backtop


Print 51 comment(s) - last by Mike Acker.. on Jul 31 at 8:37 AM

Apple demands $2.5B USD from Samsung -- plus complete sales ban on most of its smartphones/tablets

Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) is in the middle of a tough week in the courts.

I. Samsung Accused of Destroying Evidence

The South Korean gadgetmaker recently celebrated outselling arch-rival Apple, Inc. (AAPL) nearly two-to-one in smartphone sales in the recent quarter.  Those strong sales are driven by the Galaxy S III, a smartphone whose hardware beats Apple's flagship iPhone 4S in nearly every category.

Apple is struggling to keep up in sales despite continuing to haul in record profits as the world's most profitable tech company.  Apple attorney Josh Krevitt sums up his company's plight, remarking, "Samsung is always one step ahead, launching another product and another product."

But Apple has been relatively effective at looking to stifle its competitor in court.

In recent weeks it scored sales bans on the Samsung Nexus smartphone and Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet, although it failed to secure its most hoped for ban -- a kill shot on the Galaxy S III.

Now it's scored another small victory in its U.S. court battle, with Judge Paul Grewal of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San Jose/San Francisco) granting an Apple request to give an "adverse jury instruction." The judge told the jury that Samsung destroyed evidence that might have been pertinent to the case.

Shredding
Samsung is accused of destroying evidence. [Image Source: Office Products NYC]

Samsung's global electronics empire maintains a purpose-built central email network.  That network automatically deletes emails after two weeks.  That's run Samsung into trouble in past lawsuits, including a 2004 one where it received a similar sanction for the practice.

In the current case, the U.S. International Trade Commission had ruled that Samsung behaved responsibly.  While it acknowledged the automatic email deletion, it noted that the company had informed employees that they should be saving any documents pertinent to the case.

But Judge Grewal saw things quite differently.  He argued that Samsung did not do enough to monitor that its order was being enforced.  He remarks, "In effect, Samsung kept the shredder on long after it should have known about this litigation."

Samsung plans to appeal, but if it loses, the order could be a blow to its image when the trial goes before the jury.

II.  Apple Wants $2.5B USD

Apple is suing Samsung on the grounds of a slew of patents and trademarks.  The trademarks encompass largely deal with the look of certain icons -- such as a white email envelop on a blue background.  The patents cover a host of software features such as slide to unlock and multi-touch, as well as the "look" of the iPad and iPhone.

A UK court recently found that most of these patents were invalid due to prior art.  It forced Apple to print a public apology to Samsung acknowledging that Samsung did not "steal" the look of the iPad with its Galaxy Tab.  In recent interviews Judge Richard A. Posner, one of the most experienced intellectual property experts in the U.S., expressed similar sentiments remarking that the majority of software patents -- including Apple's -- should likely be ruled invalid.

Apple wants an exorbitant $2.525B USD from Samsung ($2B USD of which represents profits from devices).  It also wants Samsung to be banned from selling the majority of its Android smartphones and tablets in the U.S.  These provisions would surely provide a nice padding to Apple's already industry-leading profits, and help it overcome its product design difficulties.

Apple money
Apple wants Samsung's devices banned and Samsung forced to pay billions in damages.
[Image Source: SomanyMP3s]

Samsung sought a 2.4 percent royalty from Apple on its 3G patents in the U.S., a proposal that is also slightly outlandish, given that it's grossly above the industry standard for licensing fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) patents.

III. Galaxy Tab 7.7 Banned Throughout the EU

More bad news came for Samsung this week when a decision by the Dusseldorf Higher Regional Court was expanded into a complete ban on sales of the Galaxy Tab 7.7 throughout the EU.  The ban comes courtesy of Community Design 000181607, which depicts a rectangular tablet:

Apple D'889 patent

It was found that the Galaxy Tab 7.7:
Galaxy Tab 7.7

...looked too much like the iPad, despite being a different size, having different back decals, and different ports.

Again, this would seemingly indicate Apple has a government-enforced monopoly on tablets in the European Union, but this is clearly not the case, as Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1N was deemed valid for sale thanks to the addition of extra metallic accents.

