Samsung could try to get the iPhone 5 delayed or banned in Europe, a source has told South Korea's Maeil Business Newspaper today. The Korean giant is considering a lawsuit against the next version of the Apple smartphone due in October, in the expectation that iPhone 5 will make use of some basic telecoms technology that …
BenR, yes it's just you, I'm loving this.
HP Cynic, don't do it! Get a Galaxy S2.
Or a Monte Carlo and GiffGaff if budgetry concerns are foremost.
Apple must lose
I SO hope Samsung win.
Someone needs to stop Apple, otherwise everyone will be paying patent royalties to Apple for years and years to come - and us, the consumer will suffer through inflated hardware costs.
I just wish people would stop buying Apple products until they back down.
and then what? apple loses and who will samsung copy then?
Tit for tat
"You sue me, I sue you."
It would be fun if Samsung recruited lawyers of similar calibre to Apple - and maybe applied for an injunction in the US as well. Imagine if neither device was able to be released while tied up in litigation... :D
The Global (Pseudo) Intellectual War
The only winning move is not to play.
Samsung copying Apple
Don't do it, it could be used against them as showing Samsung will do exactly the same as Apple!
Apple:- what goes around comes around.
Apple you started this fight. With your BS about tablet shape/look.
If Samsung ends wining this case this will affect all Apple phones. Apple could be force to relase IMEI numbers so all iPhones could be blocked from working in Europe. So iPhone, iPhone 3, iPhone 3GS will not be able to connect to any mobile network in Europe.
Are you for real? I'm not a lawyer, but something smells awfully similar to BS.
Yeah, but no. That's not at all how it works.
Most of the time successful patent infringement suits lead to a verdict where the infringer is required to cease infringing (ie stop producing/selling the product in question) and pay damages for existing infringements.
Expecting them to track down and retrieve past products sold *before* the infringement was ratified through the legal process is excessive, and sets bad precedents when taken in the context of the USA's b0rked patent system.
Don't let the facts ruin the fantasy though ;)
I may be wrong...
...but that sounds like the biggest load of b*ll*cks I've ever heard!
The above was supposed to be in response to the Anon Coward post titled "WGACA" (a few posts up), and not a comment upon the article.
It's the politicians fault
For giving them the laws to do this. If they really want to help the economy you drop the entire patent thing on the ground for anything that involves a cpu be that software or hardware. On the balance of things any possible value from patents is outweighed a million-fold in today's age by the disadvantages.
Don't tease sleeping bears
Could I patent the idea of suing a competitor who launches a product which has the same purpose as something which I already make or plan to produce?
Oh yeah, too much prior art although apparently if I patent it in the US...........
I hope they kick Apple's butt!
Not that i really care either way as i'm in the WP7 camp, but it's great viewing!
Where's the popcorn icon, oh a beer will do!!
Blame the Greeks for all this tosh, circa 500BC (according to wikipedia).
"encouragement was held out to all who should discover any new refinement in luxury, the profits arising from which were secured to the inventor by patent for the space of a year."
It has to be said, they started it off with a far more sensible system than we have now.
Interesting to see that the first 20 year patent in the UK was for coloured glass. Where would we be today without green bottles?
Anyway...isn't it iPhone 4S?
Apple's fault, fair and square
When they dothe equivalent of a car company accusing a competitor of copying because they built a car with wheels at each corner, they need someone to step up and say 'enough'.
Samsung has done some innovation?
Wow that is a shock! I actually don't care for all the copyright/design/patent fighting. Both companies are behaving badly there. However I am wondering what Samsung has actually done that's innovative. The didn't write the OS. They don't write the apps. They didn't design the processor. They didn't come up with the UI metaphors. What do they do other than regurgitate other peoples' work and bang out cheap phones.
Actually, Samsung invented AMOLED
Dear The Register
Can we please add the "I judge you to be a troll" vote button to the up/down votes.
That won't end well
But then we'll need a "I judge you to be an iTard/freetard/neckbeard/M$tard" etc and soon all we'll see are buttons stretching down our screens into infinity.
Yes, but then I won't feel compelled to do the obligatory Ad Hominem response that some of these comments enrage me to do.
And I can avoid typing paragraphs of text to prove that the commentator is indeed a troll.
Patents restrict innovation, not encourage it
I can appreciate the importance of trademarks, which prevent other organisations or individuals from playing off the goodwill earned by a brand. And I can appreciate a limited form of copyright, in order to protect the investment made in a work. I can even appreciate patents in a limited form, especially to protect smaller businesses from being ripped off by those with more money. But the problem is the scale and scope that they currently enjoy.
For instance, the newly passed copyright extension in Europe is a perfect example of what's wrong with the current system. Rather than let copyrights expire and usher in a new era of creativity or create an incentive to invest in the industry, large corporations seek to hold on to income generated from business deals up to nearly three quarters of a century after they were made.
Instead of protecting and encouraging investment in an industry it is actually diminishing it, as large companies seek to monetise existing products instead of innovating. That goes against the very reason they protections were introduced. They have failed the common sense test.
I'm wonder what 'basic telecoms technology' Samsung could have patened
Surely 'basic telecoms technology' is something used by Fisher-Price baby alarms - and just about every device that 'coms' in one form or another.
And also surely, 'basic telecoms technology' must pre-date anything Samsung might have invented - especially as (according to wikiP) their telecoms business only started in the 80s with telephone switchboards.
Something else puzzles me - after reading the wikiP. Samsung is now a mega-corp involved in multiple industries - a bit like Hitachi. I can't see how a company that started as a woolen mill in the 1950s, had the necessary where-with-all to develop all the things it got into without copying other companies products along the way.
I might be wrong, but I don't think I am.
Apple have brought this on themselves to be honest, I really hope Samsung win for the good of "innovation" in a broken system.
I wonder though if Apple have found a new supplier for components or even fabing them themselves without necessary playing ball with the complex wireless licensing system. Be a bit silly if they are..
aside from the blackberry and to a degree the sony all the other handsets follow a similar design language, however they all show differentiations large enough to tell them apart.
why do samsung have to wait until the iPhone 5 comes out...
... before checking if it violates their patents???
Apple managed to get a court to order Samsung to send them [Apple] some pre-release version of the Samsung Tabs so they could "check it doesn't invalidate our patents".
Why the hell don't Samsung use the same court and ask the same question - Apple would go fricken' ape at having to put an iPhone 5 "out in the wild". That would be hilarious to see
Come on Samsung play Apple at their own game - they got pre-release versions you should too.
Poor, poor Apple...
How sad is this day? Not sad, joyful for hath not Apple brought upon themselves the seeds of my delight?
Sucked in you A(pple)-holes...
- IT bloke publishes comprehensive maps of CALL CENTRE menu HELL
- Nine-year-old Opportunity Mars rover sets NASA distance record
- Analysis Who is the mystery sixth member of LulzSec?
- Prankster 'Superhero' takes on robot traffic warden AND WINS
- Comment Congress: It's not the Glass that's scary - It's the GOOGLE