Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Claims Samsung and Motorola Patent Monopoly

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the patent-vs-patent dept.

Google 381

esocid writes with a bit in Daily Tech about the ongoing spat between Apple and the rest of the mobile world. From the article: "Apple lawyers are crying foul about Samsung, and ... Motorola's allegedly 'anticompetitive,' use of patents. ... Apparently Apple is irate about these companies' countersuits, which rely largely on patents covering wireless communications, many of which are governed by the 'fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory' (F/RAND) principle, as they were developed as part of industry standards. ... Apple takes issue with the fact that Motorola in its countersuit declines to differentiate the 7 F/RAND patents in its 18 patent collection. ... Regardless of what Florian Mueller says, it's hard to dispute that the 'rules' of F/RAND are largely community dictated and ambiguous."

cancel ×

381 comments

Galla-Walla (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275628)

Frost Posrst

How dare they sue us! (5, Insightful)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275648)

We where just minding our own business, suing them, and then THEY SUED US for no reason!

Re:How dare they sue us! (1)

mvar (1386987) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275760)

Apple has been on lawsuit-rampage during the last 6 months, its nice to see at last some action from Google. This is going to be fun!

Re:How dare they sue us! (5, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275816)

It's really very unfair. Here we were, just defending our rightful monopoly over all things rectangular with screens on the front, and these uppity bastards with their "patents" on "foundational RF technologies" that they supposedly "invented" are getting all touchy about it. WTF?

Re:How dare they sue us! (1, Troll)

regimechange (2287586) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275906)

It's really very unfair. Here we were, just defending our rightful monopoly over all things rectangular with screens on the front, and these uppity bastards with their "patents" on "foundational RF technologies" that they supposedly "invented" are getting all touchy about it. WTF?

Problem with your thinking is....no tablet looked anything remotely like the ipad until the ipad came out. Look at the picture at the bottom of the link to see the blatant copying Samsung did. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/08/30/apple_accuses_motorola_samsung_of_monopolizing_markets_with_patents.html [appleinsider.com]

Re:How dare they sue us! (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275934)

Too bad the court disagreed and even named a tablet that looked quite similar. Thicker, but that was only due to technology limits at the time. The icon layout does not look default on those Samsung devices, someone rigged it to look similar.

Re:How dare they sue us! (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275962)

Too bad you both missed your humorTab(C)(Patent Pending by Johnson's wax) today.

Double up tomorrow. Remember, side effects may include nausea, blurred vision and priapism.

Re:How dare they sue us! (2)

dc29A (636871) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275944)

Have you watched ST:TNG? Or 2001 Space Odyssey? Of course every company making blatant copies of this 'awesome' Apple patent [google.com] .

Re:How dare they sue us! (1)

RicoX9 (558353) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276260)

That appears to be a patent on a rectangular solid. Sad.

Re:How dare they sue us! (2)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275948)

There have been thousands of tablets before the iPad. Many of them looked very simular. Your single counter example does not negate this. Technology progresses, devices get lighter and thinner. If only Apple is allowed to have a rectangular device with icons, what exactly would you suggest others use. And keep in mind that there have been tablet computers since the late 80s.

Re:How dare they sue us! (-1, Troll)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276004)

There have been thousands of tablets before the iPad. Many of them looked very simular.

Do you have any reference?

Re:How dare they sue us! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37276106)

I have a Dauphin DTR-1 486-25mhz tablet around here some place. But if you really have to question if tablets existed before the iPad then I doubt any evidence will convince you.

Re:How dare they sue us! (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276256)

The first electronic table was in 1888, used for handwriting over wire.
And there have been more. In fact 'tablet' was coined by Microsoft. regarding a computing device, natch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablet_computer [wikipedia.org]

Apple has never done anything first; which is fine. They do improve them and make stylish devices.

Re:How dare they sue us! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37276028)

Odd the ipad looks much like the screen on my old pre-ipad laptop, but without the keyboard bit... How innovative >.>

Re:How dare they sue us! (2)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276088)

It's really very unfair. Here we were, just defending our rightful monopoly over all things rectangular with screens on the front, and these uppity bastards with their "patents" on "foundational RF technologies" that they supposedly "invented" are getting all touchy about it. WTF?

