Slashdot Mirror


Samsung Tries To Ban Import of iDevices To US

tekgoblin writes "The battle between Apple and Samsung has just heated up again. Samsung has filed a complaint to the International Trade Commission to ban import of the iPhone, iPad, and iPod products to the U.S. From the article: 'Samsung, the world’s second-largest maker of mobile phones whose Galaxy devices compete with the iPhone and iPad, claims Apple is infringing five patents, according to a filing with the U.S. International Trade Commission in Washington yesterday. The ITC, which can block imports of products found to violate U.S. patents, must decide if it will investigate Samsung’s claims.'"

16 of 201 comments (clear)

  1. How is Samsung Wrong? by paulsnx2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In fact, *Nobody* can produce a smart phone without infringing on *Somebody's* patents.

    You want IP reform? Take EVERY infringing product off the market. Let's see congress and the Executive branch do without their Blackberries and their iPhones. It is stupid to allow the thousands upon thousands of bogus patents to be used as a patent thicket to protect a few big companies. These are NOT inventions, in the sense viewed by the framers of the constitution. Most are little minor tweaks obvious to anyone working in the industry. But the costs to consumers in more expensive products and less competition and slowed innovation is huge and vast.

    It is time we limit tech patents to 3 years. But regardless of the reform, reform is needed.

    1. Re:How is Samsung Wrong? by whisper_jeff · · Score: 3, Insightful

      These are NOT inventions, in the sense viewed by the framers of the constitution. Most are little minor tweaks obvious to anyone working in the industry.

      I see this argument all the time but let's be real for a second here - in the smartphone category, there's a very distinct "pre-iPhone" era and "post-iPhone" era. It may seem obvious _now_ but, until the iPhone came along, it clearly wasn't that obvious because damn near nobody else was doing it. Now? After the iPhone? Yeah - everyone and their cousin is producing a smartphone that looks and acts like an iPhone so it all seems so obvious. Until the iPhone came along, however, it wasn't obvious at all.

      Here - I'll make it even easier to understand with an car analogy. Well, a minivan analogy, to be exact. At one point, minivans had one sliding door on one side of the minivan. That's what they all looked like. All of them. It was a holdover from the minivan's utilitarian predecessor - the cube van. Then, one day, someone got the bright idea of putting a sliding door on the other side of the minivan as well. And, low and behold, everyone started doing it because "it's so obvious." But, until the first one appeared, it wasn't obvious - if it had been, everyone would have been doing it. It wasn't obvious at all.

      While many people want to believe that the iPhone is not inventive and is just a collection of obvious ideas, that's not even vaguely true because, if it was obvious, there would have been a ton of iPhone-like phones already on the market. It wasn't until the iPhone came along that suddenly "it's so obvious" happened followed by everyone doing what Apple had done because, you know, "it's so obvious."

      Sliding doors on both sides of a minivan. iPhone. Obvious, only after you see it done.

  2. Re:Dumb move. Really dumb move. by YodasEvilTwin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Samsung sells everything to everyone. I'm sure they'd happily take a small profit hit now in order to force Apple to pay them royalties on every device they have sold and will sell. It might not work out in their favor, but it's probably worth a shot.

  3. How are they going to get an unbiased judge? by Liambp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They are going to have a hard time finding a judge or jury who isn't addicted to some Apple product methinks.

    1. Re:How are they going to get an unbiased judge? by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Funny

      They are going to have a hard time finding a judge or jury who isn't addicted to some Apple product methinks.

      we had to dismiss half the jury for texting during the trial.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  4. Patent Length by xzvf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When patents were first introduced in the UK, their length was 14 years. That was based on apprenticeships lasting seven years, and two generations of apprentices learning how to build and operate a device. If it could be argued that it takes a software engineer six months to become proficient in a programing technique then software patents should only be one year. Look and feel patents, if it takes 12 weeks to master creating that look and feel, then the patent should only be six months. Something that takes a four year engineering degree to master, gets eight years. A doctorate, 16 years. This would reduce the load on the patent office, because it wouldn't be worth the effort to patent simple things.

  5. Gee Apple, how'd that lawsuit work out for ya? by gmezero · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seriously, right off the bat when Apple sued Samsung the first thought that crossed my mind was "how is this going to work out", Samgung is simply going to counter sue the crap out of them. Then when it was noted that the iPhone contains Samsung parts, I just shook my head at the stupidity.

    I'm sure the person at Apple that was getting pats on the back over this slick move is now picking the shoe parts out of their ass.

    You know the extra delicious bit of irony with this new turn is that we have a Korean company suing an American company and filing for injunction to prevent the American company from shipping their products because they've outsource production overseas. HAhahaha. Globalization? How's that working out for you?

  6. Re:Dumb move. Really dumb move. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course Samsung will not succeed in obtaining the ban; it's not the goal. Everyone knows that it's going to end up as a settlement and a cross-licensing agreement, they're just haggling over who pays and how much.

