In the third blow against Samsung this week, a Dutch court has turned down its application for an injunction against Apple's products on the basis of 3G patents. The case, one of the many in the Apple v Samsung patent debacle, was potentially shaky, given that 3G is a standard and therefore the patents involved in it are …
This was obvious from a mile off. Samsung never stood more than a tiny chance of winning an injunction based on FRAND encumbered patents, not in the EU anyway. Maybe in Korea if the judge is biased towards the home-side.
I don't think "encumbered" means what you think it means.
Erm, yes it does - but keep thinking.
War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Relaxation is Encumbrance.
Shitty bloggers will, however, stay shitty.
I didn't know you blogged
That is 3-0 then. No doubt the fandroid will come with further conspiracy theories on how the judge has an ipad or iphone blah blah meh meh. Just go and develop something original and create some non-frand patents Samsung
"Get in"? You're seriously happy about this? Leaving aside the tribal/fanboyish bullshit, you really think this is a good thing? Regardless of how nice/nasty Apple are, or how nice/nasty Samsung are, you REALLY think all this is good for you as a buyer of these gadgets?
Apple just added another 15 hits over the little guy: 18-0
Samsung's products are original. You only have to hold them and use them to know that. Should apple also develop something original, or are they allowed a free ride? Here're 15 Apple apps which are very similar to existing apps. Maybe Apple should take themselves to court over it. If they go up against Samsung's lawyers they'd probably still win.
Number 8 is interesting because the author of the original app commented "Well I'm just going to have to make LockInfo better now." Why can't apple just do the same when they face competition? In a way they have, such as copying android's notification panel, on-keyboard dictation, lockscreen apps etc and all the apps mentioned in the article. But why must the world's biggest corporation also try to scare off legitimate competition by getting the State to bully the little guy?
This certainly wasn't original development. Apple had knowledge of all of these apps, because they sit in the middle of developers and independent hardware owners, reviewing, governing and taxing all the functionality which independent developers want to sell to those independent owners. 2 of the apps in the list are for Cydia but IIRC they were also submitted to apple, and banned (volume rocker camera operation and wifi sync).
To the mattresses...
If I were a Samsung exec right now, I'd fling some cash at marketing and get them to come up with some TV and newspaper ads that said in effect "Our Tablet is that much better than iPad, that Apple are trying to prevent us from selling it to you..." then maybe (if it's not illegal) provide a list of international stores (e.g. partner with Amazon or whatever) where someone can order online and get it shipped internationally. Definitely not illegal for individual consumers, just have to pay import duty.
Play Apple at their own game and make it seem like their tablets are exclusive, coveted and worth the extra effort to get. Just like people were smuggling iPads from the States when they first arrived on the US market.
I dont recall Adobe publicly bitching about Apple in their ad campaigns doing them much good either...
Adobe doesn't make hardware. Different fight.
But same attitude from Apple. We (Apple) own the ball park, so take your ball, your glove and your bat and Get the fuck off our grass!
Calling Mueller "Independent" is stretching the truth a lot.
People who are commissioned by Microsoft to conduct a study on patents can hardly claim to be independent anymore...
...Not that his previous attacks on Google left much doubt.
the "visionary's" greed
So, does Steve Jobs need this bloody money now?
Just make something that isn't a straight copy of an iPad. I had a look down Purple World, Acer / asus / sony etc seem to be able to do it, how hard can it be?
"Not at this distance your honour."
-At one point in the hearing the judge held both Samsung and Apple products up on the air and challenged the defence to whether they could identify which device was which.
Samsung attorney Ms Sullivan, who was roughly 10 feet away, responded: "Not at this distance your honour."-
Says it all really.
I read Mueller's blog and I find it interesting and informative, but I think of him as an interested party, not an "independent journalist".
that is just full of f's
looks like the flabby fantasy fallacies of the freetard fanbois are falling fabulously fast if not forever
stick to your mums basement and sci-fi action figures because the law, real life, and social skills you know not
Hits just keep coming
Samsung just lost an attempt to prevent Apple seeing Qualcomm's license to Samsung's IP. If patent exhaustion applies, they may not even get a token FRAND income stream from Apple beyond what they're already getting from Qualcomm.
Samsung should just redesign their tablet , sure some cash will be lost with the ones already made but the electronics inside can still be reused just need a new case design or they could still be sold in countries where there isn't a ban on selling them. gotta be cheaper than paying for lawyers to keep trying to fight this in court as so far they are on a loosing battle
The Jobsian cult
I didn't really want a tablet.
I'm now curious.
I'll try and buy Samsung if I go ahead.
Though of course it's completely legal for companies to pursue injunctive measures against their competition, I am ambivalent; is it ethical for corporations to use patent infringement merely as anti-competitive tactics, or should these disputes be settled in the marketplace, where they belong?
- Product Round-up Smartwatch face off: Pebble, MetaWatch and new hi-tech timepieces
- Geek's Guide to Britain BT Tower is just a relic? Wrong: It relays 18,000hrs of telly daily
- Geek's Guide to Britain The bunker at the end of the world - in Essex
- Review: Sony Xperia SP
- FLABBER-JASTED: It's 'jif', NOT '.gif', says man who should know