Problem with your thinking is....no tablet looked anything remotely like the ipad until the ipad came out. Look at the picture at the bottom of the link to see the blatant copying Samsung did. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/08/30/apple_accuses_motorola_samsung_of_monopolizing_markets_with_patents.html [appleinsider.com]

http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/03/crunchpad-the-launch-prototype/ [techcrunch.com]

http://lawpundit.blogspot.com/2011/08/samsung-digital-picture-frame-2006-is.html [blogspot.com]

World Class Hypocrisy (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275654)

So when Apple sues its competitors with overly broad patents it's "protecting its innovations"

When the targets of Apple's anti-competitive lawsuits counter-sue Apple cries "anti-competitive" monopoly.

Apple gets more evil every day.

Re:World Class Hypocrisy (3, Funny)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275950)

Steve Jobs wouldn't have allowed this to happen. I blame Tim.

Re:World Class Hypocrisy (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276254)

This isn't actually a surprise, if you watch the keynote where the iphone was introduced, about 3/4 of the way through, Jobs says, "We've patented this." The meaning was clear, that they intended to protect their product in court.

The surprising thing is that it took them so long to bring a lawsuit against Android.

Re:World Class Hypocrisy (4, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276230)

Apple (lawyers) are saying (lawyers don't actually get irate as long as they get paid and the court time lasts longer and longer) that the patents were part of a standard. That Motorola et al purposely made their patents part of a standard, and are now using them to extort concessions out of Apple. This is unfair, because there is no way to work around the patents: you can't use a GSM network without using Motorola patents. So when the standard was made, all players agreed to license their patents for a reasonable cost.

This is different than the Apple patents, which theoretically can be worked around. Apple doesn't even want to license them, they want to prevent competitors from using the stuff they invented. Other people should go invent their own stuff. And legally, patents give them that right. It's great, isn't it? (sarcasm) But not hypocritical, unless you have no understanding of the issue.

Re:World Class Hypocrisy (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276298)

Maybe the judge will agree with Apple and abolish all the patents.

heh.

For Chrissakes (4, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275670)

Look, you pack of fucking navel-gazing fucktards. Put down the fucking guns, agree to pool your resources to buy sufficient hookers and Caribbean vacations for Congresscritters to have the existing patent system tossed out the door. We get it that you all sort of started out accruing vast numbers of patents, some good, some bad, some absolutely fucking moronic, in no small part to fend off attacks from each other and from evil little patent trolls, but look at how it's complicating your lives. You couldn't roll out a steaming turd without someone somewhere trying to claim you infringed on a patent they own.

Apple, you're now one of the biggest companies around. If anyone can afford the required number of prostitutes, golf club memberships, or whatever it is those corrupted evil bastards in Congress have an appetite for. Google, come on, you could help out here, same with Samsung. Then you can, you know, compete on the quality of your products, rather than trying to stuff newspaper down each others throats in what can only be described as the bonfire of the idiots.

Re:For Chrissakes (1)

arisvega (1414195) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275826)

If anyone can afford the required number of prostitutes, golf club memberships, ..

Sure Apple can do that- but so can Microsoft [slashdot.org]

Re:For Chrissakes (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275842)

Given Apple's recent litigation history, which seems to have kicked the spat off, they would appear to want to have their cake and eat it too. They went and attempted to have Samsung's products kicked out of Europe for being too damn rectangular, and are somehow surprised that people with patents on actual technology are fighting back?

Re:For Chrissakes (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275870)

So the real solution here is to make hypocrisy a capital offense.

Re:For Chrissakes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275968)

So the real solution here is to make hypocrisy a capital offense.

Then we wouldn't have any elected officials.

Re:For Chrissakes (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276172)

You say that like it's a bad thing...

Re:For Chrissakes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275878)

You miss the point. Apple started all this, they do not want any competition. Now they're going to learn what real patents are, and not simple color schemes and case geometry.

There's no need to cross license, Apple's patents are hot air and easy to avoid. The real manufacturers, i.e. those that aren't buying off the shelf components and putting a shiny case around them, may choose to cripple Apple's mobile profits by demanding rather large licensing fees for genuine inventions and technology.

Re:For Chrissakes (2, Interesting)

stating_the_obvious (1340413) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276098)

I don't think you understand Apple's business model. They're entire growth strategy is based on novel innovation and a locking up of supply chains to keep them 1-2 years ahead of product offerings from competing companies.

