Apple met with Samsung 4 times in 2010 trying to avoid patent litigation
Prior to filing suit against Samsung for alleged copyright infringement, Apple approached its rival four times in 2010 in an attempt to avoid resorting to litigation.
Details of the meetings between Apple's and Samsung's lawyers were revealed in an Apple court filing discovered by The Verge. The first meeting took place in July 2010, and Apple soon after made three more attempts to broker a deal with Samsung to no avail.
The meetings took place both at Apple's corporate headquarters in Cupertino, Calif., as well as in Samsung's home country of Korea. At one meeting in Korea in August of 2010, Apple representatives showed a presentation to Samsung officials entitled "Samsung's Use of Apple Patents in Smartphones," detailing its belief that Samsung was infringing on two patents.
Last year, it was first revealed that late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs contacted Samsung in 2010 in an attempt to resolve the patent dispute between the two companies. But the extent of talks between Apple and Samsung was not known until Apple disclosed it in court.
Apple eventually sued Samsung in April of 2011, accusing its rival of copying the look and feel of the iPhone and iPad with its own smartphone and tablet products. Samsung quickly fired back with its own accusations, and the two companies are now involved in lawsuits that spread across four continents.
Details on three of the meetings between Apple and Samsung, as portrayed in Apple's filing in California federal court, are included below:
Quote:
On or about August 4, 2010, Apple representatives met with Samsung in Korea and showed a presentation titled 'Samsung's Use of Apple Patents in Smartphones.' This presentation emphasized Samsung's copying of the iPhone and identified two of the patents-in-suit (the '002 and '381 patents), giving Samsung actual notice of at least these patents, and many more.
On or about August 26, 2010, Apple sent Samsung an electronic archive file containing claim charts further illustrating Samsung's infringement of Apple patents. A presentation document that accompanied these claim charts identified the '002 and '381 patents as two patents that Samsung products infringed, and it substantiated these allegations with text from the patents and photographs of Samsung devices illustrating infringing functionality. Apple later presented these slides to Samsung at a meeting in Cupertino, California on or about September 9, 2010.
On or about August 4, 2010, Apple representatives met with Samsung in Korea and showed a presentation titled 'Samsung's Use of Apple Patents in Smartphones.' This presentation emphasized Samsung's copying of the iPhone and identified two of the patents-in-suit (the '002 and '381 patents), giving Samsung actual notice of at least these patents, and many more.
On or about August 26, 2010, Apple sent Samsung an electronic archive file containing claim charts further illustrating Samsung's infringement of Apple patents. A presentation document that accompanied these claim charts identified the '002 and '381 patents as two patents that Samsung products infringed, and it substantiated these allegations with text from the patents and photographs of Samsung devices illustrating infringing functionality. Apple later presented these slides to Samsung at a meeting in Cupertino, California on or about September 9, 2010.
[ View article on AppleInsider ]
Comments
On or about August 4, 2010, Apple representatives met with Samsung in Korea and showed a presentation titled 'Samsung's Use of Apple Patents in Smartphones.' This presentation emphasized Samsung's copying of the iPhone and identified two of the patents-in-suit (the '002 and '381 patents), giving Samsung actual notice of at least these patents, and many more.
On or about August 26, 2010, Apple sent Samsung an electronic archive file containing claim charts further illustrating Samsung's infringement of Apple patents. A presentation document that accompanied these claim charts identified the '002 and '381 patents as two patents that Samsung products infringed, and it substantiated these allegations with text from the patents and photographs of Samsung devices illustrating infringing functionality. Apple later presented these slides to Samsung at a meeting in Cupertino, California on or about September 9, 2010.
Do I remember correctly that Apple was made to remove many patents from this lawsuit? I wonder if they came to Samsung with a bushel of nebulous claims and demands which were not really taken seriously? Maybe an even bigger bushel than they could (with a straight face) file in court? IIRC, Apple was ordered to drop most of their patent claims, and to winnow it down to the real ones.
Seemingly, two are left? Is that correct? The only two real ones?
Sammy should propose a reasonable settlement and move on. But maybe they already have and Apple said "We don't want your money - we want you to stop using our stuff?
Do I remember correctly that Apple was made to remove many patents from this lawsuit? I wonder if they came to Samsung with a bushel of nebulous claims and demands which were not really taken seriously? Maybe an even bigger bushel than they could (with a straight face) file in court? IIRC, Apple was ordered to drop most of their patent claims, and to winnow it down to the real ones.
Seemingly, two are left? Is that correct? The only two real ones?
I am not a lawyer, but I don't think you've interpreted it correctly.
I think when a company is preparing for litigation, they make the strongest and most expansive case possible to encourage settlement and heh, maybe to intimidate as well. I expect that this can make for potentially a very lengthy case that can be confusing and time consuming for the judge and very expensive for the litigants. Some of the claims may require a lot of work when they are not really central to the argument. I understand that the judge asks them to strip out those sorts of claims to simply things for the court. They have lots of other cases to deal with.
