Samsung will sue Apple immediately if it releases an LTE device, allegedly partnering with Microsoft to cut dependency on Android
0. phoneArena 30 Aug 2012, 08:48 posted on
Samsung’s recent loss in court might have triggered some interesting processes inside the company pushing it to develop closer ties with Microsoft…
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
19. MikeG77 (Posts: 366; Member since: 24 Nov 2008)
Apple is in no position to really be complaining about Samsung copying there products as Apple has done the same thing. The ONLY reason why Apple took Samsung to court was not to protect IP but to hurt them financially seeing as there the ONLY one really making any money. I mean come on Apple is now valued as the richest company in the world, has the highest gross margin and keeps breaking records for sales. To me Apple is just being straight up greedy asking for $2 billion in damages when there worth over $600 billion!
Im just curious if Samsung was able to prove they didn't copy Apple and had won in court would you tell Apple to accept the decision????? Don't bother answering because im willing to bet you would say NO.
23. TheLibertine (Posts: 484; Member since: 15 Jan 2012)
Of course I would, i promise. If not the Highest Court, who would decide what is true and what not?
Well, there is God and I believe in him, but he has nothing to do with human judgement.
43. TheLibertine (Posts: 484; Member since: 15 Jan 2012)
Ah, another question: did a single Fandroid accept the decision that Samsung copied Apple? No, they are making excuses again about the Court being corrupt and as forth...
46. MikeG77 (Posts: 366; Member since: 24 Nov 2008)
I agree there was a strong resemblence to when i looked at the Galaxy S and 3GS. Im not saying that Samung did not copy some Apple features but my point is that Apple has done the same as well.
49. TheLibertine (Posts: 484; Member since: 15 Jan 2012)
Of course it did. Just not to to the degree they get sued for a billion of cash.
56. MikeG77 (Posts: 366; Member since: 24 Nov 2008)
At this point you are correct but you and i both know that US patent law is complete crap that allows people to patent the dumbest things. To me the whole trial was a waste of time seeing as Apple is gonna shell out a bunch of money for attorneys and they got 8 phones banned that are'nt really relavent anymore.
60. TheLibertine (Posts: 484; Member since: 15 Jan 2012)
Nah, it's about image. 1 billion isn't that much for Samsung and Apple especially and those eight phones really don't bug anyone anymore. They did earlier, as they helped Samsung to get those market share.
86. Supermanz28 (Posts: 17; Member since: 23 Aug 2012)
so what your saying is that its ok to copy as long as its not to much that u piss the person off and get sued? ya thats fair and totaly justifiable thats complete BS. i think apple just threw its weight around there was no need for this drama or crap i may like android but i do have apple products im not an ifan or fandroid but this was still stupid in every aspect, apple used to lawsuits so was more prepared for this where as samsung off guard its even been mentioned they were under prepared and had a weak argument for apple dispute.
63. joey_sfb (Posts: 2547; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
Keep up with your name calling... it just make you look piss with every android users which is like 68% and gaining....
64. TheLibertine (Posts: 484; Member since: 15 Jan 2012)
Well, same goes for Apple's tablet shipments. And as I never insulted someone or someone's opinion I'm relaxed about it.
69. abdane (Posts: 473; Member since: 07 Oct 2011)
bro, you're becoming the new TACO ! :D
if you know what i mean ;)
100. ncv144 (Posts: 126; Member since: 04 May 2012)
True that, havent seen taco in a long while...
96. tbar (Posts: 34; Member since: 18 Jan 2010)
Well, let's see. I have owned an iPhone and an iPad. I currently have a WP7 and an android phone. With that said, my comments are: Apple is not an innovator as they are billed. They are a GREAT marketing firm. Everything they have is copied. They just do a better job of making people think they must have Apple products. Apple is also very hyprocritical. They copied everything but don't want anyone else to use that business model. And finally, as many have said, the patent process is completely broken and ridiculous. Until that gets fixed, we are still going to be dealing with this type of garbage. Personally, I hope the patents that have been granted to Apple and others that shouldn't have been get invalidated by the courts. Then what will Apple do? Their business plan is gone! One question I have asked that has never been answered is this: when a company files for a patent and does not include information that is available that shows prior art or application of technology, why aren't they subject to fines or sanctions????