The expectation of backlash suits was likely expected as less innovative companies scan their patent portfolios in a desperate attempt to limit the innovation gap between their company and Apple. You can only lose a patent argument a few times before the patent becomes toothless against precedent.The current end game from litigation is that Apple will likely win more battles than they lose and Apple will stay 1-2 years ahead of competing product offerings. The current end game for the industry overall isn't yet known -- either other companies will replicate Apple's mix of innovation and supply chain control and compete against Apple, or they'll settle to be 2nd tier technology companies.

You're "real manufacturer" comment is off the mark. Apple uses it's war chest of cash to finance the build out of supply chain fab plants in return for first choice / monopoly supply. the "real manufacturers" you're referring to (I assume Taiwanese ODMs) can't get the parts to replicate.

Either way, geeks who love new toys win -- so long as you're not an apple hater.

Re:For Chrissakes (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276156)

1 or 2 years ahead?
So then why did they not have copy paste until after android?
You are a nut.

Re:For Chrissakes (2)

X.25 (255792) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276270)

The expectation of backlash suits was likely expected as less innovative companies scan their patent portfolios in a desperate attempt to limit the innovation gap between their company and Apple.

So, creating easy-to-use UI is "innovation", and Motorola (and probably others) is one of "less innovative companies"?

You are a retard.

Re:For Chrissakes (0, Troll)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275894)

Then you can, you know, compete on the quality of your products, rather than trying to stuff newspaper down each others throats in what can only be described as the bonfire of the idiots.

The point of the lawsuit is that Motorola and Samsung are claiming that patents they control are essential for implementing technical standards, and are supposed to be offered to everyone, but instead of offering to license to Apple they're just suing. They own patents that can crush any cellphone manufacturer if asserted, thus they were required as part of the standards process to permit anyone to use them and to not charge different people different prices to license them. You can't sue for them without making the standards proprietary in effect. If they sue Apple for them today, how does Huawei know they aren't going to get hit tomorrow?

Regardless of what Florian Mueller says, it's hard to dispute that the 'rules' of F/RAND are largely community dictated and ambiguous

Regardless of what a patent lawyer says, clearly we should just read the nouns in the summary and relax, knowing that if "Apple," "$ANDROID_LICENSEE" and "patent" appear in the summary we know who they "good guys" are without further need for investigation.

Re:For Chrissakes (2)

SiChemist (575005) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275960)

Florian Mueller is not a patent lawyer. From the wikipeida entry [wikipedia.org] :

"He blogs frequently about patent issues and gives legal advice, despite having no formal legal training."

So, appeals to his authority are suspect at best.

Re:For Chrissakes (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275966)

Since when is Florian a patent lawyer?

He is a professional troll, nothing more.
Is apple part of the body that defined those standards, is that group still open for new members?
F/RAND agreements often don't apply to the public, or in a more limited matter. This are contracts not matters of law.

Re:For Chrissakes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37276118)

You forgot the blow. Its morning golf in the Carribbean, followed by a light lunch, then fishing and scuba in the afternoon. Then fine dining with expensive French wine and surf & turf. You follow that up with hookers and blow. Thats how you re-align the congresscritters. You included the hookers, but forgot the blow. Its a no-go without the blow.

Re:For Chrissakes (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276138)

Really? You're asking Apple to help get rid of patents? There is no tech company I know of that likes patents more.

Re:For Chrissakes (4, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276294)

Apple's "bigness" is pending their continued popularity. The moment they cease to be popular, they will implode. They are not diversified enough to sustain itself as the market changes. Given that they base themselves exclusively on the consumer market, there may never be such a thing as "critical mass" in any of Apple's market places.

Critical mass is crucial to successful staying power. As it is, nothing that Apple offers is "necessary" and the cost of moving away from Apple at any point in time is trivial. Let's make the argument that Apple's iDevice apps have created something that resembles critical mass which I am sure many people would try to argue. Let's look at the money that users actually put into the software. $2 here, $5 there... $25? Unheard of for the most part. The numerous apps attract consumers to buy the iDevices, but the sunk costs aren't quite high enough to keep people married to them.

