Search results matching tags 'Patents' and 'Samsung'

RE: Apple Wanted $30-$40 Per Samsung Device Sold To Avoid The Courtroom

mhenriday — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 19:34:13 GMT

Not quite sure, LKnudson (any relation to AKnudson ?) to what event you are referring when you end your posting above with the following comment : «Apple just didn't expect Samsung to take it to court». My understanding, which would seem to be confirmed by this detailed time-line constructed by Charlie Osborne at ZDNet (http://www.zdnet.com/apple-v-samsung-timeline-the-guide-to-whats-happening-7000002625/), is that the original lawsuit was filed by Apple against Samsung in April 2011. Samsung then counter-sued. Perhaps you possess other and more authoritive information on just which company sued first ? If, however, the source I cite above is correct in that Applelaunched the original suit, then not expecting Samsung to respond in kind would be a degree of sancta simplicitas of which I should be loath to accuse Apple's attorneys....

Henri

RE: Apple Wanted $30-$40 Per Samsung Device Sold To Avoid The Courtroom

mhenriday — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 17:33:55 GMT

With regard to Apple's desire for 30 or 40 USD for each and every Samsung smartphone or tablet sold, respectively, HH readers might find it interesting to note that Motorola Mobile is now taking Apple to court and seeking a ban on the import of, among other things, iPhones, iPads, and Mac computers to the USA because of the latter's refusal to negotiate license term acceptable to both parties (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-17/google-s-motorola-files-new-patent-case-against-apple-at-itc.html). Wonder how much Motorola Mobile (Google) is asking per device ? 30-40 USD ? «For 'tis the sport to have the enginer: Hoist with his own petar; and 't shall go hard: But I will delve one yard below their mines: And blow them at the moon....»

Henri

RE: Apple Wanted $30-$40 Per Samsung Device Sold To Avoid The Courtroom

mhenriday — Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:27:47 GMT

Well, karanm, I must confess that I, too, was rooting for Hal at the end....

Henri

RE: Apple Wanted $30-$40 Per Samsung Device Sold To Avoid The Courtroom

mhenriday — Mon, 13 Aug 2012 14:20:15 GMT

Apple has shown itself to be quite competent in «borrowing» - generally speaking without the developers' knowledge or permission - ideas and concepts from others and packaging and marketing them in a manner which appealed to a certain section of the public willing to pay inflated prices for shiny things. I have no problem at all with this - let consumers decide how they want to spend their money - but what I do find deeply problematic is that Apple then has gone on to «patent» the «borrowed» (Saint Jobs was less mealy-mouthed than yours truly and referred to the practice as «stealing») items. Yes, a great deal of responsibility does lie with the USPTO which has granted and continues to grant these absurd patents, almost all of which are vitiated by the concept of «prior art», and not least, the US Congress, which passes the absurd laws on which these decisions are based, but Apple cannot escape responsibility for the manner in which it has profited from the situation. Unfortunately, the US legal system seems to a large degree unable to correct these injustices - cf the farce currently taking place in Lucy Haeran Koh's court - so it seems as if the only recourse would be a general boycott of Apple's products until such time as the company comes to its senses and decides to allow consumers, rather than the courts, to decide which products are to remain on the market. Alas, the chances of such a boycott taking place are minimal, at best....

Henri