Macworld Forums: Samsung hopes to block sale of iPhone 4S in Italy and France - Macworld Forums

Post your comments for Samsung hopes to block sale of iPhone 4S in Italy and France here

Dear Samsung, patents that are vested in technology standards must be licensed to all parties at standard rates. If Apple is already covered by the components in its iPhones being from licensed vendors, than you don't even have that leg to stand on. Either way your desperate attempt to block iOS devices as a retaliation for the very real infringement YOU are making by copying iOS devices is pathetic. Don't disgrace yourself.

I think it's time both companies send their team of lawyers to a lovely all-inclusive resort for a long long time, and go back to doing what they're both really good at: developing technology. These constant battles are not good for either company's image, and even less for their customers. Both have awesome products and creativity. They don't need to fight each other legally to compete. Do it on the technology level.

Although patents serve their purpose, they also hinder development and research, not only in technology, but also in critical fields like health care and pharmacology.

I guess I'm just bored to read the same stories over and over again. :-)

The peaceful times of "i don'to sue you/i buy your parts and you don't sue me" have definitely come to an end.
I'm wondering how far they will go and how absurd it might get in the coming months (years ?)

With so many patents given to everybody that to many is just the way a normal person would do things, these things are not supposed to be able to be patented. People's real patents need to be protected. But the way tings are now everybody is probably violating everybody elses patents. Somehow there needs to be a way that actually works so that everyone can license these patents.

The way I see it if Samsung's tablets are to be held off the market then Apple's should also be held off. I saw a Galaxy Tab 10.1 & did not at all think or confuse it with my black iPad 2. They all remind me of an OSHA designed displays. Displays have been getting narrower & narrower bezels as the building materials allowed. The corners for safety purposes are rounded, That came from my kitchen counters & my drywall corners. Ease those corners & make the item safer. Isn't hat what OSHA is all about.

Both sides need to do some changes to get these things going rather than just have lawyers be the sole source of income for the company, Apple & Samsung included.

I'm not a shar.., pardon, I meant a lawyer, and maybe claims of this kind have some legal basis. Anyway, I find very ludicrous that:
1- Apple inctroduces a new gizmo (computer, iPhone, iPad, etc.) that is something new in appearance and functionality.
2- Other companies start to COPY the interface and the appearance of Apple's products.
3- Other companies sue Apple.

CDTobie, on 05 October 2011 - 06:05 AM, said:

Too late.

To my understanding the two Samsung patents have to be licensed to all comers since they cover basic communications technology. So at the worst Apple will have to license the two patents and pay Samsung some money.

Samsung's basis to injunct the sale of the iPhone4S may not have any basis beyond forcing Apple to license what they already should have licensed. At least that is my understanding - please correct me if I am wrong.

This will not end well. For Samsung.

Apple have a very good case against Samsung's Galaxy Tab: it's such a clear rip-off of the iPad, it's astonishing Samsung thought Apple wouldn't notice.

Furthermore, no company can claim that Android's default (rip-off) GUI, which flagrantly copies iOS', is the "only" or "obvious" solution to the problem of creating a multi-touch user interface. Microsoft has proved there is at least one other approach.

And damned good it is too. I'm an Apple user and even I was impressed by some of Windows 8's new features. (WinPho 7's "Mango" release is also intriguing.) Windows 8's App Store approach combines the best of both worlds: a curated market stall, but with curated links to external sites for companies who'd rather sell using their own systems. Say what you like about Ballmer—he's no Bill Gates, let alone Steve Jobs—but Microsoft's R&D really do crank out some impressive stuff when they've a mind to. MS' problem was always that of finding a good way to bring that R&D to market.

Hopefully Windows 8 and Windows Phone 7 will do what none of the Android licensees have so far managed, despite their ridiculously long head start: provide Apple with some actual competition in the user experience and design fields.

Back on-topic: Samsung wouldn't recognise "innovation" if it dressed itself in neon orange and kicked that company hard in the meat and two veg. Twice. While screaming "I'm Mr. Innovation!" Through a megaphone.

HobbesDoo, on 05 October 2011 - 06:07 AM, said:

So if you legally own something and someone rides (or you perceive that they ride) roughshod all over your rights you would not use those same legal mechanisms to protect yourself?

The legal teams operate independently from the engineering and marketing teams. Both can apply their full resources at the same time without affecting the other.

Multitouch and the "totalface" of technology like Siri and Google and other equivalents are the paradigm shift in interface away from keyboard and mouse. Whoever owns this technology would be well advised to go to all measures to protect it since this new interface paradigm is worth a lot of money and will be around a very long time.

bettercitizens, on 05 October 2011 - 06:54 AM, said:

I think Apple's response to this is that they DO license these patents through their deal with Intel.

I am about to buy a new large screen TV, and Samsung was the front runner. After seeing their tablets in the flesh the rip-off of Apple design is obvious, and the deserved to get pulled up. And yet the courts accept submissions from Samsung on what are in effect open standards. I for one vote with my feet, and I will now get a Sony or LG TV. I hope everyone else will do the same.

It sure seems as if Samsung has decided that their phone and tablet business is worth more to them than the contracts for parts Samsung has with Apple. Because they seem pretty determined to kiss THAT business relationship goodbye. Not even my Korean co-workers understand this; they only thing they can say about it is that Samsung has a lot of quasi-independent departments that don't talk to each other. And apparently either don't answer to any central authority or else the central authority in question has decided to burn bridges with Apple.

Does anyone outside of the courtrooms where these alleged patent violations are being discussed actually know which patents are in dispute?