Now if we were talking about serious enterprise investments, even those nickel-and-dime expenses could equal something big, but Apple doesn't market to the enterprise and I have yet to see an iPhone deployment in a business that resembles deployments like blackberry. The same goes for Apple computers. I recall one jerk who used Apple itself as an Apple enterprise deployment. Dear god... that simply does not qualify.

Apple, I believe, has strategically limited itself so that it does not fall under various antitrust and other law/rules so that it can continue its "style" of business/abuse.

Pot, meet Kettle (5, Insightful)

Kagetsuki (1620613) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275678)

Remember that little kid that hit the other kids, but as soon as another kid hit back he'd start crying? Apple is now that kid.

Re:Pot, meet Kettle (1)

NecroPuppy (222648) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275874)

And Florian Mueller is the parent of that kid, attempting to defend their precious little snowflake, through misinterpretation and obfuscation.

Re:Pot, meet Kettle (1)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276048)

Sounds like one of those weird SF stories in which someone travels back in time, fucks their grandmother and alters history completely.

Coincidense? (5, Insightful)

Mensa Babe (675349) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275680)

  1. 1. Apple frivolously sue companies using Google's software [slashdot.org] using its bogus patents for rectangles [slashdot.org] .
  2. 2. Google buys Motorola [slashdot.org] to use its patent portfolio defensively to protect themselves against such companies like Apple.
  3. 3. Apple attacks Motorola [slashdot.org] who used to be so great in the past (Apple would never use the inferiour intel CPUs, right?) and now it is Motorola that is being a problem with their patents?! Make up your mind, Apple. Make up your mind.

Re:Coincidense? (1)

dave562 (969951) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275916)

Here we go again. Perfectly insightful and on point analysis of Apple gets modded down. I sure hope this ends up in meta-moderation and someone fixes this abuse of the system. Or barring that, hopefully enough people reply to this with posts that are then modded up to keep it part of the discussion.

Yes Apple, we know you have your fanboys here from the PR department with mod points to try to control the discourse. As Streissand learned, you can't control teh intarwebz. We all know how much your company sucks, and how shady your business practices are.

Re:Coincidense? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37276210)

yeah. Slashdot is slanted towards Apple. I believe you.

Re:Coincidense? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37276214)

do you really think apple gives a shit about what people say on slashdot? lol ...

hoist by their own petard (5, Insightful)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275682)

Apple's unyielding patent attack has to come to trouble for them eventually. It's bad enough MS wants $15 from every Android phone, but Apple just plain is trying to bar companies from competing.

The industry will eventually respond with the only tool they have, more patent garbage.

Perhaps this is the start of that.

It's going to take a long time before Apple realizes they can't win this legal battle and they should have just kept competing in the marketplace instead. They're pretty good at that, I'm not sure why they want to try to turn the business into a web of red tape for everyone instead of just pushing forward.

Re:hoist by their own petard (1)

Reverand Dave (1959652) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275868)

This is a pretty similar trend as to what has happened in our economy.
  • 1. Innovate to become a world class company/economy
  • 2. Exhaust your innovative edge as your ideas stagnate and competition follows market trends
  • 3. Slow or stop all real innovation
  • 4. Find and innovative way to make more money instead of innovating the advancing the technology/growing your economy
  • 5. Give up on real innovation and use the courts/government/taxpayers to make your money for you

The financial institutions came up with a lot of innovative ways to get the nations wealth into the hands of a few people but when they had so much of it that they couldn't beg, borrow, or, steal it from the peasants anymore they went to the government and asked for a bailout.

Suing and Counter Suing is only going to work for so long until these guys are going to go to the congress they own and ask for some kind of reprieve.

Re:hoist by their own petard (1)

chrb (1083577) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276038)

The industry will eventually respond with the only tool they have, more patent garbage.

This is exactly it. It was inevitable that, when faced with patent attacks, companies would acquire patents to defend themselves in a "Mutually Assured Destruction" scenario. Microsoft thought that they could charge a slice of every Android handset sold. Apple wanted HTC and Samsung phones and tablets taken off the market. What did they think was going to happen? That these companies would just shut up and die? Of course not. Instead, HTC acquired S3 for its large patent portfolio, and Google acquired Motorola for its patent portfolio.

