or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Samsung CEOs to hold last-minute lawsuit settlement talks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple, Samsung CEOs to hold last-minute lawsuit settlement talks

post #1 of 48
Thread Starter 
Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook will once again sit down with Samsung's CEO in an effort to reach a settlement in their ongoing patent infringement case before the jury begins deliberations.

Citing a person familiar with the matter, Bloomberg reported on Monday that Cook is set to engage with Samsung CEO Kwon Oh Hyun in private talks on the telephone. Lawyers representing Apple and Samsung will report on the outcome of those talks to U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh.

Cook last met with the CEO of Samsung in May, but no resolution came about from those discussions and the trial between the two parties started in late July. Cook last spoke with Geesung Choi, president and chief executive of Samsung's digital media division, while the latest talks are said to involve Oh Hyun, the company's new CEO.

Oh Hyun was named chief executive of Samsung in June, and was immediately viewed as an Apple-friendly choice. Some industry watchers felt Samsung's choice of Oh Hyun was a sign that the Korean electronics maker was attempting to retain Apple as a customer for parts like mobile processors, flash memory and displays, even though Apple and Samsung remain bitter rivals.

The latest last-ditch talks between Apple and Samsung come as jurors in the California trial are awaiting a streamlined work sheet that will allow them to potentially enter a verdict in the patent infringement suit. Both Apple and Samsung have accused the other of violating patented inventions related to product design, software development and wireless communications standards.

Tim Cook
Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook.


If a resolution cannot be reached in the talks between Cook and Oh Hyun, deliberations are expected to begin with the jury as soon as Tuesday.

Koh asked both parties to discuss a settlement last week, saying it was "time for peace." But lawyers representing each side made a joint filing on Saturday stating they had failed to narrow their dispute through those last-minute discussions.

Koh had hoped the parties would at least narrow their claims if a complete out-of-court settlement could not be reached. She felt a winnowing of claims would make it easier for jurors to come to a decision in the complex case.
post #2 of 48
These two companies are so closely tied together Apple should be able to gain from Samsung a public acknowledgment and large settlement, along with a cross-licensing agreement (similar to the one with Microsoft, where they're not allowed to clone Apple's products) in exchange for Apple's continued reliance on Samsung for future parts.

Samsung's long-term success should be it's CEOs primary concern. If they know they're in the wrong here, there shouldn't be too much of a hit to honour or ego in taking this approach and they can move on by empowering their designers to blaze new trails.
post #3 of 48

I really hope that this can get settled out of court.  Let's face it, both sides have at least a couple of valid arguements, although personally I do feel that a select few Samsung products, not all of the ones listed in this case, do come a little too close to copying.  But I think cross-licensing would be the best solution here.  Apple doesn't lose face if they can get a good deal on some of Samsung's patents, and Samsung could save face and hopefully retain some of Apple's production demands in their factories.

 

However, the realist in me says that this will go down to the jury, and regardless of which side they choose to "win" this case will drag on for a couple more years in appeals and counter-suits.

post #4 of 48

They should seriously settle. By the time Case Reviews, Appeals, Appeal reviews, etc will end in this case, multitude of years would have passed and legal fees itself would be greater than any potential award to any party.

 

2.5 billion will do no good to Apple balance sheet nor 500 million to Samsung's.  Samsung has moved away from Apple designs from nexus and s3, and   they are still competitive as per recent sales figures, quarterly revenues and profits. 

 

Apple has achieved what it wanted. If by any chance, Apple loses this case, hell will break loose with copy cat products sprouting everywhere. 