About the only conclusion one can thus draw from these divergent rulings is that bans are rather arbitrary and based on the sentiments of whatever court they happen to wind up in for the ruling.

The ban is tentative, pending appeal, and likely does not apply to the UK, which already found Apple's design claims invalid.

Sources: WSJ, PC Magazine



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By drycrust3 on 7/26/2012 4:39:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
despite being a different size, having different back decals, and different ports.

What if Samsung made their tablets look exactly or almost like previously released model, e.g. one of the X05 series (Zdnet did a review of the X05 XTC1500 in 2003 http://www.zdnet.com/samsung-x05-xtc-1500-30100050... )? Then Apple haven't got a leg to stand on! What are they going to say? "Samsung stole our 2004 design ideas and incorporated them in their 2003 model?" Yeah ... I know ... I wouldn't be surprised if that's what they say too.




RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By michael2k on 7/26/2012 4:46:53 PM , Rating: 1
That X05 doesn't have the trademarked Apple phone icon, music icon, address book icon, etc:
http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/custom/Apple-vs-S...

You know, the lawsuit where Apple is claiming Samsung is infringing upon Apple's trademarks, and trade dress?


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/26/2012 4:53:04 PM , Rating: 2
And of course, those icons look nothing like Apple icons but hey, keep those blinders on and keep defending poor Apple!


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By michael2k on 7/26/2012 4:54:50 PM , Rating: 2
That was my point, earlier, that you seemed to not want to educate yourself on.

Trademark law requires that Apple sue Samsung on the barest perception of infringement in order for them to retain any trademark rights.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/26/2012 5:01:07 PM , Rating: 2
Not really sure what I need to "educate" my self on when the icons are clearly not the same, nor even close. But again, keep sucking that Apple teet!


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By michael2k on 7/26/2012 5:07:59 PM , Rating: 1
Well, since you apparently took the time to look at them, I'll take the time to indicate the icons that Apple probably has a very strong defense of:
White telephone oriented diagonally left to right against a green field
Yellow lined legal paper with a leather binding
Male silhouette on a ring bound book
Beamed eighth note overlaying a CD (they've been using this since 2002, the purple version since 2003!)


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/26/2012 6:27:00 PM , Rating: 2
LOL....

Again, they look NOTHING alike, get your eyes checked. Seriously.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By michael2k on 7/26/2012 7:13:17 PM , Rating: 2
That is why the court of law exists.

And that is why the lawsuit isn't silly. If the court finds that Samsung did in fact infringe, your assertion that they look nothing alike is wrong and that Apple acted correctly. If the court finds that Samsung did not infringe (as you assert), the Apple has to pay damages and legal fees etc.

However your assertion isn't sufficient to negate the lawsuit. The fact that the icons have similar pictures and icons and such is enough to initiate such a suit.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By hexxthalion on 7/27/2012 7:37:48 AM , Rating: 1
there's no point to try to explain something to Cheesew1z69 - he'll never get it


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Alexstarfire on 7/27/2012 11:11:11 AM , Rating: 2
They might have a leg to stand on for the phone icon, even though they are quite obviously different even at the quickest of glances, but the rest seem pretty far fetched. The problem I see, in the eyes of the law, is that if you're merely basing similarities off a check-list of features, and rather vague features at that, that you could have two "similar" icons that are nearly completely different. It'd be like looking at the stats/features of two computers and saying they are the same computer just because they match. And you and I both know that most likely wouldn't be the case.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By michael2k on 7/27/2012 11:30:52 AM , Rating: 2
Did you see the music icon?
Purple beamed note over silver CD?

Apple's been using that since 2001 until 2009, well within the 5 year statute of limitations for trademark and copyright.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/27/2012 11:38:28 AM , Rating: 1
BIG FUCKING DEAL...THEY LOOK NOTHING ALIKE.

Different color purple, Samsung uses what ACTUALLY LOOKS like a CD...Apple doesn't...

You are completely BLIND if you think they LOOK ANYTHING alike.

You are really stretching now. Get your head out of Apples colon please.

BAHHH! BAHHH!

