Friday, 13 June 2014

EU: Samsung trying to illegally hinder competitors



interesting note here that:

  • frand patents essential , obvious. there no other way around them. design patents apple has not. apple has every right sue based on patents has. samsung has no right sue on frand patents essential compatibility , connectivity.
  • the investigation takes account irrevocable commitment offered samsung european telecommunications standards institute abide frand terms.
 

essential, yes. obvious, no. if were, other companies involved in standard would've challenged them @ time.

usually true, because they're part of standard being used.

are not what?

essential make phone? true, they're not required. frand patents guaranteed income because cannot avoided if want use standard. apple's patents can gotten around changing design.

obvious? judges around world have warned apple obviousness.

each has right sue on patents. main restriction on frand patents in comparison way apple uses patents, frand ones cannot used stop sales while faith negotiations going on.

of course, question is, appropriate frand terms?

common misconception frand means pays same amount. isn't true @ all.

terms can depend on quantity, length of contract, , cross licensing trades lower rate.

core gsm cellular patents priced percentage of retail price of device. (this done in order promote lower phone prices gain widespread acceptance.)

starting date has effect, due inflation. frand rate today higher ten years ago, or last year.
 


Forums Apple and Apple Services Apple, Inc and Tech Industry


  • iPhone
  • Mac OS & System Software
  • iPad
  • Apple Watch
  • Notebooks
  • iTunes
  • Apple ID
  • iCloud
  • Desktop Computers
  • Apple Music
  • Professional Applications
  • iPod
  • iWork
  • Apple TV
  • iLife
  • Wireless

No comments:

Post a Comment