Samsung Requests Preliminary Injunction on Apple’s 3G Products in Netherlands Due to Patent Infringement, But it Likely Won’t Happen


That didn’t take long, did it? Following news earlier that Samsung would be going on the offensive against Apple, they’ve requested that Apple’s iPad and iPhone (any variants currently advertised and available for sale with 3G radios inside) be banned in the Netherlands.

The patents are related to methods of managing the data connection and speed between a mobile station, such as a smartphone or tablet, and a network base station.

This is what that unnamed Samsung insider was referring to when they said Apple would need to completely strip out all phone radios inside if they wanted to have a chance in these cases. Samsung is said to be seeking injunctions in other regions, including the UK, US, Germany, France, Japan and South Korea.

This doesn’t mean we’ll suddenly see Apple’s mobile products disappear from the media and store shelves if Samsung is indeed granted the victory. Apple has requested a hearing to make a case that Samsung can not deny them a license under terms of the fair, reasonable and no discrimination policy of holders of standard-setting patents.

Because the patents Samsung hold define technology that is highly intertwined in today’s standard 3G networks, they can’t deny Apple a license. Not only can Apple not be denied, but the price they pay has to be reasonable. The judge ultimately decides what’s reasonable and what isn’t so Samsung can’t ask for Apple to pay an inordinate amount of money to keep them from licensing the patents.

We’re not sure what this will do for the dynamic of the case, but perhaps Samsung’s hoping Apple will simply back-off. Unfortunately, we don’t see Apple backing down from having to pay a little money – they are one of the richest technology companies in the world, after all. The FRAND hearing is set for September 26th. Back to the drawing board for Samsung, we suppose, as it looks they’ll eventually have to find another basis for their case. [via MacWorld]

Quentyn Kennemer
The "Google Phone" sounded too awesome to pass up, so I bought a G1. The rest is history. And yes, I know my name isn't Wilson.

Downloads: HTC Vigor Wallpapers, Ringtones and More

Previous article

Amazon Plans for Press Event Sept. 28th – Possible Android Tablet?

Next article

You may also like


  1. bring it on, I hope Apple learns a lesson and learns to compete in the marketplace instead of competing with lawyers

  2. I hate Apple with a passion…

  3. the “But it Likely Won’t Happen” part is very negative.

  4. Ok, under those terms, to be fair, they have to grant them a license. But I don’t think it specifies how long it might take to come to a licensing agreement… a year? Two? It’s only fair that Apple halt all sales of their products until an agreement is reached.

    1. Not to mention, if they do a by-the-device license and charge $5 per device, Apple would have to pay for EVERY 3g device they’ve EVER sold. That’d add up quick.

  5. “Apple has requested a hearing to make a case that Samsung can not deny them a license under terms of the fair, reasonable and no discrimination policy of holders of standard-setting patents.” hmmm…patents like a flat tablet with a screen…?

    1. E X A C T L Y!!!!!!

      Someone give this man 100 likes…lol

      What kills me is this Florian Mueller guy, whose some patent guru….doesnt see it this way. Unless it benefits or helps Apple..

  6. They should ask for $10 dollars per iPad and iPhone :D

    1. $150, no less. Suck it apple.

    2. They should ask in percentage as in how much it plays a part in apples devices so if the iPad costs $600 and 30% of it is built from samsung parts that require licensing then they should get $200 off of each tablet sold.

    3. If apple’s profit margin is about $500 dollars (based on iphone 4 launch price) then i think $100 per device is fair. with around 70mil iphones sold, that’s $7billion to samsung. All agree that’s fair?

  7. Let me get this straight, there is something out there that says one Samsung cannot deny another company a license under “terms of the fair, reasonable and no discrimination policy of holders of standard-setting patents”…”Because the patents Samsung hold define technology that is highly intertwined in today’s standard 3G networks”.

    So, why then was Apple able to block Samsung’s products over some “design” patent? In my opinion, the way the iPhone looks, the way the Galaxy S/II series phones look and practically every other high-end smartphone (small differences but pretty damn close). Why is that still even in courts?

    1. My guess is that its because Samsung isn’t licensing the design from Apple whereas Apple is licensing the radio technology from Samsung. Apple isn’t getting this stuff free, they’re paying for it. Samsung isn’t licensing or even trying to license the iPhone or iPad design (not that they should have to), so Apple isn’t receiving money for the sales of these devices. Apple could be required to license the designs that they claim a right to at a reasonable price and to everyone like Samsung is being forced to do here, but they’re not doing so currently and manufacturers aren’t licensing their designs.

      1. Are you saying that Samsung should pay Apple for making a rectangular phone?? Has apple patented the rectangle??

        Unlike Apple’s patent claims on shape, Samsung holds patents for the 3g technology involved in making a connection, and they surely deserve some payment from apple.

    2. Well, even though I agree, I thought that with some research and creativity, a perfectly fine tablet who doesn’t look too much like ipad/iphone isn’t impossible. Just take a look at sony s tablet, it looks nothing like ipad, and the design gives sony some advantages especially in terms of differentiating itself from the crowded android tablet market. Just my 10cents

  8. Apple iOS device in total has much more market share compared to Samsung (only) Android devices. Here where Samsung will win. By counting number of device sold, Samsung will get more money on licensing deal, compare to what they must pay to Apple for Apple’s licenses.

  9. @JohnMantI09876
    fuck off

  10. FRAND are not legally enforced, they’re community enforced and the community just wants Apple to quit suing so they made an exception.

    “Many of these patents are governed by the “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” (F/RAND) principle, as they were developed as part of industry standards. Basically the premise is that R&D companies are guaranteed to be paid, but generally have to license F/RAND patents to whoever wants to use them.

    But given Apple’s legal belligerence, the carriers have made a special exception when it comes to Apple. And Apple, struggling in court, is growing increasingly frustrated.”

  11. I just think all of this patent crap needs to be thrown out the window and the only way to get a new patent is on your own technology and not being able to buy patents. There should be no suits for a product looking similar to another but in reality its not even close.
    I’m not going to point out one company over another, they all just need to stop acting like children.

  12. Quentyn, FYI, there are lots of vacancies at appleinsider and Macworld. You wont look out of place there.

  13. I have a great idea! Just ban everything Samsung and Apple everywhere until they stop fighting over stupid crap!

  14. google should just not allow apple products to be able to acess google apps. maps, youtube, google search. etc and every company that apple tries to sue should stop allowing them to use whatever tech they let them use. even if they pay for it.

    apple is retarded. i hope the iphone 5 has a major defect from the factory.

    also, they should look into apples sweatshops in china and shut all that down because most of whats going on is illegal.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *