Apple and Samsung
met all day yesterday in a court of the Netherlands. The Korean group called
for the country is prohibited in the import and sale of the iPhone and iPad 3G
version, Involved, the use by Apple 3G transceivers without payment of
royalties. These components include technology from Samsung. A similar
procedure is under way in France since July 8, on patents related to 3G as well
as
the United States. The heart of the debate, however, focused on issues of technology licensing at Apple Samsung. The second accused the first to use them improperly and without consideration.
At one point the debate, counsel for Apple let out confidential information. Samsung calls for each of the four patents in question, a royalty of up to 2.4% of the component. Apple should pay 9.6% royalties plus the cost of these chips, for each iPhone 3G sold iPad. She finds the note and that the total salt should not exceed 5%. According to iSuppli estimates of times by the Wall Street Journal, Intel manufactures these chips under license sells for about $ 12 to Apple.
Between the percentage requested by Samsung which would amount to $ 1.15 per unit, the 80 million iPhones expected in 2011 and iPad 3G (Apple does not give sales figures for the specific model), Samsung would receive no close to $ 100 million in royalties (73 million). This in addition to what it already sells to Apple, such as flash memory and respect to the main processor. Apple's lawyer said that the requirement of Samsung was' simply excessive "and that the Korean was abusing its contribution to the definition of 3G standard. Apple has released the map conditions FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-DISCRIMINATORY / fair, reasonable and non discriminatory), that allow players of an industry to obtain a license on fair rates of technologies included in a standard. Apple estimates that Samsung can contribute to one side of a standard pot and later seek to withdraw large profits. Apple spoke of "robbery" and later a policy of "patent ambush". Samsung is accused of having actively participated in the definition of the UMTS standard, while concealing the fact that he had patented technologies available. Today, they have become essential, it would seek high royalties. Apple cited the case of Rambus, which had used this tactic in the 90's, the memory market. This was resolved by an arrangement with the European Commission had imposed on Rambus to review its licensing terms. Apple's request to prohibit its equipment Samsung is the manifestation of an abuse of power and is illegal.
Samsung has challenged this interpretation, saying that its patents were fully known in 2008, when the iPhone has taken off in the Netherlands. He had also proposed to Apple to license its technology, either in whole or essential patents at reasonable costs. What Apple responded that they were neither friendly nor reasonable?
Another point raised, Apple said it purchased the components from Intel and Infineon (now owned by the first in January) and that in this case it did not have to pay license since Intel was already doing. This may explain today 9to5Mac remember why Steve Jobs had said "happy" for this operation (see Infineon: the bosses of Intel have consulted Steve Jobs). Samsung countered that before the takeover of Infineon chips did not include a license for its patents. Apple would have used in the iPhone's sold in the Netherlands without a license. Apple would also have a dozen vendors and keep it to give their names so as not to raise other issues around these licenses. Apple has denied, reiterating that it obtained supplies from Intel, and added that Samsung had not brought to the table the issue of licenses before 2010 because the Californian was a very important client. According to the Guardian, Apple would have weighed in 2010 to 4% of sales of components to Samsung.
Apple also said that the Korean group had altered its contracts with Qualcomm so that the chips (the iPhone and iPad distributed by the CDMA operator Verizon) sold at Apple are not covered by the patent licenses Samsung. A process according to the conditions FRAND prohibited. The judge's decision to address these issues licenses will be given Oct. 14. At the same time, Samsung has fixed some interface elements on three phones threatened with a ban on sales to the Netherlands from mid-October. The journalist Andreas Udo de Haes following the case in The Hague and has tweeted much of the discussion yesterday, was told by a representative of Samsung as an update in the interface of Samsung phones was being deployed. Samsung has withdrawn the rebound effect that has been on iOS when you get to the beginning or end of a list. Android does not offer default, preferring a halo effect, but the Samsung had returned to Apple and slipped into its terminals.
the United States. The heart of the debate, however, focused on issues of technology licensing at Apple Samsung. The second accused the first to use them improperly and without consideration.
At one point the debate, counsel for Apple let out confidential information. Samsung calls for each of the four patents in question, a royalty of up to 2.4% of the component. Apple should pay 9.6% royalties plus the cost of these chips, for each iPhone 3G sold iPad. She finds the note and that the total salt should not exceed 5%. According to iSuppli estimates of times by the Wall Street Journal, Intel manufactures these chips under license sells for about $ 12 to Apple.
Between the percentage requested by Samsung which would amount to $ 1.15 per unit, the 80 million iPhones expected in 2011 and iPad 3G (Apple does not give sales figures for the specific model), Samsung would receive no close to $ 100 million in royalties (73 million). This in addition to what it already sells to Apple, such as flash memory and respect to the main processor. Apple's lawyer said that the requirement of Samsung was' simply excessive "and that the Korean was abusing its contribution to the definition of 3G standard. Apple has released the map conditions FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-DISCRIMINATORY / fair, reasonable and non discriminatory), that allow players of an industry to obtain a license on fair rates of technologies included in a standard. Apple estimates that Samsung can contribute to one side of a standard pot and later seek to withdraw large profits. Apple spoke of "robbery" and later a policy of "patent ambush". Samsung is accused of having actively participated in the definition of the UMTS standard, while concealing the fact that he had patented technologies available. Today, they have become essential, it would seek high royalties. Apple cited the case of Rambus, which had used this tactic in the 90's, the memory market. This was resolved by an arrangement with the European Commission had imposed on Rambus to review its licensing terms. Apple's request to prohibit its equipment Samsung is the manifestation of an abuse of power and is illegal.
Samsung has challenged this interpretation, saying that its patents were fully known in 2008, when the iPhone has taken off in the Netherlands. He had also proposed to Apple to license its technology, either in whole or essential patents at reasonable costs. What Apple responded that they were neither friendly nor reasonable?
Another point raised, Apple said it purchased the components from Intel and Infineon (now owned by the first in January) and that in this case it did not have to pay license since Intel was already doing. This may explain today 9to5Mac remember why Steve Jobs had said "happy" for this operation (see Infineon: the bosses of Intel have consulted Steve Jobs). Samsung countered that before the takeover of Infineon chips did not include a license for its patents. Apple would have used in the iPhone's sold in the Netherlands without a license. Apple would also have a dozen vendors and keep it to give their names so as not to raise other issues around these licenses. Apple has denied, reiterating that it obtained supplies from Intel, and added that Samsung had not brought to the table the issue of licenses before 2010 because the Californian was a very important client. According to the Guardian, Apple would have weighed in 2010 to 4% of sales of components to Samsung.
Apple also said that the Korean group had altered its contracts with Qualcomm so that the chips (the iPhone and iPad distributed by the CDMA operator Verizon) sold at Apple are not covered by the patent licenses Samsung. A process according to the conditions FRAND prohibited. The judge's decision to address these issues licenses will be given Oct. 14. At the same time, Samsung has fixed some interface elements on three phones threatened with a ban on sales to the Netherlands from mid-October. The journalist Andreas Udo de Haes following the case in The Hague and has tweeted much of the discussion yesterday, was told by a representative of Samsung as an update in the interface of Samsung phones was being deployed. Samsung has withdrawn the rebound effect that has been on iOS when you get to the beginning or end of a list. Android does not offer default, preferring a halo effect, but the Samsung had returned to Apple and slipped into its terminals.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.