Samsung turned down Apple's offer of an olive branch 1 year ago
posted by Alan F. / Dec 03, 2011, 9:56 PM
offer an olive branch to Samsung by offering them the license, but was turned down. Possible reasons why the Korean company would just say no to Apple include the latter asking too high a price for the license, or perhaps Samsung thought that with its countersuits, Apple would feel pressured and give in. Lastly, it just might have been that Samsung thought it was innocent and did not feel that it infringed on the patent.
What is interesting about the discovery of this deal was that it is known that the late Steve Jobs had threatened to finish off Android, and yet, by offering a deal to Samsung, Jobs had had his foot on the neck of the OS and then lifted his leg. The patent involved is number 7,469,381 which covers the scrollback feature of iOS that displays a background "texture" when a user scrolls beyond the edge of a web site or document. Apple enlisted this patent when it sought a ban against the sale of Galaxy products in the U.S. which was turned down as we reported.
source: TheVerge via electronista
Posts: 2232; Member since: Feb 14, 2011
November 2010 was one year ago not two years ago. Unless I am missing something...
posted on Dec 03, 2011, 10:21 PM 7
Posts: 1496; Member since: Apr 06, 2011
So in addition to some of the tripe they put in their articles, PA apparently can't differentiate time as well.
posted on Dec 04, 2011, 2:06 AM 6
Apple: We will give you, Samsung, an opportunity to have our blessing to make Android products if you make us (cough) richer (cough)... ahem... more wealthy. Samsung: Why should we bother? Apple: Why not? We would not want to have to see you suffer if you pursue Android device designs... without our blessing. Savvy? Samsung: Ummmm... haha... we see. Have a nice day! Apple: Aww... what a shame. It would be terrible if we had to watch you pay some lawyers in a couple years... they really like getting paid a lot, ya know.
posted on Dec 03, 2011, 10:23 PM 12
Posts: 119; Member since: Sep 17, 2011
If apple followed the motto to Live n let others Live peacefully, we would be seeing a much drastic n awesomer technological revolution to what Lawyers r seeing now but on their front !!! .. Law schools must be having focus on teaching abt patent wars "How to get rich, the fast way" !!
posted on Dec 03, 2011, 10:40 PM 5
Posts: 4; Member since: Dec 01, 2011
When it come to copying design & technology all the manufacturers are same. We can not tell Samsung is innovative than Apple or Apple is better than HTC. It looks like all in the same boat. But in recent time Samsung is more into copying thing from other manufacturer.
posted on Dec 03, 2011, 11:24 PM 6
Posts: 660; Member since: Nov 03, 2011
lol, just for the fun of it.... http://www.mobilitysite.com/20
posted on Dec 04, 2011, 10:51 AM 1
Posts: 13; Member since: Sep 04, 2011
"We consider that Apple copycat the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006. We take that to mean ‘Apple stole our idea." omg they predicted the future!
posted on Dec 05, 2011, 6:06 AM 0
Posts: 254; Member since: Sep 06, 2011
Even my feature phone from 2005 had this "scrollback" feature described by PA. Don't even remember the model.
posted on Dec 04, 2011, 12:34 AM 4
Posts: 2610; Member since: Jan 25, 2009
Yes because we totally had touch screen phones with full html websites back in 2005. Its actually really annoying how so many manufacturers copy even to the nitty gritty details. I definitely noticed Samsung's addition of the scroll back when watching videos of the galaxy products. Why are companies still copying a phone that has been supposedly outdated for years now? So lame Samsung
posted on Dec 04, 2011, 4:40 AM 0
Yeah, I can not believe it either... the iPhone in 2007 was so awesome... not like anything from 2005... it is so incomparable that it is darn near impossible that the iPhone would stoop to running on either GSM or CDMA networks... they were so mundane... it must have had LTE even back then because it was sooooo amazing! Yeah, absolutely nothing like it. It can not have been actually made of anything plastic, either... would have been too comparable to some other phones from 2005 if it had actually had plastic parts in it. All those Fandroids out there, even the ones who do not have an Android phone yet... well, that really means anyone who does not have an iPhone (do not even try to relativate with me! I refuse your interpretation of my statements!)... must be absolutely delusional.
posted on Dec 05, 2011, 1:09 AM 0
Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010
IMO, the primary reason that Judge Koh declined Apple's request for an injunction against Sammy was due to her concern the patent would be ruled to be invalid. Sammy probably came to the same conclusion (patent would be ruled invalid) when they were offered a license to the patent. Just because Steve had a bunch of patents that he could hold over the various industry players, doesn't mean he would have prevailed. Guess what - Apple is not batting 100% in their patent enforcement litigation efforts. Stay tuned. Cook up some more popcorn. In the end, Apple's attempts to enforce its patents (patterns?) is going to be a mixed bag. Which will lead to a business decision to cut more cross-licensing deals and it will be time to move on and focus on the business of making better smartphones than everyone else.
posted on Dec 04, 2011, 12:54 AM 0
Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011
Hey DxD -- when is ATT going to start their hostile takeover of TMobile USA since you are the guru of business speak???
posted on Dec 04, 2011, 2:10 AM 0
Posts: 74; Member since: Dec 01, 2011
I agree Apple will win some and lose some. That's how it goes with patents. What's annoying is the people that want to attack everything Apple. Here we see they attempted a license deal. Pretty reasonable.
posted on Dec 04, 2011, 11:52 PM 0
Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010
How about a patent for how the on/off button works on a phone? Or, a patent on how someone speaks into the phone? How ridiculous is this going to get? Stay tuned....
posted on Dec 04, 2011, 1:21 AM 5
Posts: 800; Member since: Nov 29, 2011
Droid_x_dough, I thnk, u didn't read the transcript of Judge Koh's hearing completely.......... She refused to give injunction primarily due to the reason that, Apple was unable to prove that the sale of Galaxy series devices will cost apple some irrepairable damages...... Though she does observed that samsung product are infringing on Apple's patents.............. I thnk Samsung shud hav done the deal with Apple nd licensed their patent, if price was high then there is always sumthng called 'negotiation' nd ny ways Apple is biggest customer of Samsung, becoz most of the parts used in their iproducts are manufactured or licensed by Samsung........... Most of Android device manufacturers are already paying Microsoft, so thr was no big deal in it............
posted on Dec 04, 2011, 2:08 AM 2
Send a warning to post author
Send a warning to Selected user.
The user has 0 warnings currently.
Next warning will result in ban!
Ban user and delete all posts
Message to PhoneArena moderator (optional):