3 ms·

From what I'm reading, it seems like Samsung is trying to use FRAND patents in their injuction against Apple which I thought is a big no-no. http://fosspatents

by itg 15y ago

From what I'm reading, it seems like Samsung is trying to use FRAND patents in their injuction against Apple which I thought is a big no-no. http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/10/samsungs-attempt-to-ban-iphone-4s-over.html http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/10/samsungs-attempt-to-...

patrickaljord 15y ago
This blogs is anti-google and anti-android and he constantly paints the google side as the losing one even though he got proven wrong many times. No wonder he did it again today. Samsung isn't just using FRAND patents in this lawsuits. The majority of the patents Samsung claimed in their lawsuit weren't. > Also, Samsung can sue Apple if Apple is unwilling to pay which they aren't. The correct route (going by what I've read) to license FRAND patents would be: negotiate on price; if negotiations fail go to court to determine a fair price; if still the infringer doesn't want to pay seek an injunction and forced payment. (from http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/l1jcu/samsung_seeks_iphone4s_sales_ban_in_italy_and/c2p32cy http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/l1jcu/samsung_seeks...) Also, a few years ago, Nokia sued Apple based on wifi FRAND patents, how did it end up? With a settlement in favor of Nokia. If FRAND patents were impossible to enforce, do you think it would have ended with a settlement?
- cube13 15y ago
  >Also, a few years ago, Nokia sued Apple based on wifi FRAND patents, how did it end up? With a settlement in favor of Nokia. If FRAND patents were impossible to enforce, do you think it would have ended with a settlement? It's not that FRAND patents are impossible to enforce. Nokia sued Apple after neither side could get an agreement about the licensing terms. Apple held that the terms Nokia was demanding were not fair. That was the entire reasoning about the suits. At the end of the day, it was not about whether or not Apple would pay Nokia. That was a foregone conclusion. The entire suit was over how much Apple would pay.

by itg 15y ago

patrickaljord 15y ago

This blogs is anti-google and anti-android and he constantly paints the google side as the losing one even though he got proven wrong many times. No wonder he did it again today. Samsung isn't just using FRAND patents in this lawsuits. The majority of the patents Samsung claimed in their lawsuit weren't. > Also, Samsung can sue Apple if Apple is unwilling to pay which they aren't. The correct route (going by what I've read) to license FRAND patents would be: negotiate on price; if negotiations fail go to court to determine a fair price; if still the infringer doesn't want to pay seek an injunction and forced payment. (from http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/l1jcu/samsung_seeks_iphone4s_sales_ban_in_italy_and/c2p32cy http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/l1jcu/samsung_seeks...) Also, a few years ago, Nokia sued Apple based on wifi FRAND patents, how did it end up? With a settlement in favor of Nokia. If FRAND patents were impossible to enforce, do you think it would have ended with a settlement?

cube13 15y ago
>Also, a few years ago, Nokia sued Apple based on wifi FRAND patents, how did it end up? With a settlement in favor of Nokia. If FRAND patents were impossible to enforce, do you think it would have ended with a settlement? It's not that FRAND patents are impossible to enforce. Nokia sued Apple after neither side could get an agreement about the licensing terms. Apple held that the terms Nokia was demanding were not fair. That was the entire reasoning about the suits. At the end of the day, it was not about whether or not Apple would pay Nokia. That was a foregone conclusion. The entire suit was over how much Apple would pay.