Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 26th Sep 2011 08:59 UTC
Legal So, the hearing about the supposed FRAND status of the three 3G patents Samsung is asserting against Apple in The Netherlands is under way. Samsung is currently pleading, and they claim that Apple has wilfully and systematically infringed these patents. They further state that Apple has refused to license the patents since the introduction of the iPhone 3G, even though Samsung offered licenses. As usual, WebWereld's Andreas Udo de Haes is covering the proceeding live on Twitter (in English). Update: Samsung offered two FRAND license options (per-patent and as a package deal). Apple declined. Apple also refused to sign an NDA, delaying negotiations (all according to Samsung, of course). Update II: Apple retort: we only buy chips from Intel, and they have a license. Second, Apple claims Samsung didn't demand a license until 2010. Update III: Massive Apple fail: lawyer reveals the percentage Samsung is demanding for its patents - this is highly confidential information. Update IV: If Apple can convince the judge of this one... Ouch!
Thread beginning with comment 490829
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Ars Technica wrote a great article about this
by umad on Mon 26th Sep 2011 21:41 UTC
umad
Member since:
2011-08-18

Ars wrote a great article that elaborates on all this... they made the same conclusion that I had that Samsung's attempts to collect on the FRAND patents could actually backfire on them.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/09/samsung-lawsuits-against-...

Reply Score: 2

organgtool Member since:
2010-02-25

There is something that many people seem to be missing about FRAND patents. While the terms of FRAND are rarely released, it is widely believed that companies that license their patents through FRAND usually require a cross-licensing agreement with the licensee. This makes sense: why should you be forced to allow other companies to license your hard-earned technologies for a relatively low price only to allow those companies to come back and sue the dick off of you? Requiring a cross-license agreement from all licensees sounds extremely Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory to me.

However, it is also widely believed that Apple wants to license the FRAND patents WITHOUT allowing other companies to cross-license Apple's patents. This belief was bolstered by the fact that the only term of Apple's settlement agreement with Nokia that was released to the public was the fact that Nokia relented and allowed Apple to license their FRAND patents without a cross-licensing agreement. This made sense in that particular case because most of Apple's patents in the mobile arena are software patents related to elements of iOS. Since Nokia is moving towards WP7 and Microsoft already has a cross-licensing agreement with Apple and indemnifies all hardware manufacturers of WP7, it didn't make sense for Nokia to continue an expensive protracted legal battle with Apple over something that was quickly becoming irrelevant. However, Samsung is in a completely different position from Nokia and they aren't going to give in nearly as easily. Game on!

Reply Parent Score: 4