This is a discussion thread for the "Apple to Samsung in 2010: Let's License" story posted on the front page.
Unless I'm completely stupid (somewhat likely), counter-plaintiff is Samsung in this case. They aren't technically a defendant, even though they are certainly on the defense right now as Apple wraps up its case.
Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy sh*t we don't need. Tyler Durden
Hm... this doesn't actually prove Samsung was copying Apple back then. It just proves that Apple a) accused Samsung of copying and b) wanted to settle their problem with Samsung with license fees.
True. The article here also doesn't mention that Apple refused to take a license for the 3G patents they should have for every iPhone before the 4S.
Their argument for that is that the part they purchased came from a manufacturer who already licensed the patent from Samsung, and, since they are only buying a finished product and not actually creating it themselves, they do not infringe upon it.