586
Living Room / Re: Apple vs. Samsung Goes NUCLEAR!
« on: August 06, 2013, 12:12 AM »When I read this story in he weekend on a Dutch tweakers site, the comments were juicy. The apple camp kept saying that apple needed to pay ten times more than other parties for samsung frand's. That got me thinking...Dothese other parties have frand's that Samsung uses? If so, frands can be used to say 'I don't pay for your frands, you don't pay for my frands'. If there is a difference in number of frands between parties a bonus-malus system would be reasonable. How much (relevant) frands does apple have in this case? According to the trade cmission not enough. I believe that because of this apple didn't pay anything and dod not even try to negotiate. Both sides act as little children trying toget their way. Samsung is right, but 'big brother' obully sets the market straight...I am just waiting for the bitch-slapping to be delt to each and every party in this scandal. It is seriously long overdue.-Shades (August 05, 2013, 01:35 PM)
In the industrial world that's the whole patent game. They're used to form cartels to make sure nobody who isn't part of the club (or big enough to buy in) gets a seat at the table. If you have a warchest full of patents you get a cross licensing deal. If all you've got is a great product you get sued into oblivion. Samsung fully expected Apple to just buy in because that's the way the game is played. Steve Jobs thought he'd use patents the way they're supposedly intended and screwed up everything.
I've got no sympathy for either side. Steve Jobs was a brilliant CEO but also a whiny baby who was all for copying until he was the one being copied. Then it was theft. Samsung is a government backed anti-competition machine that suckers other companies into paying for their R&D as supposed partners. They break up a couple years later and Samsung gets the goldmine while their partner just gets the shaft.
Honestly they deserve each other. The problem is we don't.