Samsung was so desperate to appropriate Apple's design cues and the look and feel of Apple's products that they were willing to risk litigation.
Of course they were. In part for arrogance and in part because when big guys end up in court no one really wins. Look at the Google Oracle debacle. Oracle wanted 6 billion, they will be lucky to get 32 million, if they even win.
Apple could have negotiated with them for years and continued to get nowhere. Suing Samsung all over the world was their only resort.
But when you don't have a choice, you've got to go for it, and when you go for it, you have to go all out for it.
In the global economy companies have to deal with different cultures with different histories and interpretations of ethical behavior. What would would seem as copying, plagiarizing, or stealing in the US is not viewed the same way everywhere. Making a cheaper copy of what someone else has created is considered OK, and patents mean little. You can negotiate all you want, and they will sit there and smile and act agreeable and make promises, but they have no intention of changing their behavior. And they see nothing wrong with that - it is their culture. Not say it is right, but that is just the way it is. What we think as sneaky, devious and lying means nothing to them.
Apple could have negotiated with them for years and continued to get nowhere. Suing Samsung all over the world was their only resort.
That's a really good point.
I lived and worked overseas from 1997 -2004, and did many deals with SE Asian companies. Their ethical and business standards are completely different then U.S. standards.
That's a really good point.
I lived and worked overseas from 1997 -2004, and did many deals with SE Asian companies. Their ethical and business standards are completely different then U.S. standards.
Jesus, it's quite incredible how ethnocentric/racists you fanbois are. What's next? only Anglo protestants have salvation & work ethics to be successful in global economy? Have you been drinking M. Weber kool-aid? Just where did you guys get your PhD's in sociology?
This is doubly funny considering that Apple is just a glorified marketing / product integration company that depends on technology / manufacturing giants like Xerox, Samsung, Sharp, etc for success.
Jesus, it's quite incredible how ethnocentric/racists you fanbois are. What's next? only Anglo protestants have salvation & work ethics to be successful in global economy? Have you been drinking M. Weber kool-aid? Just where did you guys get your PhD's in sociology?
This is doubly funny considering that Apple is just a glorified marketing / product integration company that depends on technology / manufacturing giants like Xerox, Samsung, Sharp, etc for success.
Pretty sure he never said Asians in and of themselves are like that, simply that the culture in those countries is like that. It's like me saying that south Detroit is a rough neighborhood and you automatically assuming I'm a racist because the majority of that neighborhood is black. There are plenty of white people, Asian people, Latino people that live there that are just as ingrained in the culture. Just because somebody has a flaw and happens to have a different skin color doesn't make me a racist for pointing out his flaw.
In the global economy companies have to deal with different cultures with different histories and interpretations of ethical behavior. What would would seem as copying, plagiarizing, or stealing in the US is not viewed the same way everywhere. Making a cheaper copy of what someone else has created is considered OK, and patents mean little. You can negotiate all you want, and they will sit there and smile and act agreeable and make promises, but they have no intention of changing their behavior. And they see nothing wrong with that - it is their culture. Not say it is right, but that is just the way it is. What we think as sneaky, devious and lying means nothing to them.
Apple could have negotiated with them for years and continued to get nowhere. Suing Samsung all over the world was their only resort.
That's a really good point.
I lived and worked overseas from 1997 -2004, and did many deals with SE Asian companies. Their ethical and business standards are completely different then U.S. standards.
This is the kind of cop-out I hear all the time. It makes no sense at all. If that were the case, such companies have no business doing business globally. They should stay at home and do what they do. Using the same logic ("they do it differently"), we might as well jettison all international laws, conventions, and institutions.
Quite apart from the fact that it is painting with a ridiculously broad brush ("S. E. Asia"), most importantly it is a condescending view you have: there is no culture or legal system in which copying, cheating, or stealing is legal.
This is doubly funny considering that Apple is just a glorified marketing / product integration company that depends on technology / manufacturing giants like Xerox, Samsung, Sharp, etc for success.
I don't know what you've been drinking (or smoking), but this is the kind of uninformed nonsense that renders moot any remote credibility you think you might have.
That's a really good point.
I lived and worked overseas from 1997 -2004, and did many deals with SE Asian companies. Their ethical and business standards are completely different then U.S. standards.
1. Largest bankruptcy in the world - Lehman Brothers. Score 1 for the U.S.
2. Largest fraud-related bankruptcy in the world - WorldCom. Score 2 for the U.S. (Before WorldCom, it was Enron)
3. Largest brokerage that went bust after using customer's fund to plug the short fall - MF Global. Score 3 for the U.S.
4. Largest Ponzi Scheme in the world - Bernie Madoff. Score 4 for the U.S.
I rest my case on "ethical and business standard"
I don't know what you've been drinking (or smoking), but this is the kind of uninformed nonsense that renders moot any remote credibility you think you might have.
He's not entirely wrong but the same can be said about all other CE companies. He just could've been less of a tool in his talk, hence the moniker tooltalk lol
I don't know what you've been drinking (or smoking), but this is the kind of uninformed nonsense that renders moot any remote credibility you think you might have.
