4 ms·

On the other hand, Samsung willingly contributed patented technologies to various standard setting organizations, encouraged their use in a host of consumer ele

by codex 14y ago

On the other hand, Samsung willingly contributed patented technologies to various standard setting organizations, encouraged their use in a host of consumer electronics, and years later now charges the very producers they encouraged to use these standards with patent infringement. That doesn't sound acceptable either.

cageface 14y ago
This is exactly why I'd like to see all these suits thrown out so that people can get back to making better products. It creates the wrong incentives for either side to win this way.
clhodapp 14y ago
I forgot about this before, but it's also true that Samsung claims that Apple /didn't/ license Samsung's 3g patents at all, even under FRAND terms. That would be fair grounds to sue, though the rate they are demanding may be unreasonable. Source 1: http://venturebeat.com/2012/07/23/samsung-apple-prefers-lawsuits-to-licensing-3g-patents/ http://venturebeat.com/2012/07/23/samsung-apple-prefers-laws... Source 2: http://www.phonearena.com/news/Samsung-says-Apple-stole-some-of-its-technology-for-the-Apple-iPhone_id32647 http://www.phonearena.com/news/Samsung-says-Apple-stole-some... Source 3: http://www.pcworld.com/article/259650/samsung_apple_refused_to_negotiate_to_license_3g_patents.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/259650/samsung_apple_refused_...
- gnaffle 14y ago
  Apple didn't license the patents directly from Samsung, but they did through Qualcomm. Apple claims that Samsung has exhausted their patent claims since they've already gotten paid by Qualcomm for those patents.
  - clhodapp 14y ago
    Interesting. I guess this is what is referenced here: http://www.zdnet.com/samsung-sacrificed-qualcomm-truce-for-apple-war-7000001348/ http://www.zdnet.com/samsung-sacrificed-qualcomm-truce-for-a... According to the article it was not a license agreement, but rather a contract not to sue. Apparently, Samsung claims that the agreement was terminated when Apple sued them, but I would not be surprised if we see Qualcomm doing something to make clear to Samsung that it does not appreciate this move.
    - gnaffle 14y ago
      OK, that puts it in a different perspective - the question at hand now is whether those patents are covered by the ETSI FRAND agreements, and if those agreements are relevant in Australia.

by codex 14y ago

cageface 14y ago

This is exactly why I'd like to see all these suits thrown out so that people can get back to making better products. It creates the wrong incentives for either side to win this way.

clhodapp 14y ago

I forgot about this before, but it's also true that Samsung claims that Apple /didn't/ license Samsung's 3g patents at all, even under FRAND terms. That would be fair grounds to sue, though the rate they are demanding may be unreasonable. Source 1: http://venturebeat.com/2012/07/23/samsung-apple-prefers-lawsuits-to-licensing-3g-patents/ http://venturebeat.com/2012/07/23/samsung-apple-prefers-laws... Source 2: http://www.phonearena.com/news/Samsung-says-Apple-stole-some-of-its-technology-for-the-Apple-iPhone_id32647 http://www.phonearena.com/news/Samsung-says-Apple-stole-some... Source 3: http://www.pcworld.com/article/259650/samsung_apple_refused_to_negotiate_to_license_3g_patents.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/259650/samsung_apple_refused_...

gnaffle 14y ago
Apple didn't license the patents directly from Samsung, but they did through Qualcomm. Apple claims that Samsung has exhausted their patent claims since they've already gotten paid by Qualcomm for those patents.
- clhodapp 14y ago
  Interesting. I guess this is what is referenced here: http://www.zdnet.com/samsung-sacrificed-qualcomm-truce-for-apple-war-7000001348/ http://www.zdnet.com/samsung-sacrificed-qualcomm-truce-for-a... According to the article it was not a license agreement, but rather a contract not to sue. Apparently, Samsung claims that the agreement was terminated when Apple sued them, but I would not be surprised if we see Qualcomm doing something to make clear to Samsung that it does not appreciate this move.
  - gnaffle 14y ago
    OK, that puts it in a different perspective - the question at hand now is whether those patents are covered by the ETSI FRAND agreements, and if those agreements are relevant in Australia.