 

Apple should understand that message is already delivered to Android camp.  By stretching this case, they risk many things,  a, Risk of patents being held invalid b, Risk of scope of patents getting too narrowed to avoid copy cat products c, Risk of  very less damage award. It will have an opposite effect of what Apple wants.

post #5 of 48
I agree they should find a settlement outside of court. I still feel the bigger issue for Apple is Google and Steve's 'Thermo Nuclear War' on IP theft in the software area.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #6 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by smack416 View Post

These two companies are so closely tied together Apple should be able to gain from Samsung a public acknowledgment and large settlement, along with a cross-licensing agreement (similar to the one with Microsoft, where they're not allowed to clone Apple's products) in exchange for Apple's continued reliance on Samsung for future parts.
Samsung's long-term success should be it's CEOs primary concern. If they know they're in the wrong here, there shouldn't be too much of a hit to honour or ego in taking this approach and they can move on by empowering their designers to blaze new trails.

That's a really big IF.
Originally Posted by Granmastak: Labor unions managed to kill manufacturing a long time ago with their unreasonable demands. Now the people they were trying to protect, are out of a job.
Reply
Originally Posted by Granmastak: Labor unions managed to kill manufacturing a long time ago with their unreasonable demands. Now the people they were trying to protect, are out of a job.
Reply
post #7 of 48

Well, they certainly won't settle now.

 

Judge Koh has cancelled the jury instruction about Samsung deleting e-mails. Samsung argued that since Apple also deleted some e-mails that they both get the same instructions. Apple will appeal, of course, but they won't know the results of that until after they talk. So Samsung probably feels in a stronger position now.

 

I know Apple has failed to produce some e-mails, but Samsung is worse in this regard. Personally, I don't see how Judge Koh could give an "equal" instruction to the jury when the severity of their e-mail preservation is different.

 

My guess is she'll reverse the order, or maybe say something like "both parties have failed to produce e-mails, and the ratio is 80:20 for Samsung". This way the jury is advised that both sides have deleted e-mails, but that Samsung has deleted far more.

 

Otherwise Apple will have a great reason to appeal if they lose this case.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #8 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by simpleankit View Post

They should seriously settle. By the time Case Reviews, Appeals, Appeal reviews, etc will end in this case, multitude of years would have passed and legal fees itself would be greater than any potential award to any party.

 

2.5 billion will do no good to Apple balance sheet nor 500 million to Samsung's.  Samsung has moved away from Apple designs from nexus and s3, and   they are still competitive as per recent sales figures, quarterly revenues and profits. 

 

Apple has achieved what it wanted. If by any chance, Apple loses this case, hell will break loose with copy cat products sprouting everywhere. 

 

Apple should understand that message is already delivered to Android camp.  By stretching this case, they risk many things,  a, Risk of patents being held invalid b, Risk of scope of patents getting too narrowed to avoid copy cat products c, Risk of  very less damage award. It will have an opposite effect of what Apple wants.

 

Apple need a win to protect themselves against the cases Google brought against them via Motorola.

 

Cook should not back down, Samsung have more to lose.

 

Wilful infringement = triple damages = $7.5 Billion and the withdrawing of $10 Billion a year in component purchases would be a huge hit to Samsung.

 

Cook needs to show that Apple aren't the walkovers they were in the early nineties, when Microsoft almost crushed the life out of them, Apple are back and they mean serious business.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #9 of 48

Hard to believe there wasn't a confidentiality agreement negotiated between Apple and Samsung's chips and displays division by Tim Cook and Kwon Oh Hyun, the man who ran that division and who is now Samsung CEO.

post #10 of 48

Settle?  Samsung will settle only if the jury goes against them decisively.  Anybody who has done business in places like China, India, Korea, Russian, Brazil, etc should understand how most of the folks there operate.  Agreements do not mean anything... they are meant to be broken.  Courts take forever to resolve the issues.  Even if one owns land and even office/dwelling, squatters can move in and it difficult to evict them.  That is why many joint ventures in that part of the world fail... they foreign partners gets stiffed by the local guy.  