There's a breed of anti-Apple folks out there like tool who believe Apple is just better at marketing somebody else's innovations in shiny aluminum boxes, and therefore, are not deserving of all the attention and praise they get from the press. It's just petty jealousy. Pay it no mind.
There's a breed of anti-Apple folks out there like tool who believe Apple is just better at marketing somebody else's innovations in shiny aluminum boxes, and therefore, are not deserving of all the attention and praise they get from the press. It's just petty jealousy. Pay it no mind.
Amen to that.
But I can?t quite figure why these critical individuals seem to loose their reasoning power when evaluating Apple.
All one has to do is pick up and use almost any Apple product. If exudes quality when compared to other electronics available out there. And the user experience is better by far.
Its like looking at a Mustang Cobra and then driving a BMW M3 (I like both cars, by the way) and walking away thinking they are somehow the same animals. I?m puzzled by such myopia and lack of judgment that comes from some people. It just blows me away.
In the global economy companies have to deal with different cultures with different histories and interpretations of ethical behavior. What would would seem as copying, plagiarizing, or stealing in the US is not viewed the same way everywhere. Making a cheaper copy of what someone else has created is considered OK, and patents mean little. You can negotiate all you want, and they will sit there and smile and act agreeable and make promises, but they have no intention of changing their behavior. And they see nothing wrong with that - it is their culture. Not say it is right, but that is just the way it is. What we think as sneaky, devious and lying means nothing to them.
Apple could have negotiated with them for years and continued to get nowhere. Suing Samsung all over the world was their only resort.
That's a really good point.
I lived and worked overseas from 1997 -2004, and did many deals with SE Asian companies. Their ethical and business standards are completely different then U.S. standards.
Jesus, it's quite incredible how ethnocentric/racists you fanbois are. What's next? only Anglo protestants have salvation & work ethics to be successful in global economy? Have you been drinking M. Weber kool-aid? Just where did you guys get your PhD's in sociology?
This is doubly funny considering that Apple is just a glorified marketing / product integration company that depends on technology / manufacturing giants like Xerox, Samsung, Sharp, etc for success.
It's not racist to point out differences regarding culture. Though culture can be bound to race it is not always and is typically more influenced by geography & history. People like to think that by being culturally tolerant that is equivalent to racial equality but that's utter garbage. If you meet an undiscovered tribe in the jungle that happens to have a culture of cannibalism you'd be an idiot to say, "oh that's just their culture, nothing wrong with that." Anyone who thinks their culture is beyond flaw and is perfect is asinine, but anyone who thinks that means you can't point out differences or even perceived flaws in cultures other than your own should go live on an island somewhere where their feelings won't get hurt.
Right or wrong ethics vary widely from culture to culture and to say everyone can be right is just insanity.
On a side note, you are clearly intolerant of religion and are racist against anglos.
Jesus, it's quite incredible how ethnocentric/racists you fanbois are. What's next? only Anglo protestants have salvation & work ethics to be successful in global economy? Have you been drinking M. Weber kool-aid? Just where did you guys get your PhD's in sociology?
This is doubly funny considering that Apple is just a glorified marketing / product integration company that depends on technology / manufacturing giants like Xerox, Samsung, Sharp, etc for success.
Let's just leave it at a lot of people here assuming Apple is automatically in the right, even though they have yet to get a single decisive victory that vindicates all their losses to date. The comment about working overseas and finding the "ethics" and "business standards" to be different is vague and vapid. It's accepted that different countries and their businesses will have different ways of doing ethics.
But ethics? That's a good one. Ever heard of the Great Recession? I'm sure anyone who's been reading the news can name at least 5 companies--American companies--that more or less orchestrated it.
Jesus, it's quite incredible how ethnocentric/racists you fanbois are. What's next? only Anglo protestants have salvation & work ethics to be successful in global economy? Have you been drinking M. Weber kool-aid? Just where did you guys get your PhD's in sociology?
This is doubly funny considering that Apple is just a glorified marketing / product integration company that depends on technology / manufacturing giants like Xerox, Samsung, Sharp, etc for success.
What's race got to do with business culture and local laws?
Amen to that.
But I can?t quite figure why these critical individuals seem to loose their reasoning power when evaluating Apple.
All one has to do is pick up and use almost any Apple product. If exudes quality when compared to other electronics available out there. And the user experience is better by far.
Its like looking at a Mustang Cobra and then driving a BMW M3 (I like both cars, by the way) and walking away thinking they are somehow the same animals. I?m puzzled by such myopia and lack of judgment that comes from some people. It just blows me away.
It's also puzzling how one decides that a "marketing company" has managed to upend and utterly transform as many categories of tech as Apple has. Just to note the latest, it looks like tablets are going to be the dominate computing platform of the early part of the 21st century. Quite a trick for a product integration outfit. Then again, "fanbois", so you can check your brain at the door.