Bottom line, it's a ridiculous mess because patents are granted that nobody with any common sense or intelligence would grant.
98. lyndon420 (Posts: 1687; Member since: 11 Jul 2012)
Sorry to burst your little bubble, but you have an Android fanatic right here who thinks those Samsung phones looked alot like the crappy iphone. As far as the scrolling and pinch to zoom issues, I think that was apple reaching a little.
Apple had a good day in court yes, but I'm sure they will be feeling the pinch later. And this case did wonders for GS3 sales. (no I'm not a Sammy fan either).
128. Forsaken77 (Posts: 545; Member since: 09 Jun 2011)
I agree 100%. I prefer Android but think Samsung dug their own hole. The og iPhone was the first smatphone to look the way it does with the fully touchable screen with no buttons. 99% of smatphones use the same design. I'm surprised Apple didn't get a patent for the rectangle phone that's covered by a touch screen from top to bottom. Guess it was too general.
But why can Samsung sue if the iPhone uses LTE? LTE is a service , and it wasn't designed by Samsung.
139. Raymond_htc (Posts: 430; Member since: 06 Apr 2012)
Your note must be abused. poor note... fallen in the wrong hands.
140. Raymond_htc (Posts: 430; Member since: 06 Apr 2012)
Your note must be abused. poor note... fallen in the wrong hands.
106. bonelyfish (Posts: 1; Member since: 30 Aug 2012)
You implied it was not guilty to steal from a thief? That's non-sense. (Especially Apple added a lot of their own effort and polishing to make the unworkable worked, and Samsung just copied)
117. stealthd (Posts: 913; Member since: 12 Jun 2011)
Apple didn't get to where they are by ripping off other people's designs, and that's exactly what Samsung did.
22. MeoCao (unregistered)
Samsung LTE patents are not FRAND?
42. groupsacc (Posts: 232; Member since: 28 Feb 2012)
I thought they were FRAND. I think there was a case recently where Apple sued HTC for not letting them use the LTE technology.
52. MeoCao (unregistered)
I don't know about patent law very well, but I guess SS LTE patents licensing precedence can be used by Apple to force a similar license. And SS cannot demand the ban of infringing products but merely ask for licensing fees.
Did I miss anything?
50. ph00ny (Posts: 585; Member since: 26 May 2011)
Yes but that doesn't mean you don't pay for them.
55. MeoCao (unregistered)
Then that is disappointment b-c Apple can settle this easily, and I want they face iPhone ban.
59. ph00ny (Posts: 585; Member since: 26 May 2011)
Supposedly samsung owns more than 10% of all essential LTE related patents right behind qualcomm. Even with FRAND patents, they can still sue if apple doesn't pay up for the patent usage. As for other patents outside of FRAND category, they can still sue apple without much issues.
Biggest problem is the courtroom where jury trials like the last one flat out ignored samsung's patent validity (which apple doesn't even deny) and awarded broad design patents with massive amounts of dollars
91. -box- (Posts: 3708; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Is LTE enough of a commonplace that FRAND applies? It's still a "luxury" feature
110. sakib.ahsan (Posts: 7; Member since: 07 Aug 2012)
Good point. Common sense tells me there are no possibilities of Samsungs LTE patients not being FRAND.
115. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
then you both lack common sense.
If that were true, then Qualcomm's patents on LTE would be FRAND. Those patents are what keep others like samsung and Nvidia from properly integrating LTE on to the baseband chip.
126. ph00ny (Posts: 585; Member since: 26 May 2011)
Um you do understand that Samsung and Qualcomm have had a long relationship with cross licensing in place?
26. MeoCao (unregistered)
SS does what is best for SS. Their troubles are related very little to Android but mainly to SS own designs.
SS traditionally has strong ties with MS and that relationship is not the result of their legal defeat by Apple.
Android is safe and strong with or without SS.
28. networkdood (Posts: 6247; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
many legal analysts believe the verdict gets overturned....
87. structureman116 (Posts: 135; Member since: 14 Sep 2010)
I dont believe the entire verdict will get overturned, but the amount awarded Apple should most definitely be reduced based on the details released about iphones not even being available to carriers selling some of the "infriging" phones.