My lord, I have never seen so much retard in my life.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By michael2k on 7/27/2012 12:32:25 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe because you don't know what the iTunes logo looks like?
Before iTunes 10 (so 2009), the logo was a beamed note over CD:
http://paulgalbraith.com/itunes-10-icon
With the note in various colors (blue, green, purple, etc)

That's the one I think Apple is claiming trademark infringement on since iTunes doesn't run on the Galaxy Phone yet the icon for iTunes (beamed note over CD) is in use.

I wish you would stop with the "BAHHH! BAHHH!" too, it makes you sound like an idiot.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/27/2012 12:42:54 PM , Rating: 1
And you look like a bigger idiot with your head up Apples colon defending them.

Once again, the icons look nothing like. But keep it up, only serves to make you look like a tool each time you bring it up.

BAHHH! BAHHH!

Fucking sheep...


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By michael2k on 7/27/2012 1:05:26 PM , Rating: 2
How can you say they look nothing alike?
CD, silver, check
Note, double, with beam, colored and glossy and in 3D, check
Offset the note in the lower right hand corner, check

The only thing that looks different is that Apple has no background color to their logo while Samsung uses purple.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/27/2012 1:28:36 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The only thing that looks different is that Apple has no background color to their logo while Samsung uses purple.
Wow, are you fucking kidding me? Then IT'S DIFFERENT. My lord, you are full of stupid aren't you?


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By michael2k on 7/27/2012 1:47:27 PM , Rating: 2
That's not how trademark and trade dress works.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/21/gucci-law...

In Gucci vs Guess, Guess used different colors in their stripes (brown instead of green), and 4 Gs instead of 2, or placed their 4G logo inside of the diamonds instead of on the corners, but still lost the trademark lawsuit.

http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2008/05/po...

In Adidas vs Payless, Payless used 4 stripes instead of 3.

http://www.arentfox.com/publications/index.cfm?fa=...

Asics lost against Sketchers, but won against Madden.

These lawsuits have been won over larger differences than the background color of the logo.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Alexstarfire on 7/27/2012 11:46:34 AM , Rating: 2
Honestly, Samsung's is more like a combination of the two from Apple. The new one is just a circle, not a CD, and the old one isn't even in color. The only thing that's consistent is the music icon which, let's be honest here, everyone just sees as a music icon, not a specific note. Both sides have been using a note for a while so I can't see that holding up.

Using purple might be the biggest issue with that icon. But it's not like the color matters to anyone either.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/27/2012 11:53:45 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
But it's not like the color matters to anyone either.


Yes it does, to the Apple colon dwellers it does.

He just proved it...

He is actually using a color as an argument...to fucking funny.

LOL


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By michael2k on 7/27/2012 12:35:36 PM , Rating: 2
No, I think you're not seeing the right example. That page shows a black and white note over CD, when the "real" icon is almost identical:
http://paulgalbraith.com/itunes-10-icon

Apple's been using it from 2001 until 2009, and replaced it in 2010 with the circle you mentioned.

However 2009 (when they last used it) to 2010 (when Samsung used a very similar icon) is close enough to run afoul of trademark and copyright infringement; trademark has a 5 year limit while copyright as a little longer (75 year? I forget).

Trademark is the one where you use it/defend it or lose it.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Alexstarfire on 7/29/2012 7:55:53 AM , Rating: 1
I could see more of a case being made for that as other than color they are pretty similar. The thing that bothers me the most is that no one really gives a shit what it looks like so long as they know it's music. Truth be told, headphones would probably work too, however that doesn't necessarily mean music like a CD and music note do. You could use an instrument, or instruments, but then you might think it's about making music rather than listening to it. Of course, you could write out the word music, but that kind of defeats the purpose of having an icon.

Some symbols really just need to become standard because they don't point to a specific product but to a functionality. This might not be the best case since Apple's symbol is for a specific product. And really, if this is just an icon for a media player then several others could easily be used.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 9:04:34 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
The thing that bothers me the most is that no one really gives a shit what it looks like so long as they know it's music.
Except Apple


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By michael2k on 7/30/2012 1:40:45 PM , Rating: 2
You can get the point across then without copying the design.

