@JoeMonco : Samsung is not generally known for their litigious behavior, as Apple is known for, despite being one of the largest patent holder in the world.
Ya, but the thing is they didn't just counter sue Nvidia, they also sued Velocity Micro, who had nothing to do with this legal dispute. Samsung was basically willing throw a relatively small company who had nothing to do with this fight under the bus simply to give themselves a tactical advantage against Nvidia in court, a real dirt move.
@dragonsqrrl : Sure, and Samsung doesn't have anything to do with this legal dispute, either. Samsung doesn't make their own GPU -- all their phones use either Qualcomm (Adreno), ARM (Mali), or Imgtech (PowerVR) -- and Samsung asked nVidia to resolve this matter with the makers of the GPUs. Instead, nVidia decided to go after the infringers' customer, Samsung. This is perfectly legal and Samsung can be liable for using infringed parts in their end products -- it's called secondary liability, or "indirect infringement."
Now, this is where Velocity Micro, nVidia's customer, comes in. an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Samsung's lawsuit against nVidia sound perfectly fair to me.
@dragonsqrrl : that being said, Samsung is going after Velocity Micro, nVidia's customer based in VA, only because of its location, in the eastern district court of Virginia. That's where Samsung wants the case to be tried -- it's just a legal maneuver to change the legal venue favorable to Samsung. Velocity Micro is a small company that has really nothing to offer to Samsung. Samsung isn't out to destroy it and Velocity Micro isn't even worried. In their response to the lawsuit, CEO released a message indictating that "... We know nothing about the previous issues between Samsung and Nvidia, and we don’t care."
That's a pretty clever dirt move by Samsung in response to nVidia's scummy lawsuit.
"that being said, Samsung is going after Velocity Micro, nVidia's customer based in VA, only because of its location, in the eastern district court of Virginia."
Yep, there ya go. The legality of Samsung's response is irrelevant here, and no one is questioning it. Although I do question your interpretation of that quote from Velocity's CEO. I mean, you really had to stretch that one out of context to align it with your argument. He wasn't saying that he wasn't worried or didn't care about the impending litigation. He said that he didn't care about the issues or history between Nvidia and Samsung, as Velocity Micro has nothing to do with it. He went on to say "Regretfully, precious company resources and energy will be diverted from our core business and wasted to fight one of the world’s largest companies, just so they can play legal games with Nvidia and the court system." and "This is not our fight, and it’s unconscionable that Samsung is willing to completely disregard the effects and financial fallout this legal tactic will have on the undeserving employees of Velocity Micro and our local community." That's really shitty, but yes I know, it's perfectly legal so you have no problem with it. Further you say it's perfectly fair because Nvidia did the same thing to Samsung, but I think if you cared to take two steps outside the legal jargon you would see that it's not the same thing and it certainly isn't fair for a small boutique builder.
He ended his letter by saying "If this is how Samsung operates, we want no part of it, and we hope others agree". It's really sad to me that apparently some people are so driven by their own personal biases and agendas that they are compelled to disagree.
He should be pissed at Nvidia, not Samsung. I literally cannot find Samsung at fault for a situation Nvidia solely created. Nvidia clearly sued Samsung because they are purely seeking monetary gain, and by dragging such a small company into it, Samsung showed that they have no such agenda. Samsung had just as much of a right to drag that company into things as Nvidia had to sue Samsung.