When you threaten people with a weapon, their first response will be to try and acquire one of those weapons for themselves. When you have a knife, they will try to get a knife. When you have a gun, they will try to get a gun. When you have a nuke, they will try to get a nuke. It's simple psychology.

Re:hoist by their own petard (1)

SpiralSpirit (874918) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276094)

apple suing for design patents, and then getting sued back for fundamental cell tech patents is more like bringing a knife to a bear fight.

HAHAHAHAHAHA (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275684)

HAHAHAHAHAHA, ah, now my stomach hurts. Apple isn't playing nice in patents, and now they're bitching about others not playing nice? You know, I guess maybe Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field must have lasting effects.

Seriously though they'd have a point if Apple wasn't acting like, well, a total and complete legal asshole. Keep in mind these are countersuits to Apple. Apple is basically using Motorola's good will, turning around and stabbing them in the back, and then complaining that Motorola doesn't act nice towards them anymore. Or if getting rid of Apple would be actually anti-competitive, since there are what, at least 5 major smartphone makers?

Re:HAHAHAHAHAHA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37276084)

Funny... I was wanting to post a HAHAHAHAHAHAHA... you summed it up for me!

What's good for the goose is good for the gander (3, Insightful)

sandytaru (1158959) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275696)

Or the pot is calling the kettle black. Honestly, the only people all these lawsuits are really helping are the corporate lawyers. Why don't all the technology companies just agree to drop ALL the lawsuits and instead invest that money into R&D? We could have had the next iPad killer by now if they weren't wasting time and money on lawsuits!

Re:What's good for the goose is good for the gande (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275770)

We could have had the next iPad killer by now if they weren't wasting time and money on lawsuits!

This is precisely what Apple doesn't want.

Re:What's good for the goose is good for the gande (2)

CarsonChittom (2025388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275796)

We could have had the next iPad killer by now if they weren't wasting time and money on lawsuits!

This is precisely what Apple doesn't want.

Not quite true. Apple will be happy for there to be an iPad killer—as long as it's the Apple iTable.

Re:What's good for the goose is good for the gande (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275780)

We could have had the next iPad killer by now if they weren't wasting time and money on lawsuits!

And how would that be good for Apple?

Hey Apple (2)

L473ncy (987793) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275698)

Here's a tissue.

Didn't you learn anything as a kid, Apple? (3, Interesting)

poofmeisterp (650750) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275704)

Apple is irate about these companies' countersuits, which rely largely on patents covering wireless communications, many of which are governed by the 'fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory' (F/RAND) principle, as they were developed as part of industry standards

And yours are all artistic and nothing else, eh? The industry shouldn't use any of your mechanisms for compatibility or interchange, right?

Grow up. You started the sh**, now deal with it.

Re:Didn't you learn anything as a kid, Apple? (2)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275850)

Whats funny about this is that had they not tried to sue in the first place, they could have probably out-competed them in the marketplace.

Re:Didn't you learn anything as a kid, Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275976)

Whats funny about this is that had they not tried to sue in the first place, they could have probably out-competed them in the marketplace.

I highly doubt it.

Welcome to post-Jobs Apple. Like him or not, this new strategy of "sue to prevent competition" makes perfect sense if you assume that Jobs has been slowly phasing himself out over the past year.

The new Apple isn't an Apple of technical and marketing innovation, it's one of suing competitors while slowly fading into oblivion. History does repeat itself, it would seem.

Re:Didn't you learn anything as a kid, Apple? (1)

poofmeisterp (650750) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276066)

... History does repeat itself, it would seem.

A-effin'-men. And Humans wonder why things take so long to improve. Focus, people, focus.

Did they do that with a straight face? (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275710)

How?

Re:Did they do that with a straight face? (2)

chomsky68 (1719996) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275890)

With the help of a few shots of well aimed bottox.

Apple is irate (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275752)

Is it going to start throwing chairs?

Re:Apple is irate (1)

Torodung (31985) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275872)

No, but they have a patent pending for the iRate. Next time Ballmer throws one, fscking lawsuit country, baby.

Re:Apple is irate (1)

bigredradio (631970) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275886)

I'm pretty sure Microsoft has the patent on that. Might cause another lawsuit.

Sosume (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37276076)

Rather ironic, isn't it.

Patent Pending. (1)

Xunker (6905) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275784)

I would be playing the World's Smallest Violin for Apple right now, except someone already has the patent for it and has threatened to sue me over it.

