using. That a lot of the things Apple was awarded patents for should've never been given in the first place.

You're essentially arguing they should quit, pay Apple, and then go start the process all over again with the USPO. From Samsung's perspective, that makes little sense. That's why Facebook, Google, HP and others are writing to the court on Samsung's behalf right now while they see a chance.

You seem to think that I don't understand your point, I do. I just think it's not a sensible avenue.

posted on 07 Feb 2016, 12:41

62. AlikMalix (Posts: 5887; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)

Terry, no it's silly to drop everything now... It's been a long hard going with Samsung some won, and plenty lost. All I'm suggesting is that all these people pointing at Apple crying foul, when it's USPO that can't make up its mind.... Apple got the patent, Samsung infringed, Apple sued. Apple did not do anything wrong, not even file a patent that you seem to find silly, Samsung and everyone else files silly patents - this one happened to be the one that Samsung infringed on. That's all I'm saying: Samsung new it was breaking the law and still did it. If it was Apple (no matter how silly it was) some of these guys would give them the electric chair by now.

The thing is, if Samsung appealed and all was dropped right away - that's fine.... But it will be like the 5th time Samsung lost the case and going to appeal without beginning any new evidence. The fact that other android "buddies" are siding with Samsing doesn't mean they're right - they're gaining up on Apple because they're the only ones making money in this market. It's funny how it's always the consortium of android against one company and they still loosing and loosing bad.

posted on 09 Feb 2016, 18:59

63. TerryTerius (Posts: 1789; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)

Facebook and Google don't get along in the slightest and Facebook has been making plans to ditch the play store altogether in order to circumvent google's stranglehold on android . HP doesn't make any android devices whatsoever, Granted they do make chromebooks which wouldn't really be influenced by the outcome of this case either way.

The fact that you tried to make this an android OEM versus Apple thing shows that you honestly have no idea what you're talking about. This is Apple owning several common usage patents, which are the equivalent to Mercedes only patents for four wheels on the car or doors that open sideways.

Yes, the USPO should not have given those. But Apple wanted those in the first place in order to prevent competition, which is something they have an extremely long history of doing. i'm not saying that's immoral, I'm just saying that's what it is.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 15:55

46. VZWuser76 (Posts: 4210; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)

So what are your thoughts on the patents for things like 3G and LTE that Apple has willfully infringed upon? This isn't a small piece of a UI, without it the phone isn't a phone. Yet they don't want to pay unless they get a special deal on it.

Apple has done the exact same thing you're accusing Samsung of, yet seem to be ignoring it in their case. You're telling everyone to get off the Apple hate bandwagon. Well other companies have patents that were granted to them that Apple willfully infringed upon, why no vitriol in that case?

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 16:31

48. Diezparda (Posts: 871; Member since: 23 Oct 2013)

Aren't we all forgeting university of Wisconsin here?

Please Alix quit pointing others as a haters, aren't you the one who are biased here when it's related to your fave brand?

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 16:52

49. AlikMalix (Posts: 5887; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)

If you go back to that article on PA, you'll see my post saying "if they're guilty they should pay". Especially if Apple knew and infringed anyway. But I have not seen Apple drag a case out with appeals for years and years especially being deemed guilty for the same thing over and over. Apple sued because they had a patent in their hands granted by USPO that Samsung infringed on. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that statement. Samsung knowingly infringed on a patent that was at the time valid... And now they're still found guilty on patents that are still valid and theyre going to appeal for like the third time or 5th time. It's getting rediculous. That's why Apple wants it to stop - they're tired to be dragged back into court for the same damn lawsuit they won 3-5 times now.

Why can't you see the frustration?

