Dutch Court Rejects Samsung Patent Claims Against Apple

angry tapir writes "A judge at the district court in the Hague has rejected claims that Samsung had made against Apple regarding four patents. Samsung wanted Apple to pay for licensing the patents in question, and the court to issue an injunction banning the import and sale of Apple's iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad, iPad 2, as well as upcoming products, until licensing terms are in place. But the latter won't happen at this point. The ruling came in the in the same week that an Australian court blocked sales of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1."

FRAND process

[msobkow]

The judge says Samsung didn't go through FRAND negotiations properly. I'm confused by this. Isn't it Apple that refused to negotiate? If so, it would seem Samsung has done their part to come to an agreement, rendering the judgement invalid.

There doesn't appear to be any question of whether Apple infringed the patents or not -- the article clarifies that the patents are for essential technology, which means you can't actually build such devices without infringing the patent.

I hate to say it, but Mueller has this one right

[JAlexoi]

I hate to say it, but this time I have to agree with Florian Mueller... This decision, on it's own, is a win for the industry. Simply because it reaffirms the fact that you can't use FRAND'ed patents for an injunction.