Re:Patent Pending. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275862)

Use this one instead.

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/violin/id295019128?mt=8

Re:Patent Pending. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275912)

You can use this one:

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3193

Along with oblig:

xkcd.com/743/

Wish Samsung would play hardball (1)

ArchieBunker (132337) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275790)

Given that Apple is suing Samsung while at the same time using Samsung chips in their products, Samsung should halt all production of chips to Apple and see what happens. But of course nobody is that crazy...

Re:Wish Samsung would play hardball (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37276104)

Likely there's a contractual agreement between Samsung and Apple that if Samsung fails to deliver chips upon a per-negotiated time frame, Samsung would have to pay massive fines to Apple. I can't speak for Apple, but when I worked for a major telco, these clauses were standard.

Hahahaha (1)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275798)

Steven P. Jobs has bragged about his mastery of stealing ideas from others, stating, "Picasso had a saying - 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

Blowback (1)

redelm (54142) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275808)

Unusually lame and egregiously hypocritical, even for lawyers!

Essentially, Apple's defense is: "our obvious patents on egg-sucking are valid, yours are invalid because they're F/RAND submarines".

I had not heard any court invalidated patents as F/RAND and submarines still live (RAMBUS).

Motorola and Samsung can never be sued? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275810)

If Motorola and Samsung have their way, this basically gives them total immunity to any lawsuit in the mobile sector. All because they deceived the standards bodies to include their patented technology by claiming they would not use them in lawsuits. Now that everyone relies on these patents, because they were incorporated in to standards, Motorola and Samsung are waving these around to make everyone cower in fear? I seriously hope these FRAND patents are thrown out for the good of everyone.

Re:Motorola and Samsung can never be sued? (1)

SpiralSpirit (874918) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276064)

I hope apple figures out their campaign of lawsuits over trivial copyrights has made them more enemies than it afforded any safety or defense against competition. It's unlikely, though.

Re:Motorola and Samsung can never be sued? (1)

SpiralSpirit (874918) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276112)

-meant patents.

Apple is the worst kind of narcissist (1)

markhahn (122033) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275812)

Apple produces nicely designed cases, and some of their UI design is tasteful and effective. Otherwise, they suck, but since they drink their own koolaid, they think everyone else sucks, AND that everyone else aspires to be Apple.

if you believe you have designed the uberphone or uberpad (or uber-UI - remember the ancient war with MSFT), it is only natural that you feel threatened whenever someone else makes a vaguely rectangular tablet with, say, a front-facing display.

Apple is letting its hired dogs (lawyers) drive the company's public moves; this is a mistake. lawyers have to sue to justify their existence so you keep them in cages, where they can only growl at your neighbor's lawyers-in-cages.

"design patents" are even more stupid than software patents. I don't see why we allow lobbying of any form, since all we get is bought government.

Re:Apple is the worst kind of narcissist (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37276134)

let's use a sideways analogy:
iPad vs Samsung's iPad clone
Now look at the Nintendo Wiimote and the PS Move
Or even the SNES controller and the PSX controller

See the problem is that when things are copied, they are copied "and then changed slightly as to not infringe", in the case of design patents (the square rectangle thing) is the problem is that when they copy too much that a customer can't honestly tell the difference between two products. That is where Apple has a case, and Samsung doesn't.

For inventions, eg the technologies in UMTS and LTE, to pull a patent from the F/RAND to use as ammo in a lawsuit is a bad faith, and like the RAMBUS issue, may cause complete abandonment of the standard to cut out that company from further involvement in standards.

Software patents however are generally math, and can be discovered by multiple people working on the same ideas. It's like two people who invent the wheel, only out of different materials, but try to patent PI.

Dug their own grave (1)

gubers33 (1302099) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275856)

I find this extremely amusing. Apple tried to do the same thing with the iPad suing any company who also made a thin tablet. They made the mistake of going after people with bigger guns. Why Apple ever went after Motorola when they were making cell phones before Apple even came out with the Macintosh is mind boggling since Motorola probably has more patents relating to telecommunications than everyone else combined. Adding that Google purchased Motorola just adds more firepower. After that purchase it would have probably been smart of Apple to just back off from attacking the Android makers. Apple dug its own grave on this one, now they have to lay in it.