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 19:52 1

50. willard12 (Posts: 1686; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)

I hate to break the news to you, but in the US, there is a constitutional right to due process. That LAW exists whether Alikmalix likes it or not. Apple dragged their eBook price fixing guilty verdict appeals for almost 3 years, as is their right. Through the appeals process, Samsung has only paid $500 million of what used to be $1.2 billion damages verdict. Apple didn't have a problem bringing the frivolous suit, they shouldn't have a problem with the defendant exercising their constitutional rights. If you do, who cares? Additionally, the trials process is another avenue of invalidating patents. Samsung has a right to exercise the constitutional right to due proces. Or, I guess all of the people who spent 20 years on death row and later cleared through DNA should have stopped appealing, because, you know, a jury said they were guilty and that is that.

posted on 06 Feb 2016, 00:12

54. AlikMalix (Posts: 5887; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)

I do not disagree with anything you posted... Just that Samsung has been found guilty after appeal again and again for the same thing. Maybe after 3 to 5 tries - they'll get a clue they were wrong. Yes, they got some invalidated and I don't blame Apple for filing - I blame USPO for awarding them. But it's getting old. This case dragged on for too long. That's all I'm saying.

posted on 06 Feb 2016, 15:48 2

58. willard12 (Posts: 1686; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)

You can blame the USPTO for granteding the patent, I can blame Thomas Jefferson and John Hancock for allowing the appeals process. But, had Apple never taken step 1), file for patent, and step 2) file law suit, we wouldn't have anything to drag out. If you are going to be fix a problem, it's better to fix the root, not the outcome.

posted on 06 Feb 2016, 23:30

60. AlikMalix (Posts: 5887; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)

You're absolutely right. Fix it so that you can't file for patents and then have them invalidated, or have a standard not to issue a patent that's questionable.

Samsung could also fix the root of the problem not the outcome. They infringed on patents knowingly, hoped not to get caought/sued, but got caught anyway, then argue that the patent should be invalidated. What they should have done: petition that the patent was not fair, have that patent invalidated first, and then proceed with same design. They broke a law, doesn't matter if it was Apple or McDonald's. You can't infringe on a patent and then hope to overthrow it - I can build a BMW and sell it as real thing - make money, get sued and just postpone for as long as I can by appealing again and again until everyone is just s**t tired from this garbage and just give in - good job Samsung. Apple only sued because they were granted a paten that Samsung infringed on. Whether it was silly patent or not - Samsung infringed upon it. That's my argument!!! Invalidate the patent first then proceed building your products - NOY THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

STOP AVOIDING MY POINT!!! You know exactly what I've been saying. I'm done!!!

posted on 06 Feb 2016, 00:33 2

55. VZWuser76 (Posts: 4210; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)

You haven't seen Apple drag a case on for years? How about Nokia or Ericsson? Both of those didn't come to an end for years and years. How could they not know they violated the patents? They didn't create and patent those technologies, but they used them just the same. Can you honestly believe that they were using others IP without knowing it, especially since they are well known patents? They're FRAND patents, which should guarantee that the owner is compensated for them because it has been made a standard. In other words, your device can't function without them.

Sure, there's nothing wrong with that statement, just like the same can be said for when Apple does it. These suits are worth millions of dollars. It would be poor business to just give in, and I doubt their shareholders would go for that either, just as the same can be said for Apple.

I see the frustration, I have it as well. But Apple has done the same in cases where it was the defendant. Maybe not as many times, but those other suits weren't worth as much either. My frustration also comes from people who act like Apple is the only one who should be able to collect on people infringing on their IP.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 04:46

18. Supersonic (Posts: 201; Member since: 15 May 2015)

Apple the biggest joker of 21st century.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 04:52 2

20. hanabi (Posts: 177; Member since: 08 Oct 2015)

Apple fined 625 m for stealing vpn tech used in facetime and samsung fined 548 for round corner . Which IT company is copycate here?

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 06:26 3

24. ibend (Posts: 4615; Member since: 30 Sep 2014)

it already mindblowing that they can patent that "round corner" shape, lol
I wonder, who hold the patent for round steering wheel, or round disc brake, lol..

at least samsung still get some billion from apple each years for buying their component

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 05:09 6

21. tedkord (Posts: 11700; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)

Reject Samsung's appeal! But hear ours in the VirtnetX case. We need patent reform, but not until we get paid.

posted on 05 Feb 2016, 05:41 1

23. Baracus (Posts: 223; Member since: 15 Sep 2012)

And here I thought Apple were wanting patent system reform after they lost a case.
But the only reform they want is how much they can legally bribe the politicians.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories