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 490964
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Icky
by umad on Tue 27th Sep 2011 23:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Icky"
Member since:

Hardware patents for designing arrays of logic gates that manipulate waves to send digital signals.

I dare you to point to anything in the universe and tell me it isn't math.

This whole argument that software patents ought not be defensible because you ought not be able to patent mathematical figures is stupid. It's an argument on the EXACT same understanding that people ought not be able to copyright books because all of it is just letters and you ought not be able to copyright the alphabet.

Meanwhile, Apple's designs are proprietary and have not been licensed to anyone. The iPhone is not beating Samsung's products because of patents -- Samsung and Google have obviously ignored Apple's patents, and injunctions have only just begun -- but because more people want an iPhone than a Samsung phone. So I don't see how Apple is "bludgeoning" any competitors with patent law (at least not yet).

Thanks. That is probably the most eloquently stated retort on this subject displayed on this site.

@Thom: How is revealing the "highly confidential" information on Samsung's price model a "Massive Apple Fail" given that they "refused to sign an NDA" in the first place?

Thom is just showing what he hopes will happen and stating it as fact thereby throwing any remaining understanding of journalistic integrity out the window for this one as he appears to not want Apple to succeed if it means that others can't copy them.

Also, where is the moral outrage over keeping the pricing model of standards-essential patents "highly confidential"? How is that not horrible patent manipulation and a severe violation of FRAND?


Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[3]: Icky
by Neolander on Wed 28th Sep 2011 05:56 in reply to "RE[2]: Icky"
Neolander Member since:

Software Patents != Copyright

Software patents target concepts, hardware patents and copyright target implementations.

If the rules of software patents applied to hardware, we would be able to patent "gears" or even "momentum transmission between two cylinders in pivot linkage with a device's carter". On the other hand, hardware patents only allow you to patent a specific gear design, like, say, the double helical one.

Edited 2011-09-28 05:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Icky
by umad on Wed 28th Sep 2011 08:25 in reply to "RE[3]: Icky"
umad Member since:

Software Patents != Copyright

Software patents != mathematical processes [/q]

Reply Parent Score: 0