So in short you have problem with Samsung because Velocity Micro is small but you have no problem with NVIDIA doing this only because Samsung is big, that also sounds bias to me. But forget about being bias or not nonsense, it's called action and reaction. If you want to fire the first shot then prepare to get fired at, not just you but those who are not as strong as you but are associated with you. That's the reality of war, the smarter move should be thinking about all the repercussions it would cause and not to start a war in the first place.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
17 Comments
Back to Article
Mikemk - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
So what? Did they get tired of suing Apple and look for someone else to sue?just4U - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
Is it even possible to grow tired of suing a Patent Troll like Apple?JoeMonco - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
Because Samsung has never sued other people over patents? Riiiiiiight...shm224 - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
@JoeMonco : Samsung is not generally known for their litigious behavior, as Apple is known for, despite being one of the largest patent holder in the world.Ryan Smith - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
Just to be clear here, NVIDIA started this by suing Samsung in 2014.shm224 - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
@Mikemk : not sure what you mean. nVidia sued Samsung and, just like they did in Apple's case, Samsung counter-sued.dragonsqrrl - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
Ya, but the thing is they didn't just counter sue Nvidia, they also sued Velocity Micro, who had nothing to do with this legal dispute. Samsung was basically willing throw a relatively small company who had nothing to do with this fight under the bus simply to give themselves a tactical advantage against Nvidia in court, a real dirt move.shm224 - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
@dragonsqrrl : Sure, and Samsung doesn't have anything to do with this legal dispute, either. Samsung doesn't make their own GPU -- all their phones use either Qualcomm (Adreno), ARM (Mali), or Imgtech (PowerVR) -- and Samsung asked nVidia to resolve this matter with the makers of the GPUs. Instead, nVidia decided to go after the infringers' customer, Samsung. This is perfectly legal and Samsung can be liable for using infringed parts in their end products -- it's called secondary liability, or "indirect infringement."Now, this is where Velocity Micro, nVidia's customer, comes in. an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Samsung's lawsuit against nVidia sound perfectly fair to me.
shm224 - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
@dragonsqrrl : that being said, Samsung is going after Velocity Micro, nVidia's customer based in VA, only because of its location, in the eastern district court of Virginia. That's where Samsung wants the case to be tried -- it's just a legal maneuver to change the legal venue favorable to Samsung. Velocity Micro is a small company that has really nothing to offer to Samsung. Samsung isn't out to destroy it and Velocity Micro isn't even worried. In their response to the lawsuit, CEO released a message indictating that "... We know nothing about the previous issues between Samsung and Nvidia, and we don’t care."That's a pretty clever dirt move by Samsung in response to nVidia's scummy lawsuit.
dragonsqrrl - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
"that being said, Samsung is going after Velocity Micro, nVidia's customer based in VA, only because of its location, in the eastern district court of Virginia."Yep, there ya go. The legality of Samsung's response is irrelevant here, and no one is questioning it. Although I do question your interpretation of that quote from Velocity's CEO. I mean, you really had to stretch that one out of context to align it with your argument. He wasn't saying that he wasn't worried or didn't care about the impending litigation. He said that he didn't care about the issues or history between Nvidia and Samsung, as Velocity Micro has nothing to do with it. He went on to say "Regretfully, precious company resources and energy will be diverted from our core business and wasted to fight one of the world’s largest companies, just so they can play legal games with Nvidia and the court system." and "This is not our fight, and it’s unconscionable that Samsung is willing to completely disregard the effects and financial fallout this legal tactic will have on the undeserving employees of Velocity Micro and our local community." That's really shitty, but yes I know, it's perfectly legal so you have no problem with it. Further you say it's perfectly fair because Nvidia did the same thing to Samsung, but I think if you cared to take two steps outside the legal jargon you would see that it's not the same thing and it certainly isn't fair for a small boutique builder.
He ended his letter by saying "If this is how Samsung operates, we want no part of it, and we hope others agree". It's really sad to me that apparently some people are so driven by their own personal biases and agendas that they are compelled to disagree.
darth415 - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
He should be pissed at Nvidia, not Samsung. I literally cannot find Samsung at fault for a situation Nvidia solely created. Nvidia clearly sued Samsung because they are purely seeking monetary gain, and by dragging such a small company into it, Samsung showed that they have no such agenda. Samsung had just as much of a right to drag that company into things as Nvidia had to sue Samsung.Th-z - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
So in short you have problem with Samsung because Velocity Micro is small but you have no problem with NVIDIA doing this only because Samsung is big, that also sounds bias to me. But forget about being bias or not nonsense, it's called action and reaction. If you want to fire the first shot then prepare to get fired at, not just you but those who are not as strong as you but are associated with you. That's the reality of war, the smarter move should be thinking about all the repercussions it would cause and not to start a war in the first place.HighTech4US - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
I thought that nVidia sued for 7 patents so what happened to those other 4?shm224 - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
@HighTech4US : there is another lawsuit at the district court (Delaware), but that isn't going to be heard until next year.lilmoe - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
"was also invalid on the grounds of not being non-obvious"No comment....
Samus - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
Hah. OPPS.kuttan - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
haha... Nvidia deserves this failure trying patent troll.