Not only did you bring up good reasons why other designs might be bad, you need to bring up the point that:
1) A silver disc also equals movies, so you need another design to indicate music
2) iTunes, as the number 1 music retailer on the planet, therefore has a privileged spot in iconography. The only other picture that Samsung could use that would clearly indicate music would be an iPod.

Apple's use of CD+Note was dictated by the same forces you argue have influenced Samsung's design, the difference being that Apple's design harkens from the year 2001 when the iPod and iTunes wasn't in fact a big deal.

As you said, Samsung can make the icon a pair of headphones with the beamed note superimposed over it to get the same effect given Apple's existing success at making the iTunes store the #1 music retailer. CDs are in fact a dead end, which is why they changed their logo in 2009 from a CD to a plain circle with a note in the center.


RE: Arise Neo-classical tablet!
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/30/2012 8:27:53 PM , Rating: 1
Ok TesterGuy...

My lord... just shut up...

Take off your Apple colored glasses. Fuck man..


if i were sammy...
By elleehswon on 7/26/2012 3:33:07 PM , Rating: 2
I'd make sure nothing that goes to apple passes any inspection. they're under contract to make the products, not make them right. that'd halt apple's products from being built.




RE: if i were sammy...
By web2dot0 on 7/26/2012 3:55:27 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah .... real mature. That's how you run a multinational corporation. Throw a tandrum.

They are under contract to make products passing QA. Like any other company.

Keep the problems separate, and not get emotional about it. It's a business.


RE: if i were sammy...
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/26/2012 4:00:10 PM , Rating: 5
Yes, like it's real mature of Apple to sue over silly icons and other various silly things... because they perceive them being copied when in reality, they aren't...

Apple needs to grow the fuck up...


RE: if i were sammy...
By michael2k on 7/26/2012 4:25:56 PM , Rating: 3
I'm sure the anti-Apple folks are going to downrate this, but I think it bears mentioning that Apple is required to sue over icons and designs under trademark and trade dress law. It's a "defend or lose it" system.

If the law says that no copying has occurred then Apple gets to keep their trademark and trade dress. If copying has occurred then Apple gets to keep their trademark and trade dress as well as damages from the copying.

If they don't sue, however, then Apple loses their trademark and trade dress protections. That is called genericide; Escalator, Aspirin, and Thermos are all eroded trademarks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark

In this case it would appear Apple's success means they have to protect iPad from meaning tablet as well as their icons from meaning (respectively) Phone.app, Mail.app, Contacts.app, Music.app, etc.

Hate it if you wish, but that is how the system works.


RE: if i were sammy...
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/26/12, Rating: -1
RE: if i were sammy...
By michael2k on 7/26/2012 4:38:31 PM , Rating: 3
"ignorance of the law excuses no one"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorantia_juris_non_...

I'm seriously trying to raise the signal to noise ratio here.

You seem to be actively trying to increase the noise to signal ratio here.


RE: if i were sammy...
By nolisi on 7/26/2012 5:55:27 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Apple is required to sue over icons and designs under trademark and trade dress law


This doesn't make any sense as Apple is suing over patents, not trademarks. They're totally different things. Patents protect invention while Trademarks protects a word/idea that identifies the source of the good/service.

You can't really trademark a design (ie the actual tablet), but you can try to patent it. You can trademark the name of the device (iPad= Apples tablet).

Patents aren't governed under the same "defend it or lose it" system that applies for trademarks. You can't erode a patent, especially when you can now file for patents on things that you don't intend to produce.

Even though this argument is complete BS- it was a nice try. Not all of us are subject to the reality distortion field, however.


RE: if i were sammy...
By michael2k on 7/26/2012 6:03:50 PM , Rating: 2
Uh, no. Actually, Apple is suing Samsung over trade marks and trade dress.

It's only in the UK where Samsung sued Apple.

The US lawsuit, for example, covers patents, trademarks, and trade dress.

You can read more about the trade dress and mark suit here:
http://www.theverge.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-sams...

