Feeds

back to article Samsung still faces EU antitrust charges, says official

Samsung may have dropped its injunction requests against Apple in the UK, Germany, France, Italy, and the Netherlands, but that move won't stop the EU from pursuing antitrust charges against the South Korean electronics giant. "We will adopt a statement of objections very soon," the EU's top antitrust official Joaquín Almunia …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Anonymous Coward

Finally!

Apple put into line and Sumsung now put into line.

Will the children finally get over it?

0
1
Anonymous Coward

Whoo There It Is!

Spanked!

They did not drop their frivilous FRAND abuse lawsuits out of good will now did they?

5
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Whoo There It Is!

What Samsung did is a bit like being caught shoplifting - getting caught and asking to be let off as you will put it back or buy it - now.

1
1

Re: Whoo There It Is!

Not really, as they haven't actually been found guilty of anything yet. A more accurate analogy would be that of a shady looking character who has promised not to set foot in the shop, but will still be investigated for prior shoplifting accusations.

0
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Whoo There It Is!

Well the shoplifter has not been 'charged' either at that point but is trying to get out of it by offering to pay for the goods / put them back. Buy $samsung being a 'shady looking character' works for me ;)

1
1
Boffin

@Peter 48

You don't understand what an SO is, it is not a "we suspect you may have done this"; it is a "Your Guilty but we will give you a chance to explain how we got it wrong". A better analogy would be "we saw you shoot the person, you have the gun but we havn't found the bullet yet". SO's are very rare as it requires the belife of guilt to start an investigation. That is, the CC must do an investigation to work out if there is a need for a formal investigation. It was designed this way to make sure the CC couldn't be manipulated to help one countries companys against another.

Also the CC tries to resolve any problems before an SO is declared as they don't like to make rulings as that will effect the law's of every EU contry (27 at present) and no one likes that. So when an SO is declared it's only when the CC is at least 99% sure that the company is guilty. FRAND is very clear, very simple to understand and Samsung are blatently guilty of abuse. The fact that Samsung has droped the injunction demand in Europe wont help them as they havn't droped it in other countries showing "bad faith", that is "we droped it in the EU because we didn't want to get finned but we will try this shit in other countries".

This is going be bad for Samsung, the FRAND agreemeant was made in France which is a member of the EU and it was a Global agreemeant. Not only can Samsung get fined on there Global profits but if they win a case on FRAND SEP's somewhere outside the EU, they can get fined again! This is the reason Motorola droped their FRAND SEP case's in Europe (not that it will help them, im starting to think that Apple let Motorola win in Germany so that they could ban Apple products for a day, there by proving that some sales where lost by the abuse of FRAND).

Intel got fined, what $1.5 billion for much less, Samsung will be lucky if that all they get hit with as that will be only 18-24 month's of profits in Europe. I'v read some people saying it could be $3-4 billion which would, with the US judgmeant, wipe out all of Samsungs smartphone profits since the introduction of the iPhone. I don't think it would be that high as the CC normaly fines less than it could. Still it is along with the Motorola investigation, the most blatent case of abuse of monoply since the founding of the common market. RAMBUS comes to mind but that was mostly handeled in the USA and they got their arses sliced, diced and handed to them on a fake silver platter for trying to use their patents to extort money without even agreeing to a FRAND, they just got fucked for being on a SEP group andd not telling others as required, about their patents.

1
0

Big potential penalties

Fines for breaches of EU anti-competition law can in theory be as much as 10% of global group turnover (although they are not usually this high they can be in the billions as MS found out). 10% of Samsung's global turnover would be about £16BN based on their 2011 annual report although their third quarter was up 26% YoY so if they manage that over the whole year they could theoretically be liable for a £20BN fine.

Repeat offenders such as Samsung (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/05/eu_fines_crt_cartels/) can expect larger penalties than first time offenders.

4
1
Bronze badge
Thumb Up

Re: Big potential penalties

Hopefully the EU will hammer samsung again - cannot think of a more deserving candidate. And this form someone who owns 3 of their TVs (incl. a D800x) which is a brilliant device.

4
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: Big potential penalties

I own one Samsung TV and not another - not just because of this - security issues, poor interface and it's generally poorer than the other tellies I own. I bought it because it was cheaper and regret it. Yesterday it just crashed and the only way to get it back was to pull the power. Anyway Samsung were just hoping to get off lighter by dropping their lawsuits - didn't work.

0
1
Silver badge
Mushroom

Re: cannot think of a more deserving candidate

Well Apple seem more deserving to me, yes its bad form using FRAND patents this way, but at least their solid patents not like the rubbish patents Apple have sued for, and Samsung is using patents to fight back rather than launch the first blow...

I own both Apple & Samsung Devices, Samsungs are more usable, i.e. everything works together with everything else (including all my non Samsung devices.. My iOS devices don't seem to like being used in the same way, so they are now kids toys...

Just as an example I went round someones house, went on their wifi and within a few seconds was able to display my photos on their Panasonic TV, do that as default with iOS?, no chance...

2
5
Anonymous Coward

Re: cannot think of a more deserving candidate

You were lucky - the DLNA on my Samsung tell does not play nice with pretty much anything - so guess what it's now got an Apple TV box attached to it. Samsung may make decent components / screens but the interface is not as good and there are security concerns (as detailed in other articles on here). I wish I had bought a Panasonic TV so your friend made the right choice there.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: cannot think of a more deserving candidate

DLNA is a bit of a joke and the only reliable way (non Apple) is to take a HDMI adapter and plug it in.

1
1

Re: cannot think of a more deserving candidate

WTF, all Apple asked Samsung to do is not rip them off, Apple got an agreameant with Microsoft and Nokia and HTC, with 2 of them we know Apple have licenced patent with ,just don't clone us, clause. How does that make Apple deserving, they have stated many times that they will never seek an injuction over SEP patents unless sued first over SEP patents and even after being sued havn't used their SEP patents to sue anyone!

It is not bad form to abuse FRAND, it is illegal, you ask for a monoply and say you will licence under FRAND, once you get the OK, you turn around and say "nah nah fuck you", that's not bad form, that is criminale behaviore. If someone says "hey you can trust me" so you give them they keys to your house and ask them to look after it while your away, you come back and find they have sold everything it it and then gone and sold your house, would you call that "bad form"?

Here's another Question, do you go and steal from friend? or just work for Samsung?

0
0
Thumb Up

good

I think the EU regulators should not let Samsung off the hook and make a thorough investigation, providing they do the same for Apple, Nokia and everyone else out there who has been using the import ban as a trade tool.

2
1
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: good

A shame the EU investigation seems to only be about using FRAND patents (rather than frivilous patents in general) to get import bans as a trade tool.

It's a bit like the police seeing a bunch of getaway cars whose passengers have just robbed a bank, chasing and catching up with them, and then giving just one of them a speeding ticket while letting the rest off.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Shamsung PR spin..

won't get them out of it this time.

1
2
Anonymous Coward

Anna Leach tells you as it is.

Rik's always got that foul tasting Apple spin.

Bin him.

1
2
This topic is closed for new posts.