Samsung actions hint at aggressive stance against Apple

Samsung's actions are clear hints that
it's no longer content to remain on the
defensive in the mobile patent wars

In what looks like a more agressive stance by Samsung in response the increasingly litigious behaviour of Apple, Samsung is reportedly demanding details of a confidential supply arrangement between Apple and its baseband chip supplier Qualcomm.

A cross-licensing agreement between Qualcomm and Samsung is at issue, with a request from Samsung to the US District Court in California in which it has asked for “all agreements pursuant to which Qualcomm supplies or supplied ‘Qualcomm MDM6610’ chipsets to any person of entity and all documents that evidence, reflect or refer to the use by Apple of Qualcomm chipsets in iPhones or iPads”.

In other words, Samsung wants the information to finally establish if Apple is a direct customer of Qualcomm, or if it makes its purchases through a third party, critical to claims by the Korean phone maker that Apple infringes its intellectual property.

If Apple can prove that it buys direct from Qualcomm, then its products are probably covered by the cross-licensing agreement. If not, then it's potentially liable for royalties, damages and injunctions in a number of court battles between the antagonists across the globe.

Apple characterised Samsung's licensing fees, rumoured to be up to 2.4% for certain chips, as “exorbitant”, while Samsung has consistently countered that Apple “didn’t act reasonably in negotiations.” It's expected that the disclosed terms of agreement would be submitted by Samsung in evidence to courts in Germany, Japan, Italy, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Australia, France and Korea in ongoing patent suits against Apple.

Patent law guru Florian Mueller's opinion is that if the chain of distribution makes a legal difference, then Samsung's request is valid and fair. The new moves from Samsung reflect the company's shift from passive response to Apple's litigation, to aggressive actions of its own.

More to come in this seemingly never-ending conflict.

(Edit: Corrected cross licensing parties in paragraph 2)

Source: The Korea Times