 

I am just surprised the smart folks at Apple, starting with Cook, single sourced so many components like the CPU just from one manufacturer like Samsung.  They continue doing this while fighting Samsung in court.  Worst, when Apple buys components from Samsung, they are financing the plants, lowering the average costs, etc with economies of scale.  The next batch of stuff that Samsung orders for its phones will cost even less that what Apple pays.  When they order the parts like the A class CPUs, they give Samsung the circuit/logic diagram many months before the product comes to market.  Duh... what do you think the "valued partner", Samsung does with the info?  

 

I can see why Apple does biz with Samsung: short, intermediate term profits.  It would cost more do the business by outsourcing from the likes of Intel, IBM, etc.  Apple could fab the critical parts like the CPU.  It would be able to retain the competitive advantage.  Cook is over rated and certainly does not deserve the >500-600+M pay package.  A lot of folks in that company contribute to the innovation and success of the company.  Apple is will to pay $Ms to some bloke from Dixon's who promptly wants to fire retail staff at the Apple Stores.  Oh, the stores are very profitable and well run... certainly better than the dumps that Dixon owns.  

 

I guess I just need to be happy with the stock price.  

post #11 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by AjitMD View Post

Settle?  Samsung will settle only if the jury goes against them decisively.  Anybody who has done business in places like China, India, Korea, Russian, Brazil, etc should understand how most of the folks there operate.  Agreements do not mean anything... they are meant to be broken.  Courts take forever to resolve the issues.  Even if one owns land and even office/dwelling, squatters can move in and it difficult to evict them.  That is why many joint ventures in that part of the world fail... they foreign partners gets stiffed by the local guy.  

 

I am just surprised the smart folks at Apple, starting with Cook, single sourced so many components like the CPU just from one manufacturer like Samsung.  They continue doing this while fighting Samsung in court.  Worst, when Apple buys components from Samsung, they are financing the plants, lowering the average costs, etc with economies of scale.  The next batch of stuff that Samsung orders for its phones will cost even less that what Apple pays.  When they order the parts like the A class CPUs, they give Samsung the circuit/logic diagram many months before the product comes to market.  Duh... what do you think the "valued partner", Samsung does with the info?  

 

I can see why Apple does biz with Samsung: short, intermediate term profits.  It would cost more do the business by outsourcing from the likes of Intel, IBM, etc.  Apple could fab the critical parts like the CPU.  It would be able to retain the competitive advantage.  Cook is over rated and certainly does not deserve the >500-600+M pay package.  A lot of folks in that company contribute to the innovation and success of the company.  Apple is will to pay $Ms to some bloke from Dixon's who promptly wants to fire retail staff at the Apple Stores.  Oh, the stores are very profitable and well run... certainly better than the dumps that Dixon owns.  

 

I guess I just need to be happy with the stock price.  

most of the circuitry in the A class CPU's is designed by Samsung

 

until apple makes their own CPU from scratch they have to buy from samsung

post #12 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

Apple need a win to protect themselves against the cases Google brought against them via Motorola.

 

Cook should not back down, Samsung have more to lose.

 

Wilful infringement = triple damages = $7.5 Billion and the withdrawing of $10 Billion a year in component purchases would be a huge hit to Samsung.

 

Cook needs to show that Apple aren't the walkovers they were in the early nineties, when Microsoft almost crushed the life out of them, Apple are back and they mean serious business.

 

This kind of pipe dream is good to have, but it just won't happen.

 

Even if Apple won this trial and the appeal, the damage will be much less than people here dreamed of. Plus, unlike Samsung, Motorola/HTC phones are not as much a carbon-copy as the iPhone, and Google constantly update the Android software to avoid the infringement claims, it'll be even harder to nail those other guys unlike Samsung.

post #13 of 48
I wonder if any jury tampering went on .. Just wondering ... Because both sides have a lot to loose
post #14 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

most of the circuitry in the A class CPU's is designed by Samsung

Wrong. Much of the circuitry in the Ax CPUs is designed by ARM and another large chunk is licensed from the GPU provider. Apple designed a portion itself, as well. Samsung had little (if anything) to do with the design of the Ax CPUs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

until apple makes their own CPU from scratch they have to buy from samsung

Also not true. There are other foundries which can make the CPU for Apple. In some cases, there might be a tradeoff in features and/or price, but it's certainly possible. And if Apple waves a big enough carrot, they might even be able to interest Intel - which would eliminate both of those concerns.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #15 of 48

