Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 4th Nov 2011 22:20 UTC
Legal This is probably not entirely surprising. The European Commission has announced that it is investigating both Apple and Samsung because they may have breached antitrust rules with regard to patents used as standard in the mobile phone industry - otherwise known as FRAND patents. While the EC states it's investigating both Samsung and Apple, it's likely the investigation focusses on Samsung.
Thread beginning with comment 496041
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Tony Swash
by frderi on Sat 5th Nov 2011 16:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Tony Swash"
frderi
Member since:
2011-06-17

I'm Ford, I make a car design, patent it, and bring it to market. You're Hyundai, you see my car and you make a very similar one who's design only faintly differs from mine. Since you didn't have to prototype the design like I did, you were able to cut R&D costs to a great margin because I essentially designed it for you. So when you take your car to market you're able to undercut my profits. I take you to court. Let's see who wins.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Tony Swash
by JAlexoid on Sun 6th Nov 2011 15:39 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Tony Swash"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

I'm Ford, I make a car design, patent it, and bring it to market. You're Hyundai, you see my car and you make a very similar one who's design only faintly differs from mine. Since you didn't have to prototype the design like I did, you were able to cut R&D costs to a great margin because I essentially designed it for you. So when you take your car to market you're able to undercut my profits. I take you to court. Let's see who wins.

How much you sunk into R&D is not a measure by which patents are granted nor should be granted.
And please, please, please.... Hardware related patents are in a totally different universe to intangible IP. They are much easier to define, identify and protect.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Tony Swash
by frderi on Sun 6th Nov 2011 17:40 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Tony Swash"
frderi Member since:
2011-06-17


And please, please, please.... Hardware related patents are in a totally different universe to intangible IP.


So hardware deserves protection, and software doesn't?

Innovative designs on a hardware level are valuable, but on the software level they aren't?

You're valued and appreciated as a hardware company, but you're dismissed as worthless as a software company?

With more and more innovations being built around software, rather than hardware, I think thats selling a lot of people short.

Reply Parent Score: 1

unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

The Honda Jazz and Mitsubishi Colt are blatant copies of the Mercedes A Class. The Lexus I series are copies of 3 series BMWs.

No one gets sued in the car industry for copying designs. They swap IP readily. They only sue over trademarks.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Tony Swash
by frderi on Mon 7th Nov 2011 00:50 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Tony Swash"
frderi Member since:
2011-06-17

They swap IP readily. They only sue over trademarks.


I'd like to see you bring to market a Lexus which looks almost exactly the same inside out like a BMW 3 and not get sued by BMW.

Swapping IP doesn't come without a price. Its still up to the individual IP holder if they're willing to swap it or not. If they don't, you need to respect that, not do it anyway and not pay anything.

Reply Parent Score: 1