Judge: Samsung's case against Apple over 3G is "ridiculous"

Judge: Samsung's case against Apple over 3G is
Apparently, it is not only us, consumers and media, who are completely tired of the never-ending legal drama. Australian Court Judge Annabelle Bennett has recently declared the latest Samsung vs. Apple case "ridiculous", reports Bloomberg.

Here is a little back story: after Apple launched its full-scale legal assault against Samsung, accusing it of directly copying its hardware and software products, Samsung decided to counter-sue Apple, claiming that Cupertino is infringing on a number of patents of its own. One of the latest cases between both companies is over a set of 3G patents, which, however, Apple says are FRAND patents. FRAND stands for "Fair, Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory". These are fundamental patents that should be licensed to other companies. If a FRAND patent owner doesn't wish to license those patents, it can be accused of intentionally trying to hamper competition. Obviously, that's what Apple believes Samsung is doing with its 3G patents, with CEO Tim Cook recently saying that the ability of a device to connect to a 3G network isn't a patent that a company should be able to get an injunction on (than again, so is the rectangular tablet patent).

Back to the story at hand, here's what Judge Annabelle Bennett had to say about that Samsung vs. Apple case over 3G patents: "Why on earth are these proceedings going ahead?"... "It’s just ridiculous.”... “Why shouldn’t I order the parties to mediation?"

According to the source, Apple's lawyers have claimed to have approached Samsung with a proposal for a licensing fee, but Samsung had declined that offer. If this turns out to be true, we can imagine the case would be going down pretty soon.

source: Bloomberg



4. frydaexiii

Posts: 1476; Member since: Dec 01, 2011

Really? 3G isn't something a company can own, but a rectangle is? These judges should really do some research before sitting in that high chair. Why do you think Samsung is sueing Apple but not the other companies who are also using 3G?

11. taz89

Posts: 2014; Member since: May 03, 2011

3g patents is considered ridiculous where as a patent for rectangle is considered good or a patent for bounce effect is considered good..agree that some judges are stupid

5. TDUBB15

Posts: 2; Member since: Jul 23, 2012

that is funny, if Samsung wants to hurt Apple this isnt the way. Trying to patent 3g would hurt ever company who provides cell phones as well as the companies who provided the services. the biggest part is we are all in 4G and 4G LTE. its like Samsung is trying to file their taxes 2 yrs behind. lol

26. tedkord

Posts: 17397; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

3g is already patented. But the patents are FRAND patents. That means the owners are required to license them fairly and without discrimination. The question is, are Samsung trying to charge Apple an undue amount, or are Apple simply unwilling to pay what others are? A court will have to decide that, but banning a device over a FRAND patent is a tough sell.

6. Aeires unregistered

This was probably a result of trying to fight back and it's sad it had to come to that level. As for Apple mediating, obviously this judge hasn't read about Apple's stance on such things.

7. plgladio

Posts: 314; Member since: Dec 05, 2011

A technology Apple wants to call it FRAND, but a rectangular size or rounded icons are very important. I'm getting angry on Apple now. Ridiculous Apple...

28. tedkord

Posts: 17397; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

It is FRAND. The patent owners agreed to FRAND terms. Now, if you want to debate the validity of many of Apple's patents they are suing over, that's a ripe topic, due to prior art, obviousness, etc...

8. thebest

Posts: 231; Member since: Jul 08, 2012

iphone 5 with lte is about to come and they are yet to solve the 3g dispute

32. iamcc

Posts: 1319; Member since: Oct 07, 2011

Even if the iPhone5 ships with LTE it will still rely on 3G for phone calls etc...

9. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Looks like Samsung is desperate for anything now. This all could have been avoided had they just been more original in their UI and phone design.

58. aikonix

Posts: 60; Member since: Apr 08, 2012

go look at samsung touchwiz devices BEFORE android and iphone were even THOUGHTS of... then tell me who copied who

13. ojdidit84

Posts: 462; Member since: Jul 16, 2011

Wait a minute, isn't this the same judge that's been overseeing all of the Apple v Samsung cases in Australia whose husband works for the firm representing Apple in Australia, 5 Wentworth, which she also used to work for? I fail to see how having her as the judge overseeing these cases, sworn in as a federal judge or not, isn't a conflict of interest.

14. cdnfreak

Posts: 26; Member since: Mar 13, 2012

FRAND my ASS, Samsung develops a Technology which benefits all Companies. They allow Qualcomm to use it in good faith, However Apple has chosen to revoke that good faith and as such are being sued. When has apple ever given anything to the good of the industry?

18. dmn666

Posts: 244; Member since: Oct 19, 2011

LMAO - Crapsung fanboys are out with their typical factory worker like mentality. Listen up, Qualcomm doesn't give a s**t to Samsung. They along with Ericsson, Nokia DEFINE the telecom technology. Samsung and other OEMs just use them to make phones, dishwasher and whatnot. I understand you don't like Apple. But don't forget the difference between developing technology and running factories. It's a pretty big difference. Samsung never invented a s**t. They just steal others ideas and mass produce for a cheaper price at their sweatshops.

23. willard12 unregistered

"We have been shameless about stealing great ideas.". - Steve Jobs. I think you have the wrong company in your dissertation on stealing. But don't let the facts and actual admissions from apple interfere with your blind fanboyism. Because, we all know Apple invented slide to unlock, rectangles, the color black, notification ,menu, turn by turn navigation, answering a call with a message, and 3g. When the apple innovates enough to get 4g later this year, I'm sure they will have invented that too. So...based on the quote from your great leader, who steals?