  7. The whole industry by milbournosphere · · Score: 4, Informative
    is throwing lawsuits around willy nilly: http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/4/2010/10/mobilesuits.jpg

    Pretty much all the big players are being sued by somebody. That graphic's a little old, but it still illustrates just how messed up the patent system must be.

    1. Re:The whole industry by FSWKU · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pretty much all the big players are being sued by somebody.

      What else are you going to do with all of those lawyers? Feed them to the sharks?

      Can we? Please???

      --
      "So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
  8. Re:Dumb move. Really dumb move. by icebike · · Score: 3, Informative

    Exactly!

    Also with Android devices outselling Apple devices the claim would't be true even if it was limited
    to the mobile platform arena. There are 500,000 activation of android devices every day, and most
    of them contain some Samsung parts, with emphases on the flash ram.

    What Samsung would lose in iPhone sales blocked in the US they would easily recover
    from their own phones sold in the US, as well as HTC, LG, Motorola, and twenty other
    brands all using Samsung memory.

    I've seen this claim posted before, but when you check out the facts its either dated
    information or simply applied to a specific type of flash memory of a specific size.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  9. Re:Not too bright by sayfawa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hmm, seems like all the patents I see Apple getting are software and design patents that can be worked around. Whereas the other big cell-phone companies like Nokia, Samsung, SE, etc, have patents that you need to license to actually, you know, make a phone.

    --
    Free the Quark 3 from asymptotic confinement! Bring your charm! Don't get down! All colours and flavours welcome!
  10. Re:Dumb move. Really dumb move. by icebike · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Doesn't matter. They have nowhere else to go, because only Sammy can handle their orders.

    Besides, just because the 20 Android manufacturers do not individually exceed Apple doesn't mean much.
    They easily exceed Apple do when lumped together. If iPhone were banned from import
    they would still sell elsewhere Android would surge in the US. Those phones use just as much
    memory as Apple.

    So Sammy wins either way.

    Like I posted Android is outselling iPhone today and Android tablets are just starting
    to come on line from dozens and dozens of companies.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  11. You're right. by mjwx · · Score: 4, Informative

    Lets see some data for such a claim.
    If they really were such a big buyer they would be stuck with buying from samsung since they produce most of the flash.

    Apple makes up 2.6% of Samsung's sales, Sony makes up 3.7% and Dell makes up 2.5%.

    Considering the market for NAND flash is very competitive now with every man and his dog making smartphones, memory cards and solid state drives, Samsung does not stand to lose 2.6% of sales if it cuts Apple off completely as there are other customers that buy the same products from Samsung.

    It seems Apple needs Samsung products more then Samsung needs Apple as a customer. Suing them and hoping Samsung is not a vindictive company could be a really dumb move.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  12. Apple is gambling that Samsung would fold. by mjwx · · Score: 4, Funny

    If you really think that Apple didn't know they used Samsung parts, and they didn't expect counter-suits, then you really don't understand businesses in general and Apple especially.

    If you think Apple aren't betting that Samsung is not a vindictive company you dont understand law suits in general.

    Apple are suing because Samsung smart phones are taking sales away from Apple phones. Apple derives over 50% of it's income from phone sales (a single product) so they've got a lot to lose if phone sales are threatened, namely their astronomical share price.

    The suit was an act of a desperate company, if you cant see that you dont understand how tech business work. Those at the top dont worry about others, those who fall behind sue everyone (and that children, is how bubbles burst).

    Samsung hold all the power here, if Apple becomes too bothersome, they'll just find a way to get rid of all their current contracts. Apple does not make up that much of Samsungs sales and the products they sell to Apple can be sold to many other customers (Sony, HTC, HP, Dell).

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    1. Re:Apple is gambling that Samsung would fold. by Phleg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple are suing because Samsung smart phones are taking sales away from Apple phones.

      Apple is suing because that's how the game is played at this point. Trot out your patents, so does the other guy, and settle on some cross-licensing agreement that (if you've calculated right) puts you in a better position than your competitor. Or encourages your other competitors to follow suit in licensing your patents. You clearly do not understand this level of "business chess". That's alright, but you just really ought to shut up about it until you learn more.

      ...they've got a lot to lose if phone sales are threatened, namely their astronomical share price.

      Share price is an arbitrary value without knowing market cap. If you actually meant "share price", you have no idea how the stock market works. If you actually meant "market cap", you might understand how the market works, but are laughably far from reality. AAPL is currently trading at a 15.92 P/E ratio, compared to a 19.32 P/E for GOOG, an astronomical 2,424.63 P/E for LNKD, and 10.15 P/E for MSFT. However, AAPL has (as of last quarter) nearly 10% of their share price in cold, hard, liquid cash. Assuming a zero growth rate, AAPL will have more cash on hand than its current share price in less than five years.

      So tell me, please, how Apple's share price is astronomical.

      --
      No comment.