31. andro. (Posts: 1935; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)
Its funny you say that libertine because else where in the world outside of the Apple controlled US apples copy cat when going has generally be denied and apple has even been court order to make a statement on their website to say Samsung did not copy.
36. andro. (Posts: 1935; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)
Copy cat whinging I meant lol,dam auto correct!
66. dickwyn (Posts: 566; Member since: 07 May 2012)
This is just ridiculous, then after this what Apple countersues again. It is so obvious that LTE will be on the iPhone 5
73. haseebzahid (Posts: 1801; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)
lol u got 42 dislikes wonder samsung guys burning out there leave android out of this though let samsung fight on their own
92. -box- (Posts: 3708; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
If apple's using someone else's designs for their LTE chips, isn't that copying?
Also, if this happened, it would be very exciting. Verizon won't sell a new iphone without LTE. All the new WindowsPhones and Androids on AT&T have LTE. Sprint's wimax and 3g networks are due for a turndown in the next 2 years, so the iphone won't work without LTE or the new 3g network's radios.
In short, apple will be "attached to another object by an inclined plane, wrapped helically around an axis"
107. jroc74 (Posts: 4720; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
But but but....I thought if one holds patents they should protect them? isnt that what the Apple fanboys say about Apple?
I guess its ok for Apple top protect their patents...but Samsung cant?
Alrighty then..... :/
111. pikapowerize (banned) (Posts: 1869; Member since: 03 May 2012)
i dont know why will they sue apple for LTE... LTE isnt their technology....
apple just want what they own to be their... and copycats should be put to justice!!!
samsung is just stupid!!!
114. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
im not sure on the logistics of what they hold patentwise either, but obviously they do hold some patents in that area. I'm sure we will find out one way or another pretty soon.
130. jailbreakstation (Posts: 3; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
I believe this decision will affect the rights of users as well..
131. dragonstkdgirl (Posts: 144; Member since: 07 Apr 2012)
111 thumbs down? Color me impressed. Maybe I should bookmark this article and check back in a week. ;o)
2. Aeires (unregistered)
Apple needs to keep kicking the hornet's nest. Should have left well alone but they had to be the top dog no matter the cost.
3. No_Nonsense (Posts: 826; Member since: 17 Aug 2012)
Brilliant Samsung, this was bound to happen when Apple was granted a truly ridiculous patent
58. Non_Sequitur (Posts: 1111; Member since: 16 Mar 2012)
Apple won 1 billion dollars from a truly ridiculous case involving about 5 icons. I think it's time for Samsung to get payback.
4. Nikolas.Oliver (banned) (Posts: 1574; Member since: 01 Jul 2012)
apple already has a lte device named The New iPad, why samsung don't sue it ?
12. ajac09 (Posts: 1339; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)
The new ipad lacks one piece.. the voice section. They could sue on it bu wouldnt hold as much weight as it will with a full featured phone. We shall see. Lots of mummering is flying that samsung is preparing a counter attack that will make MAD (Mutual assured destruction) look like nothing.
118. stealthd (Posts: 913; Member since: 12 Jun 2011)
LTE isn't used for voice yet. It's just data.
136. LaReina (Posts: 2; Member since: 16 Jun 2012)
Dude, seriously, quit commenting while you have brain cells left because you are losing them as you type. Of course LTE refers to just data, but as was stated above, its the full function and integration of it into a phone thats at the core of ajac09's comment. Now sit down and shut up!
7. hung2900 (Posts: 765; Member since: 02 Mar 2012)
1/3 the number of LTE patents belongs to Samsung. Not surprise, but disappointed about the *ucking stupid patent war.
15. ajac09 (Posts: 1339; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)
apple started it. Samsung probobly wouldnt have cared if apple wasnt playing bully.
37. hung2900 (Posts: 765; Member since: 02 Mar 2012)
In my country, there is a saying like "Make revenge, get revenge, continuously, never end"
41. hung2900 (Posts: 765; Member since: 02 Mar 2012)
"Making revenge, geting revenge, continuously, when will end?" is more correct.
24. frydaexiii (Posts: 1176; Member since: 01 Dec 2011)
Face it, the American court is so corrupt even if Samsung presented all 3/3 of the LTE patents they'd still be in favor of Apple.