Specifically look for
quote:
Third claim: Federal trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1114


RE: if i were sammy...
By Solandri on 7/26/2012 6:38:35 PM , Rating: 5
Correct. Apple also sued over the similarity of some of the icons Samsung used to the iPhone icons. Samsung rolled out updates to change many of the icons in response, since that was easier than feeding millions of dollars to lawyers in the courts.

That doesn't stop some of the purported trademarks from being silly. A white envelope on a blue background? Really? So since envelopes are universally white, only one company is allowed to use a blue background, one green, one red, and one black, and if anyone other than those four companies uses a white envelope icon, they're infringing trademark?

Another silly one was Apple purporting to own the angled green phone icon for placing a call. Motorola used a very similar icon on one of its first cell phones.
http://www.vintagebrickphones.com/bilderspeicher/M...

But in response to Apple's suit, Samsung rolled out an update changing it to blue. Apparently it's been settled or dismissed, since the icon is now back to green.


RE: if i were sammy...
By michael2k on 7/26/2012 7:07:21 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't matter if it's silly, it only matters if the infringement was found not to occur.

Trademarks have to be defended else they are lost.

So, yes, if Apple files the trademark (and it isn't itself found to be a trademark violation), only one company can use that trademark. A classic and well known example is Mickey Mouse. No one else can use the character because Disney owns the trademark.

So long as Apple has trademarked it's icons (which, according to the registration paperwork, they have), then they can (and have to) stop others from using them.

The angled green phone icon is also the same case, and specifically regarding Motorola, has four key differences:
Shape of the button, round vs rounded square
Orientation of the phone, up vs down
Angle of orientation, diagonal up vs diagonal down
Presence of headset rest vs no headset rest

And, this is the key aspect, Motorola has to have trademarked the icon and defended it; if they didn't use it for 5 years, nor defended it, they cannot make any claim to it.


RE: if i were sammy...
By Bateluer on 7/27/2012 12:43:23 AM , Rating: 2
Far from it. Apple is not required to sue over rectangles or colored icons or colors of the device. They should never have been granted patents that are so broad, they apply to every device made in the last 20 years.


RE: if i were sammy...
By room200 on 7/26/2012 7:10:29 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, if you're an adult, you know how to spell tantrum before you throw one.


American judges are bought!
By masamasa on 7/26/2012 5:49:31 PM , Rating: 3
American judges constantly support Apple, international judges toss them out of the court. Go figure! Starting to see a pattern anyone?




RE: American judges are bought!
By Omega215D on 7/26/2012 5:56:58 PM , Rating: 2
Conflict of interest comes to mind when it comes to a certain judge in the Australian court dealing with Apple lawsuits.


RE: American judges are bought!
By ProZach on 7/27/2012 12:04:50 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know about all of America, but I sure noticed a few N. California judges appear to... think different ;)


RE: American judges are bought!
By Camikazi on 7/27/2012 3:21:23 PM , Rating: 2
A German judge banned Tab 7.7 from the EU, seems to me like they are supporting Apple :P


What Apple "wants"
By topkill on 7/26/2012 4:56:09 PM , Rating: 5
Who cares what they want.

quote:
Apple wants an exorbitant $2.525B USD from Samsung


And I want Santa Claus to bring me a pony. So what?




RE: What Apple "wants"
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/26/2012 4:59:03 PM , Rating: 2
Not only that, they "demand" it... LOL


heh
By sprockkets on 7/26/2012 3:37:11 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't see it here but Apple also values Samsung's patents at 0.049 cents a phone while apple's is like $6. The bounce I think is $1.49 and the other gui crap is $2.49. Hell, why not go for $1.50?

"How come your stuff is sht and their sht is stuff?"




RE: heh
By hexxthalion on 7/27/2012 7:40:40 AM , Rating: 2
the difference is that Samsung's patents are SEP patents (Standards Essential Patent) and should be offered under FRAND terms. Apple's patents are not SEP ones and can charge as much as they want for them or can reject to license them if they wish too. Apples and oranges.


RE: heh
By hexxthalion on 7/27/2012 7:42:21 AM , Rating: 2
*wish to*


what shape works?
By Belard on 7/26/2012 10:12:54 PM , Rating: 2
Make a trapazoid tablet and phone?

A screen is a screen... what other shape would anyone use?

How about previous Samsung Phones which have square screens?

How about Samsung sue Apple for making a phone period, since Samsung has been making phones for many many years.




RE: what shape works?
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/26/2012 10:42:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How about Samsung sue Apple for making a phone period, since Samsung has been making phones for many many years.


And others such as Moto, HTC have as well.


What next?
By Richlet on 7/26/2012 11:00:34 PM , Rating: 2
I'm almost starting to expect Apple to start funding the North Korean government to buy weapons, as well as provide them intel on US troop deployments in the far east, in exchange for the North invading S. Korea and destroying Samsung's HQ.




Pointing out the bias...
By testerguy on 7/29/2012 3:24:43 PM , Rating: 1
First, the title:

'Samsung Accused of Destroying Evidence'

Were they accused , or did the judge find them guilty ?

quote:
The judge told the jury that Samsung destroyed evidence that might have been pertinent to the case.


There, you knew the answer all along...

quote:
Apple demands $2.5B USD from Samsung

quote:
Samsung sought a 2.4 percent royalty


No comment required...

quote:
a smartphone whose hardware beats Apple's flagship iPhone 4S in nearly every category.


If we exclude GPU, apps, reliability, battery life, customer satisfaction, overall size, device upgrade support, Siri. But hey lets exclude the facts because that's what DT does. No self respecting publication would ever write such a sentence, by the way.

quote:
Apple attorney Josh Krevitt sums up his company's plight, remarking, "Samsung is always one step ahead, launching another product and another product."


Shocking that you spam this again. To reiterate, Josh Krevitt was referring to the LEGAL SYSTEM being slow. Not that Samsung was ahead of Apple, as you imply.

quote:
The trademarks encompass largely deal with the look of certain icons -- such as a white email envelop on a blue background. The patents cover a host of software features such as slide to unlock and multi-touch, as well as the "look" of the iPad and iPhone.


Your overly simplistic 2 or 3 word analysis of patents is about as relevant or educational as your entire website - completely off the mark.

quote:
A UK court recently found that most of these patents were invalid due to prior art.


Actually, the court didn't find 'most' of the patents invalid at all, most of the patents in question on this article weren't even being discussed in that case.

quote:
It forced Apple to print a public apology to Samsung acknowledging that Samsung did not "steal" the look of the iPad with its Galaxy Tab


Again, this is not the case. No apology has had to be written. As you well know. But why write the truth, hey?

quote:
Apple wants an exorbitant $2.525B USD from Samsung ($2B USD of which represents profits from devices)


No comment required.

quote:
These provisions would surely provide a nice padding to Apple's already industry-leading profits, and help it overcome its product design difficulties .


The same 'product design difficulties' which make both the iPhone and iPad best ever sellers in their respective categories, leading performance for months and months after release, in some cases even to date, outselling every other device in the category despite charging more? Could your sentence be any more biased?

quote:
Samsung sought a 2.4 percent royalty from Apple on its 3G patents in the U.S., a proposal that is also slightly outlandish , given that it's grossly above the industry standard for licensing fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) patents.


Yeah, lets skip over the anti-competitive illegality that is seeking bans over FRAND patents, it's only 'slightly' outlandish.... LOL.

Seriously, Jason - you're a joke. I actually didn't write this for a while because your article crossed the line into so ridiculously biased that I am tempted to boycott your joke of a blog entirely, as provocative as my comments are that would probably affect your bottom line.

Even 9to5mac manage to paint a more honest portrayal than you. Seriously...




RE: Pointing out the bias...
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2012 4:54:34 PM , Rating: 1
PLEASE boycott it, trust me, no one will miss your lunatic biased bullshit rants.

Do us all a favor and leave.


rotten apple
By Mike Acker on 7/31/2012 8:37:06 AM , Rating: 2
every one of these reports increases my animosity to the rotten apple Lawyers & Trolls, llc




"We are going to continue to work with them to make sure they understand the reality of the Internet.  A lot of these people don't have Ph.Ds, and they don't have a degree in computer science." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki