4 ms·

Apple is running a disgusting campaign here in Europe against it's competitors. They even managed to get the European Union to start an anticompetive investigat

by bluelu 15y ago

Apple is running a disgusting campaign here in Europe against it's competitors. They even managed to get the European Union to start an anticompetive investigation against Samsung, even though they should be investigated and not their competitors. No wonder Google, Motorola, Samsung fight back. And they should. Apple even managed that the galaxy tab couldn't be sold anymore here for a few weeks and had to be modified. When a trial ordered the same fate to their ipads, they managed to remove the ban (and Motorola even had to make a deposit of 100 Million Euros) in one day while complaining that banning a complete product because of one violating patent wouldn't be fair. Is it "fair" to have a phone/tab banned because it has round corners? They didn't complain there and are still trying to ban all sales of Samsung's Galaxy phones on design patterns or trivial patents.

nkassis 15y ago
This is a classic case of you reap what you sow. Hopefully all these companies will one day come to their senses and move against software patents. I'm not holding my breath with Apples 100B in the bank and large numbers from the other players in this fights. Who looses? The little guy like always. At least they are picking on people their own size.
- bergie 15y ago
  At least they are picking on people their own size. Sure, while at the same time ensuring no new start-ups will ever be brave enough to try and enter the field.
rbarooah 15y ago
Presumably you therefore regard Google's actions as equally 'disgusting'.
- vidarh 15y ago
  Personally I regard them as a suitable response to the way Apple is acting, and I hope more players go after Apple - unfortunately it seems escalation is the only hope of getting things to the point where they might get forced into a truce, since as long as Apple hasn't met any real opposition they've just kept escalating things.
  - rbarooah 15y ago
    This seems to rest on the idea that 'Apple started it' so everyone else is free to act in just as unprincipled a manner without cost to their reputation. As far as I am aware, Nokia won a settlement from Apple for the iPhone before Apple started going after the Android makers. Why is Nokia not the culprit here? Isn't it reasonable by the same argument used to defend Google, that after being attacked by one incumbent, Apple would become more aggressive about mobile IP? It also appears that you assume all intellectual property enforcement is equally bad.
    - nkassis 15y ago
      Cause most people have already written Nokia off. They are all guilty and I hope they all end up in a situation where they either agree to end this or die.
      - rbarooah 15y ago
        Guilty of what?
        nkassis 15y ago
        Of using patents to block progress.
        rbarooah 15y ago
        What progress has been blocked?
        nkassis 15y ago
        Turtle's all the way down I call progress the opportunity cost of the money that went into litigation instead of product development
        rbarooah 15y ago
MrScruff 15y ago
I'm not really sure what's so disgusting about it. Anyone with a pair of eyes can see that Samsung have been systematically pushing the boundaries of what you get away with in cloning a design. If Apple didn't show willingness to push back they would be allowing a competitor to dictate where that boundary should be set. Since they spend a great deal on design and branding it's perfectly acceptable that they wish to protect that investment.
- Gustomaximus 15y ago
  Really? I see plenty of differences in the popular Samsung phone models. And there is only so much a designer can do with a slim touch phone to make it significantly different.
  - MrScruff 15y ago
    Clearly that's a judgement call on both our parts and neither of us is going to convince each other to think otherwise. As an anecdote though, I was walking down Oxford St this morning and passed by a mobile phone shop that had two large displays in the window, one for a large black touch screen phone and one for an otherwise identical white version. As my eye passed over them my brain registered 'iPhone' since that is what they looked like. It was only when I looked a little closer I saw the Samsung text under the display. This is clearly what concerns Apple execs, not merely rounded rectangles.
- nivertech 15y ago
  All PCs look the same All laptops look the same All phones look the same Why all tablets can't look the same?
  - r00fus 15y ago
    A tablet computer did not look like the iPad until the iPad came out. Funny that, eh? They looked like laptops with flippable screens or tablets with flip-out keyboards... all of them had stylii.
_djo_ 15y ago
Your analysis of the situation is flawed, because you're treating the situation as if both Apple and its competitors are using the same types of patents, but they're not. The patents that Samsumg and Motorola/Google are so-called FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms) patents, meaning that they cover technology, such as 3G/UMTS and GSM patents, which are essential to the function of a telecommunications device. They are called FRAND patents because, as essential patents, companies holding them are supposed to agree to be 'fair' when licensing them to others. The EU investigation is based on their suspicion that Samsung is abusing its FRAND patents and not following the FRAND guidelines. This is partially because both Samsung and Motorola/Google are demanding a royalty on the price of Apple's final product (i.e., the iPad and iPhone), rather than on the price of the actual baseband component that uses the patent. Samsung is claiming a 2.4% royalty and Motorola/Google is claiming a 2.25% royalty, both of which are pretty clearly unreasonable, likely 'unfair' and possibly in breach of their FRAND commitments. One example thrown about is that if these royalties are accepted and a car manufacturer like BMW installs a UMTS module in one of its cars, it would be obliged to pay 2.4/2.25% of the entire car's value to the patent holder. This clearly makes no sense. Apple, on the other hand, is enforcing design and technology patents that are not essential to the function of a telecommunications device, so they are subject to different rules and have not been submitted under FRAND commitments. Hence they have no EU investigation as they're not under any obligation to license those patents, fairly or otherwise. The difference is that without many FRAND patents you probably can't make a mobile phone. But you can make a mobile phone even if it doesn't look like an iPhone or have a multi-touch screen. With all that said, this constant patent litigation is ruinous and I really hope that this will lead to some much-needed reform in this area.
obtu 15y ago
Sure it's justified on their part, but if the EU doesn't cut everyone's crap we'll be left with a shitty oligopoly.

by bluelu 15y ago

nkassis 15y ago

This is a classic case of you reap what you sow. Hopefully all these companies will one day come to their senses and move against software patents. I'm not holding my breath with Apples 100B in the bank and large numbers from the other players in this fights. Who looses? The little guy like always. At least they are picking on people their own size.

bergie 15y ago
At least they are picking on people their own size. Sure, while at the same time ensuring no new start-ups will ever be brave enough to try and enter the field.

rbarooah 15y ago

Presumably you therefore regard Google's actions as equally 'disgusting'.

vidarh 15y ago
Personally I regard them as a suitable response to the way Apple is acting, and I hope more players go after Apple - unfortunately it seems escalation is the only hope of getting things to the point where they might get forced into a truce, since as long as Apple hasn't met any real opposition they've just kept escalating things.
- rbarooah 15y ago
  This seems to rest on the idea that 'Apple started it' so everyone else is free to act in just as unprincipled a manner without cost to their reputation. As far as I am aware, Nokia won a settlement from Apple for the iPhone before Apple started going after the Android makers. Why is Nokia not the culprit here? Isn't it reasonable by the same argument used to defend Google, that after being attacked by one incumbent, Apple would become more aggressive about mobile IP? It also appears that you assume all intellectual property enforcement is equally bad.
  - nkassis 15y ago
    Cause most people have already written Nokia off. They are all guilty and I hope they all end up in a situation where they either agree to end this or die.
    - rbarooah 15y ago
      Guilty of what?
      - nkassis 15y ago
        Of using patents to block progress.
        rbarooah 15y ago
        What progress has been blocked?
        nkassis 15y ago
        Turtle's all the way down I call progress the opportunity cost of the money that went into litigation instead of product development
        rbarooah 15y ago

MrScruff 15y ago

I'm not really sure what's so disgusting about it. Anyone with a pair of eyes can see that Samsung have been systematically pushing the boundaries of what you get away with in cloning a design. If Apple didn't show willingness to push back they would be allowing a competitor to dictate where that boundary should be set. Since they spend a great deal on design and branding it's perfectly acceptable that they wish to protect that investment.

Gustomaximus 15y ago
Really? I see plenty of differences in the popular Samsung phone models. And there is only so much a designer can do with a slim touch phone to make it significantly different.
- MrScruff 15y ago
  Clearly that's a judgement call on both our parts and neither of us is going to convince each other to think otherwise. As an anecdote though, I was walking down Oxford St this morning and passed by a mobile phone shop that had two large displays in the window, one for a large black touch screen phone and one for an otherwise identical white version. As my eye passed over them my brain registered 'iPhone' since that is what they looked like. It was only when I looked a little closer I saw the Samsung text under the display. This is clearly what concerns Apple execs, not merely rounded rectangles.
nivertech 15y ago
All PCs look the same All laptops look the same All phones look the same Why all tablets can't look the same?
- r00fus 15y ago
  A tablet computer did not look like the iPad until the iPad came out. Funny that, eh? They looked like laptops with flippable screens or tablets with flip-out keyboards... all of them had stylii.

_djo_ 15y ago

Your analysis of the situation is flawed, because you're treating the situation as if both Apple and its competitors are using the same types of patents, but they're not. The patents that Samsumg and Motorola/Google are so-called FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms) patents, meaning that they cover technology, such as 3G/UMTS and GSM patents, which are essential to the function of a telecommunications device. They are called FRAND patents because, as essential patents, companies holding them are supposed to agree to be 'fair' when licensing them to others. The EU investigation is based on their suspicion that Samsung is abusing its FRAND patents and not following the FRAND guidelines. This is partially because both Samsung and Motorola/Google are demanding a royalty on the price of Apple's final product (i.e., the iPad and iPhone), rather than on the price of the actual baseband component that uses the patent. Samsung is claiming a 2.4% royalty and Motorola/Google is claiming a 2.25% royalty, both of which are pretty clearly unreasonable, likely 'unfair' and possibly in breach of their FRAND commitments. One example thrown about is that if these royalties are accepted and a car manufacturer like BMW installs a UMTS module in one of its cars, it would be obliged to pay 2.4/2.25% of the entire car's value to the patent holder. This clearly makes no sense. Apple, on the other hand, is enforcing design and technology patents that are not essential to the function of a telecommunications device, so they are subject to different rules and have not been submitted under FRAND commitments. Hence they have no EU investigation as they're not under any obligation to license those patents, fairly or otherwise. The difference is that without many FRAND patents you probably can't make a mobile phone. But you can make a mobile phone even if it doesn't look like an iPhone or have a multi-touch screen. With all that said, this constant patent litigation is ruinous and I really hope that this will lead to some much-needed reform in this area.

obtu 15y ago

Sure it's justified on their part, but if the EU doesn't cut everyone's crap we'll be left with a shitty oligopoly.