3 ms·
>This is just another example of Apple suffering from it's own actions. It was all excited about how H.264 was a FRAND standard, ignoring it's own previous stat
by cube13 15y ago
>This is just another example of Apple suffering from it's own actions. It was all excited about how H.264 was a FRAND standard, ignoring it's own previous statements about how such standards could lead to dominant players abusing other parties.
If Samsung has granted a license(either with royalties or royalty-free) to everyone else besides Apple, they aren't following the FRAND standard. If they have, and this is a result of negotiations falling apart(which is highly unlikely, considering that these are "essential to the reliable functioning of telecom networks and devices", and the iPhone 1 presumably infringes on these), then Samsung has a case.
Otherwise, Samsung may be violating agreements that they have with the standards agencies. This will be pretty interesting how it plays out.
- mattmanser 15y agoThe iPhone 1 won't, it's to do with CDMA which is only the iPhone 4 had as I understand it. The iPhone 4 with CDMA was also only available in the US though and that area is already under litigation. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/oct/05/samsung-apple-iphone-4s-ban http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/oct/05/samsung-app... for more info.
- cube13 15y agoThe article states that the patents cover WCDMA, which is apparently one of the standards used by GSM, and the standard that Apple used with the 3GS(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Mobile_Telecommunications_System#W-CDMA_.28UTRA-FDD.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Mobile_Telecommunicat...). CDMA is a superset of that, apparently, and can also apply with certain GSM providers.
- vetinari 15y agoWCDMA is basis for UMTS, which is also called 3G. Plain-old GSM (2G and EDGE) is TDMA-based.