Hey Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275936)

Fuck you!

Re:Hey Apple! (1)

ddd0004 (1984672) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276116)

Ah yes, in the fine tradition of the Lincoln - Douglas debates of 1858, an eloquently phrased point carries such weight that appeals to both the audience's emotion and reason. In fact, I think it was Stephen Douglas who said, "Yo Lincoln! (grabbing crotch for emphasis) Suck on this"

Oh Kettle! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275956)

"Thou art black!", the pot exclaimeth.

Devils Advocate (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37275980)

Lot at smartphone and tablet products pre and post apple's entry in to those markets. (Seriously. I'm talking about serious market trends here not some nobody one-off that apple 'copied')

In both markets /all/ successful devices significantly emulated apple's design and function after Apple's successful entry.. Apple's attempting to sue devices makers that emulated a to become within legal striking distance. This should not surprise anyone.

Today apple is complaining about other companies retaliating with patent suits for ubiquitous technology required for all modern wireless communication devices, regardless of form or function.

One point - FRAND was a promise to ALL (-1, Flamebait)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#37275984)

Those cheering this news against Apple should think twice - breaking away from the promise of FRAND screws over the whole industry. The point of this patents was that companies donated them to a pool with the understanding that EVERYONE could use them equally. If they are reneging on that promise then the entire industry will collapse because ALL mobile phones use those patents, and what is to stop the companies that make $20 cell phones from also being sued for violation of the same patents...

Apple is a least suing using patents they had not promised to anyone for free and nondiscriminatory use, and yet many here appear to be attempting to paint this countersuit as being equal in any way.

No, this is the ultimate patent troll action - build up a whole industry on the back of patents you said anyone could use, they yank it all away.

Re:One point - FRAND was a promise to ALL (5, Insightful)

gubers33 (1302099) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276044)

Yes, but Motorola has no interest going after the little guy or any of the other companies that are minding their business. They are going after the guy who starting poking them with the stick. This isn't a lawsuit they placed out of no where. It is a counter-suit, meaning it is a reaction. Motorola has no interest in screwing over the phone interest. Apple essentially kicked a sleeping dog and has to pay the price.

Re:One point - FRAND was a promise to ALL (2)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276102)

Except that, as the linked article states, Apple is claiming they own the entire design of modern smartphones (with patents on the rounded design, touchscreen gestures, and a whole host of other things, pretty much none of which, I should point out, Apple actually invented) in order to push Motorola, Samsung, and others out of the market. Motorola is simply responding by saying "OK, you attack us with patents that are patently BS, you can't use our legitimate patents. Everyone else can, you can't. Because you're being an asshole." This isn't a patent troll: had Apple actually played nice, Motorola would have continued to let them use their FRAND patents. Just as they are letting others keep using them.

FRAND is a community agreement. Apple is basically saying "fuck the community" by taking the IP they want, and suing others them back (the same people whose IP they benefit from using.) It'd be like kids agreeing everyone can use a playground, then having one person demand that not only can he use the whole playground, no one else can use the monkeybars. Because he says so. And because he has lots of lawyers.

Re:One point - FRAND was a promise to ALL (1, Insightful)

AwaxSlashdot (600672) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276130)

From TFA (the one from Florian, the patent expert, not DailyTech, the tech reporting site), Samsung itself complained about Ericsson and Rambus for the usage of FRAND or undisclosed-essential patents and they should be barred from enforcing them.

Apple didn't even want to prevent Samsung from enforcing them. It just wants to separate the cases between : "having to pay a licence for FRAND patents" and "being blocked from selling products because of non-FRAND patents".

Nokia vs Samsung (Has anyone RTFAs ?) (0)

AwaxSlashdot (600672) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276002)

As usual, noone ever RTFAs.

I find dubious DailyTech calling Florin Mueller "a pro-Apple blogger" for his patent litigation analysis (most especially the difference in usage of FRAND patents between Nokia and Samsung) while Florian Mueller *IS* the professional expert on patents.

Irony (1)

JackRandom (468548) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276016)

Heh, Apple complaining about lawsuits is like WikiLeaks complaining about leaks.

Wow...Just...Wow... (1)

JustAnotherIdiot (1980292) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276022)

There is not enough faces to smack palms onto in the entire world for what I just read.

