Samsung turned down Apple's offer of an olive branch 1 year ago

Back in November 2010, Apple offered Samsung a license for the iOS scrolling feedback patent, which Samsung turned down; while Sammy did turn down this olive branch, two big tech names, IBM and Nokia, took Apple up on the offer...
This is a discussion for a news article. To read the whole news, click here

53 Comments

17. cheetah2k

Posts: 2256; Member since: Jan 16, 2011

Of all the responses here, yours is the most in need of a spell checker

19. som

Posts: 768; Member since: Nov 10, 2009

Apple copied everything from Star Trek movies and patented it as their own.

22. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

correct me if im wrong, but wasnt apple already suing samsung for daring to exist outside of a parts manufacturer at this point?

36. geedup

Posts: 74; Member since: Dec 01, 2011

Samsung has gone out of their way to copy Apple products.

43. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

apple has gone out of their way to lie cheat and steal for the last 20 years, taco. Ol Jobs even smugly admitted it. Only a blind fanboy would turn a blind eye to that and then cry when others do it to them. Besides, how much could samsung copy? the insides of an iphone are already made by samsung.

48. stealthd unregistered

Apple doesn't copy successful products. They take concepts that are going no where and make them successful. Samsung just jumps into whatever market is already successful. So how much does Samsung copy? Only everything they make.

50. hepresearch unregistered

... concepts that are going no where? Like the LG Prada?

38. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

Apple wants their suppliers to be indentured servants. Within that context, Sammy should only supply displays. The moment Sammy started offering something that competed with the iDevices, they were breaking the indenture contract. Got to keep the servants in their place. Otherwise, what will the world come to?

24. theBankRobber

Posts: 682; Member since: Sep 22, 2011

My 2004 Palm treo 650 could do what we do today except watch most videos, u had a app store, could browse the internet, play games, had a touchscreen. So how is it that Apple can say they invented these features and everyone is infringing on them when again in 2004 i was able to do all these things. The treo even HAD a on screen virtual keyboard you could type on the screen or use the stylus with.

32. geedup

Posts: 74; Member since: Dec 01, 2011

Are you seriously comparing a treo 659 to today's smartphones?

44. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

why not, it had MMS and cut n paste years before the iphone invented it, taco.

46. hepresearch unregistered

ya know, every time I see that name geedup, it somehow reminds me of a name we used to see on here... taco!

45. hepresearch unregistered

Sacrilege! How dare anybody compare that Treo to the iPhone! When the iPhone came out, all the smartphones invented previously just automagically became dumb-phones... Haha... ha! =8-P

49. stealthd unregistered

When did Apple ever claim they invented those features?

51. hepresearch unregistered

... when they were granted the patents for them, even after some of the prior companies to develop the technologies were flatly denied the patents. So I guess Apple has never directly stated that they invented those things... they just managed to patent the stuff when the real inventors were denied the patents. As a result, many Apple fanboys have been claiming that Apple invented those technologies ever since...

28. buggerrer

Posts: 306; Member since: Sep 21, 2011

I WILL patent watching porn on the phone with one hand and mustrabating with the other!

29. ivanko34

Posts: 617; Member since: Sep 04, 2011

How is it possible to put a patent on something so stupid ?

52. hepresearch unregistered

Apparently patenting the number/symbol 270, as in the interstate highway number, is not so stupid after all...

31. geedup

Posts: 74; Member since: Dec 01, 2011

So here we have Apple reached out and offered a licensing deal. This is what the trolls said would be acceptable business practice. However since its Apple it is not acceptable to trolls. Of course it's fine if Microsoft or Nokia or anyone else does it.

53. hepresearch unregistered

the difference... Nokia to Apple: Hey, we will let you guys design and build phones that use our IP if you settle with us to pay a licensing fee per unit... please settle with us. We have been reasonable. Apple to Samsung: Hey, we will let you guys design and build phones that use your... ahem! I mean, our IP... if you settle with us to pay a licensing fee per unit... if you fail to settle with us, we will patent the necessary IP before you do, and sue the living snot out of you... please settle with us. We have been reasonable.

35. geedup

Posts: 74; Member since: Dec 01, 2011

I guess other than Apple letting everyone piss all over their IP nothing else would make PA posters happy.

39. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

Ummm.... @geedup, just because Apple offered a licensing deal doesn't mean that Steve sh*ted strawberry ice cream. There is the matter of whether Apple had a valid patent (aka pattern). MS and Nokia have a very mature (and tested) patent portfolio. When MS and Nokia send infringement notices out, it is time to pay attention. Which is why MS is making more off of their licensing activity than they are making off of WP7. Apple is still in the process of establishing the validity of their patents.

40. BlazinEmperor

Posts: 35; Member since: Nov 24, 2011

"I WILL patent watching porn on the phone with one hand and mustrabating with the other!" LMFAO!!! Nice Patent Bruv!
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.