25. dmn666

Posts: 244; Member since: Oct 19, 2011

You got pathetic reading skill. In your tiny world whoever doesn't like Crapsung always likes Apple. You are actually worse than a typical blind apple fan

31. Owlet

Posts: 450; Member since: Feb 21, 2011

Wait! Don't forget white! Color white too. They were the first in the world to make a cell phone in ground breaking rule bending revolutionary color black! And if that wasn't mind blowing enough, they went even further with their unbelievable innovations and made a WHITE one! It's just magical.

27. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

sounds alot like apple

39. parkwaydr

Posts: 572; Member since: Sep 07, 2011

Qualcomm doesn't care about Samsung? Please if your going to argue, know your stuff before you speak. Qualcomm contracted Samsung to assist them so they don't have to worry about a shortage for the s4 chipset. http://m.intomobile.com/2012/07/04/irony-samsung-start-making-qualcomms-snapdragon-chips/?maneref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fhl%3Den%26gl%3DUS%26ie%3DUTF-8%26source%3Dandroid-browser%26q%3Dqualcomm%2Bchips%2Bbased%2Bon%2Bsamsung%253F

42. dmn666

Posts: 244; Member since: Oct 19, 2011

LOL - let me give you some free tips. Samsung NEEDS those S4 - not the other way around. I guess you know about LTE. TSMC and UMC will be churning out the majority of Qualcomm chipsets. Leftovers will go to Samsung. That's how it works in the chip industry. TSMC is everyone's preferred fab - UMC/GF is the second choice. If there's still supply shortage, fabless companies try to book SMIC. Then comes Samsung - at the very bottom of the list as a fourth tier fab.

44. parkwaydr

Posts: 572; Member since: Sep 07, 2011

apparently, the point of the article was lost on you.

46. dmn666

Posts: 244; Member since: Oct 19, 2011

Actually you're the one who brought S4 into this discussion. Now you're feeling lost. Like you said Qualcomm is loaded with orders. That's why Samsung might end up getting a fraction of its orders and US market is very important for Samsung. For now they need S4 very much. Whenever a chip maker needs extreme volume, they contract the lowest tier fabs like Samsung. Please do your research on the fabs and find out who are at the top (TSMC, UMC, GF, SMIC, etc.) http://www.electroiq.com/articles/sst/2012/03/top-10-semiconductor-foundries-in-2011.html On a side note, the best thing about Exynos is the GPU which is fully designed by ARM itself- Samsung doesn't deserve any credit there.They just licensed it. But the ignorant fanboys whine 24/7 about Apple using others' sh*t and how innovative Samsung is - funny sh*t. Anyways, I was talking about 3G/comm. patents. Some guy was saying how QC needs others' patents. WRONG - QC makes most money out of their vast telecom patents (not from chipsets). QC, Ericsson, NSN, Motorola invent 90% of the comm. technology stuff that includes the protocols, multi-million dollar switches, BTS, etc. - not a commodity like cell phones or DRAMs which Samsung is good at making.

47. parkwaydr

Posts: 572; Member since: Sep 07, 2011

not feeling lost, just dont have the want to sit and argue with a person ill never meet, but apparently you do, so, if it makes you feel better, keep talking, ill pretend to listen. ive said what i wanted to. dont need to say anymore.

48. dmn666

Posts: 244; Member since: Oct 19, 2011

Nope - I don't. You're the one who replied with some irrelevant S4 stuff. Thanks for not wasting time anymore.

15. ph00ny

Posts: 2050; Member since: May 26, 2011

How is she still presiding over apple cases when her husband is a senior member of the firm representing apple and herself used to be a member of the same firm? Her husband listed under the senior counselhttp://www.5wentworth.com.au/site/people/ Judge herself listed under the alumnihttp://www.5wentworth.com.au/site/about/

22. groupsacc

Posts: 232; Member since: Feb 28, 2012

Yep. Definitely conflict of interest there. Maybe they don't know.

16. Owlet

Posts: 450; Member since: Feb 21, 2011

Wow! Apple bought Australia to add to their portfolio? She shouldn't be the judge in this case.

20. thedarkside

Posts: 654; Member since: Apr 30, 2012

apple: oh em gee, samsung just came out with a phone in the shape of a rectangle!! we must sue!! samsung: LOL! you mad bro? apple: samsung, we innovated the rectangle technology on our iDevices. you stole that shape from us and we demand payment for infringing on such innovations! samsung: you cant be serious? its a shape. no one owns a shape. youve lost your damn mind apple! can it just stop now before apple finds a way to sue them for using batteries in their phones?

21. mas11

Posts: 1034; Member since: Mar 30, 2012

And Apple's claims against Samsung are just as insane.

24. flamemee

Posts: 3; Member since: Jul 23, 2012

If that's the case, the "multitouch and slide-to-unlock on a mobile device with a capacitive touch screen" patent should be part of FRAND too. This patent system needs to be fixed. To put it in an analogy, why was Apple granted a patent with "the only way to flip a switch" if they did not even invent the switch itself??? Gestures should not be patented. It should be the underlying technologies that make it possible. Apple DID NOT INVENT THE CAPACITIVE TOUCHSCREEN!!! Don't want to knock on a dead guy... But didn't Jobs flatly refused to license multitouch and slide-to-unlock patent at all, while demanding to have access to cellular connectivity patents? So who's the real anti-competition/monopoly-bent?

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.