Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 2nd Nov 2013 17:24 UTC
Legal

Apple, Microsoft, and others, a little over a month ago in a letter to the EU, warning that the EU's new proposed unified patent law could lead to more patent trolling:

To mitigate the potential for abuses of such power, courts should be guided by principles set forth in the rules of procedure to assess proportionality prior to granting injunctions. And PAEs should not be allowed to use injunctions for the sole purpose of extracting excessive royalties from operating companies that fear business disruption.

Yesterday:

A new front opened today in the patent wars between large technology companies, as a consortium that owns thousands of patents from the Nortel bankruptcy auction filed suit against Google and other manufacturers alleging infringement. Rockstar, which is owned jointly by Apple, Blackberry, Ericsson, Microsoft, and Sony, filed suit in US District Court in Texas. In addition to Google, the consortium has alleged infringement by Asus, HTC, Huawei, LG, Pantech, Samsung, and ZTE.

They're not just scumbags - they are lying scumbags.

Thread beginning with comment 576055
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: You forgot Google
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 2nd Nov 2013 23:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: You forgot Google"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

Apple never refused to license Motorola's (Google's) or Samsung's patents. What Apple refused to do was agree to a deal that was WAY beyond what the license holders charged other companies.


Read the actual ITC's words. The ITC was clear in that Samsung's offer was FRAND. It was not an unfair offer at all.

Here's the ITC's opinion - and the ITC actually studied the entire negotiation (you have not):

"The Commission analyzed the history of negotiations between Apple and Samsung (this portion is heavily redacted) to see if Apple showed that Samsung failed to negotiate “in good faith,” and found that Apple failed to do so. Notably, the Commission dismissed Apple’s arguments that (1) Samsung’s initial offer was so high as to show bad faith, and (2) Samsung’s attempts to get a cross-license to Apple’s non-SEPs violated its FRAND commitments."


Edited 2013-11-03 00:01 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2