Samsung could be fined billions for trying to ban Apple products in Europe
0. phoneArena 26 Dec 2012, 15:27 posted on
Korean manufacturer Samsung is staring at fines potentially in the billions of dollars after trying to get Apple devices banned in Europe using its FRAND patents as leverage; additionally, Google wholly owned Google subsidiary Motorola faces similar charges trying to get a ban placed on the Microsoft Xbox 360 while holding patents on Wi-Fi and the H.264 video standard...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
35. tiara6918 (Posts: 1908; Member since: 26 Apr 2012)
Why do they have to fine such a huge amount? Were there damages done?
61. mrochester (unregistered)
I don't think it matters whether any damage has actually been doing. The issue is Samsung showed they were fully prepared to use their FRAND patents in an abusive and anti-competitive way.
37. Aeires (unregistered)
Key phrase in the entire story: "When Apple refused to pay what it considered to be an unfair licensing fee..."
Apple thinks anything fair is too much, not much merit in their point of view when they don't want to pay what everyone else has paid.
42. jroc74 (Posts: 5260; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Of course....folks will over look that part. Maybe because Apple sells so many iDevices....they think they should pay less. If I sell 10 devices and pay 2% per device and you sell 100 million and have to pay 2% per device....2% is 2%. Sorry you are so successful.
I wouldnt be surprised if Apple is thinking this.
62. mrochester (unregistered)
How do we know that Apple don't want to pay what everyone else pays?
69. Aeires (unregistered)
Because their stance on what should be paid was brought out in the Samsung trial. Apple wanted a ridiculous amount for Samsung to use their patents but only wanted to pay pennies for Samsung's patents.
71. mrochester (unregistered)
How do you know how that compares to what other companies pay and license to Samsung for access to the same tech?
73. Aeires (unregistered)
No one pays pennies for vital patents. Standard fees usually run around 2-4 dollars mostly. On the flipside, it's highly unlikely that anyone pays the $24 dollars Apple had requested Samsung pay for one of their patents.
Research, information is available if you look.
77. mrochester (unregistered)
What about what Samsung/Apple requested to cross license from the other party? You've only mentioned monetary compensation so far.
41. willard12 (Posts: 1086; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
"Apple seeks to defend the illegal use of patents it owns which are not essential to a product such as the "pinch-to-zoom" gesture"
Can you still own patent if it's invalidated?
44. jroc74 (Posts: 5260; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
And thats 1 out of 3 that the USPTO made invalid.
45. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 6979; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)
are u fcking serious? When this dumb sht is going to end. how the hell the EU will fine Samsung and not Apple? Apple is the one BANING SAMSUNG in every other country yet they got away with it excluded some countries. Their being PAID BY APPLE I'm sure of IT
48. corporateJP (Posts: 2284; Member since: 28 Nov 2009)
This is comedy.
Apple doesn't want to pay for something (the "fair price" at this time is under question) and is allowed to continue manufacturing and sales of their devices, and the owner of the patent will be fined?
Europe is a bigger joke legally than the U.S.
57. lubba (Posts: 1313; Member since: 17 Jan 2011)
Yes too bad for Samsung but that's what you get for trying to be like somebody else. As Google, I hope they get penalized to the max! And to that former Motorola CEO Sanjay, you are a f**king idiot. Sold his company to Google in a time when MS was trying to Cort for their business of building building WP. Now the idiot is fired, hundreds layed off, and devisions being sold off. Motorola is basically dead! The devil has taken over.
58. ultimatebatman (Posts: 52; Member since: 04 Dec 2012)
So extremely basic rectangualr designs and common pinching and swiping gestures are exempt form fair use? Who are these Ahole jusdges who consid=stently drink Apple's koolaid? And why is it immediately decided that Apple:s price is the correct price to charge for FRAND patents? We all know Apple expects to pay the minimum for the maximum, like they do with their labor and materials, so why should Motorola and Samsung accept to be ripped off???
63. mrochester (unregistered)
I think you're missing the point of the article which is the difference between FRAND and non-FRAND patents. It isn't up to Apple to decide how much to pay for Samsung's FRAND patents, it's up to the court (which has yet to be decided). In the meantime, Samsung cannot stop Apple from making or selling products using those patents (which is what Samsung tried to do, and are now being investigated and fined for).
74. ultimatebatman (Posts: 52; Member since: 04 Dec 2012)
I understand the difference. My argument is that Apple patented ridiculously common shapes and designs, and sues everyone for using them. Shouldn't a rectangular shape or simple pinch and swipes be governed by "Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory" usage laws? It seems that the law turns a blind eye in this case, since Apple saw able to gouge 1 billion $ out of Samsung for their use.
78. mrochester (unregistered)
Apple can patent whatever they like; it's up to the respective patent offices to decide whether something is patentable or not. Only patents that form part of an agreed standard are subject to FRAND terms. The pinch to zoom gesture isn't an agreed standard and therefore doesn't fall into the FRAND category. Manufacturers could design and implement other ways of zooming into and out of content on a touchscreen device (such as a jog dial, or + and - buttons on the screen etc).
59. Shino (banned) (Posts: 196; Member since: 23 Jul 2012)
Bhehe, this could be the grand finale for Samsung. But they are stupid. What do they expected? When you are a thief, finally you get what you deserve. What is more interesting is that EC finally went after the big liar of them all - Giggle.
67. tedkord (Posts: 6537; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
When will Apple get what it deserves? (Desktop GUI and mouse, multitouch, swipe to unlock, notification shade, wireless sync, etc...)
72. mrochester (unregistered)
Does Apple deserve anything?
79. mrochester (unregistered)
I think the reduction in competition and innovation that would lead to would cripple the industry. I don't think a one horse race with only Samsung in the pack sounds very appealing!
85. jroc74 (Posts: 5260; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Exactly...thats what Apple wants. I dont wanna hear no sympathy posts about Apple.
TV manufactures dont sue each other over corners and icons. car manufactures dont either. Even the few lawsuits that did happen have fizzeled away. Now a days, sometimes I cant tell what car is what unless I look for the car maker sign.
87. mrochester (unregistered)
A one horse race with only Apple in the pack isn't appealing in the slightest. The current level of competition drives the innovation that we have witnessed, with particularly Samsung and Apple engaged in a one-upmanship battle. That's absolutely brilliant for us as consumers as it means we get amazing products. What the industry desperately needs is a strong third player (or ideally, even more) such as Windows Phone or BB10 so that we have a greater choice of eco-systems rather than the current lock down of Android (Samsung) and iOS (Apple).