There, finally (2)

DaleGlass (1068434) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276040)

The insanity of the software patents seems to be finally blowing up in an extremely public way.

I really hope that the lawsuits against Apple result in very harmful for them consequences, ideally something ridiculous like forcing them to pull iPhones and iPads from the shelves.

Why? Because if that happens, there's no way it will stand. It will be discussed all over the world, and everybody will agree it's a crappy state of affairs. Maybe then some sanity can be introduced by eliminating them.

That might be a bit too optimistic, but still this is a perfect example of what's wrong with the system. At least it'll make a good explanation of why software patents are a bad idea, and should be kept out of the places that don't yet have them.

Hey Apple. (1)

Catnaps (2044938) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276072)

Here's a straw, suck it up.

Hahaha (1)

X.25 (255792) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276108)

So, it's ok for them to sue someone because they think they own rights to rectangular shape with round corners, but when someone with real tech patent sues them back - they act like babies?

I wish all tech companies would die.

Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37276184)

(Posting AC because I'm at work and I don't log in from work - I'm whisper_jeff if you feel the need to add me to your ignore list)

The hypocrisy of comments here boggles my mind. If Apple wielded FRAND patents the way that Samsung and Motorola are, people would lose their mind but because they're being used _against_ Apple, it's ok? Seriously?

You don't have to like Apple - feel free to hate them if you want - but when a company wields FRAND patents the way Motorola and Samsung are using them, we should all oppose it. _THAT_ is anti-competitive behaviour. FRAND patents are essential patents for a given industry and thus must be licensed under Fair and Reasonable terms (thus the FR part of FRAND). Any attempt to block a company from licensing the technology for fair and reasonable rates should be grounds for anti-trust sanctions. And we should _always_ oppose it. Regardless of who does it and regardless of who it's done against.

RTFA, particularly the second link. (1, Informative)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276220)

The first link is a DailyTech Blog by Jason Mick, an author well known for factual inaccuracies in every post, and for continual Apple bashing. Consider the source, and double check all facts before drawing any conclusions from it.

The second link includes an informative discussion of the actual issues. The core of Apple's argument, that Samsung is asserting that Apple is violating "standards essential" patents, for which Samsung has offered no F/RAND licensing, which is a clear violation of antitrust regulations in the US and EU (a fact which Samsung itself has repeatedly asserted in previous lawsuits when they were the defendant). Apple hasn't disputed those patents, only that they must be separated from the suit because they are standards essential patents which must be offered under F/RAND in order to prevent them from being an illegal monopoly under antitrust regulations. Therefore, they can not be considered as part of the suit potential injunction based upon the other non-"standards essential" patents, but must be considered as a separate issue and Samsung must offer F/RAND licensing terms for those "standards essential" patents.

Re:RTFA, particularly the second link. (1)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276248)

And yes, I know that the second blog is by Florian Mueller, and I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with or referring to one of his posts as a an informative discussion of the issues. Still, that is the case in this instance.

Hello Pot (1)

cgfsd (1238866) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276262)

Hello Pot? This is the lawyers from Kettle, seems that black is patented.

News Flash: Apple's Right & /. A Bunch of Assh (-1, Flamebait)

backspaces (747193) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276284)

Give me a break, Oh Open Superior Life Forms.

Perform the following experience: Give a Samsung Tablet and an iPad to your Average Idiot, you know, the MARKET for these bright shiny toys. Ask them if they come from the same company. Easily 99% yes, right?

This is the real battle: Apple builds a great product, forces ATT to their knees to have $15/month non-subscription plans, is about to come out with a world/universal phone that works on ALL networks, and basically takes the power from the lame cell carriers and brick dumb handset manufacturers. You know, innovation, right?

Then your basic we-make-anything manufacturer, no innovation just machine parts and chips, jumps in with a copy cat. BMW could have made these Android things.

So slack up know-it-alls, Apple really provided YOU with new freedoms from both the carriers and handset manufacturers who have been fucking you for years.

In other news... (1)

synapse7 (1075571) | more than 2 years ago | (#37276296)

Samsung claims Apple has a patent monopoly on things rectangular in shape.
With the preliminary injunctions Apple won against Samsung how can they accuse patent monopoly when apple has caused the most damage.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...