Apple: our 3G isn't Samsung's 3G

Apple: our 3G isn't Samsung's 3G

Summary: Apple has claimed that it isn't infringing on one of Samsung's patents, due to the way the 3G standard the patent relates to is being implemented.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Legal, Apple, Patents, Samsung
18

While Apple has admitted it uses a 3G standard that Samsung has a patent for, the Cupertino, California-based tech giant has argued that the way it has implemented the standard means that it is not infringing on the patent.

As part of its cross-claim against Apple, Samsung has alleged that the iPhone 4, 4S and iPad 2 infringe on three patents Samsung has for 3G standards.

Day two of the case has focused on Apple's argument on how it does not infringe on Samsung's Australian Patent number 2005202512: "method and apparatus for data transmission in a mobile telecommunication system supporting enhanced uplink service".

This patent outlines how the transmit power of data channels can be scaled if the total transmit power required for the data channel exceeds the predetermined maximum power allocated.

Apple counsel Stephen Burley today confirmed that Apple uses the standard in question in its 3G devices through Qualcomm's baseband chips, but said that when Samsung claimed to allege that Apple infringed on its patents, the company didn't check to see how the device actually performs the function in the standard, instead just comparing its own patent to the standard and then claiming infringement.

"We make the submission that this is an unusual case of infringement, because our friends have not done a process one might normally expect," he said. "The allegations of infringement assume in some circumstances that, where the words of the standard leave open [to interpretation] that, necessarily, the option nominated by Samsung [has been chosen and] infringement has taken place."

Burley today also denied Samsung's allegation yesterday that Apple had rejected further negotiations to license Samsung's patents on a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) basis.

"Apple has not refused to negotiate with Samsung. Apple continues to be willing to negotiate on FRAND terms for Samsung's standards essential patents, including the three involved in this suit," Burley said.

However, Samsung counsel Neil Young stood by his original claim.

The rest of this week will be devoted to tutorials for Justice Annabelle Bennett on this patent. Apple and Samsung experts will use this time to meet to discuss differences over the other two patents involved in Samsung's counterclaim. The next part of the case will be heard in the second week of August.

Updated at 4.43pm 24 July 2012: added Apple's rebuttal of Samsung's claims.

Topics: Legal, Apple, Patents, Samsung

About

Armed with a degree in Computer Science and a Masters in Journalism, Josh keeps a close eye on the telecommunications industry, the National Broadband Network, and all the goings on in government IT.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

18 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Really Apple,

    So then samsung could say this black minimalist rectangle isn't infringing on Apples minimalist rectangle because it's implementation is different.

    Apple are losing the plot.
    Bozzer
    • Exactly!

      Exactly... "Our rounded corners are not your rounded corners".

      Apple is really looking and acting pathetic and desperate as of late. Why don't they "invent" something new instead of lashing out at the competition with these petty law suits? iOS has become stale, Siri is a gimmick, and the most they can do with the iPhone is make it thinner with a bigger screen. Wow, how innovative.

      The handwriting is on the wall, Apple's best days are behind them. Good riddance, bunch of hypocrites.
      PC987
  • FRAND?

    Why does the lawsuit involve 3 FRAND patents? I thought the point of FRAND was to short-cut negotiating of use and avoid lawsuits?
    edelbrp
    • Yes

      But then what you do when someone decides they can get away without paying FRAND?
      kirovs@...
      • Including proprietary technology in standards must be forbiden

        The proper way is for any proprietary technology that is being included in a standard to become public domain. It is enough that it's inventor already has technology advantages.
        Then this FRAND nonsense will be gone.
        danbi
      • FRAND is the issue

        Apple claims Samsung would not license the patents to them on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms. Since there are lots of counter-claims and a dearth of facts out in open, no one can really say except the judge.
        paferg
        • Allegedly, Samsung made an offer for 3X what they were charging others

          That is not FRAND.

          To be fair, FRAND should be a value negotiated at the time the tech was included in a standard. The price must be set in stone and there shouldn't be any additional negotiation to establish a price. Also, the license for any patent in a standard should be payed by the company producing the hardware part that is directly responsible for implementing the standard and automatically sub-license to companies using the chip.

          Right now, patent owners are getting double whammy ... they get a license fee from the manufacturers and another from the OEMs building the final device.
          wackoae
      • Or over charge

        What do you do when the FRAND holder demands higher that fair rates such as Nokia tried to do with Apple?
        non-biased
  • Apple is a slippery snake

    I wish Apple would man-up and face the facts, rather than resorting to their usual legal and semantic gymnastics to try and avoid paying a fair price.
    Tim Acheson
    • So you have facts?

      So you have all the facts from the case and have seen all evidence so that you are qualified to make this statement? Of is just that you hate Apple so facts be damned, they are being a slippery snake?
      non-biased
  • Funny, really funny

    So there are ways to implement a patented idea without infringing the patent ?
    Then why exactly has Apple been suing Samsung about the form factor of Samsung Tablet, again ?
    Is a 16/9 screen based tablet (used by Samsung) the same as a 4/3 screen based tablet (used by Apple) ?
    The more the time, the more i dislike this rotten Apple.
    timiteh
    • Patents

      You cannot patent an idea.

      You patent the way the idea is implemented.

      It is of course possible, that Apple has implemented the same idea differently than Samsung.
      danbi
      • but thats what apple is doing

        and have been look some of them up.and does anyone know if thier is a way to find out wich pantants apple has looked up then taken for thier own let me know
        sarai1313@...
  • Not news

    Patent trolls denying they are patent trolls. In other news, fish swim.
    Trict
  • or stolen outright

    reverse engineered should be apple's new name in my book.
    sarai1313@...
  • Watch the lemmings run!

    Only Apple ever sues!

    http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1740,iid=325524,00.asp
    Robert Hahn
  • Hmm...

    Is that why iDevices are notoriously bad at managing radio connections? ;)
    Natanael_L
    • Only notoriously bad

      in the small minds of haters like yourself. Those of us that actually use the devices find we have no problems what so ever.
      non-biased