Judge Koh screwed Apple with her jury instructions, either because she's more interested in how she herself comes across in the trial than she is in getting a jury verdict that actually just... or because she thinks screwing Apple forces them to the bargaining counter. Either way, it was a sad moment for the American judicial system.

post #16 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by uguysrnuts View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by smack416 View Post

These two companies are so closely tied together Apple should be able to gain from Samsung a public acknowledgment and large settlement, along with a cross-licensing agreement (similar to the one with Microsoft, where they're not allowed to clone Apple's products) in exchange for Apple's continued reliance on Samsung for future parts.
Samsung's long-term success should be it's CEOs primary concern. If they know they're in the wrong here, there shouldn't be too much of a hit to honour or ego in taking this approach and they can move on by empowering their designers to blaze new trails.

That's a really big IF.

Maybe not as much as you would think. Samsung will want to save face in the settlement; they have now created their own brand which is actually different than the products they have infringed on in the past. A Galaxy S3 does not look like any Apple products (although it does look like what Apple would do if they were to make a 5" screen phone...). A non-cloning agreement would suit all parties well, and any settlement that is made would reinforce Apple's position in dealing with their mutual competitors.
post #17 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Wrong. Much of the circuitry in the Ax CPUs is designed by ARM and another large chunk is licensed from the GPU provider. Apple designed a portion itself, as well. Samsung had little (if anything) to do with the design of the Ax CPUs.
 

 

You're wrong here. Apple's A4 was a direct tweaking of Samsung's reference design S5PC110, aka Hummingbird. While yes, both processors will be ARM 8 compliant, several studies show the the cores are identical. So actually yes, Samsung had everything to do with it. 

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #18 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Wrong. Much of the circuitry in the Ax CPUs is designed by ARM and another large chunk is licensed from the GPU provider. Apple designed a portion itself, as well. Samsung had little (if anything) to do with the design of the Ax CPUs.
Also not true. There are other foundries which can make the CPU for Apple. In some cases, there might be a tradeoff in features and/or price, but it's certainly possible. And if Apple waves a big enough carrot, they might even be able to interest Intel - which would eliminate both of those concerns.

 

Samsung engaged a company called Inrinsity which helped them come up with the Hummingbird SOC, which was announced a full year before the A4, which x-rays showed was near identical, implying Apple asked for a few custom mods to the Samsung design.  Apple were so taken with the Hummingbird they then bought Intrinsity.

 

Since then, Samsung have come up with the Exynos line of processors, which are cutting edge.  Samsung recently announced the worlds first ARM A15 based mobile processor SOC:  http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/Exynos/products5dual.html

 

Sure Samsung get a lot of the basic design from ARM, but then so does just about everyone who designs or makes a mobile Processor, including Apple.  Trying to spin it so as to give the impression Apple has vast chip design expertise and Samsung none is laughable.

 

What do think -  Samsung just take ready made designs from ARM, with no further design input required, sticks them in a machine and hey presto, cutting edge SOC's come out the other end?  if so,  you must be smoking crack, as Judge Koh would say.

 

This continual denial that Samsung is anything but one of the worlds foremost technology companies reminds me of US auto makers who insisted the Japanese could never make decent cars.

post #19 of 48

Could both men please bring only interpreters, and lock their lawyers and corporate cheerleaders outside the room?

post #20 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

Apple need a win to protect themselves against the cases Google brought against them via Motorola.

 

Cook should not back down, Samsung have more to lose.

 

Wilful infringement = triple damages = $7.5 Billion and the withdrawing of $10 Billion a year in component purchases would be a huge hit to Samsung.

 

Cook needs to show that Apple aren't the walkovers they were in the early nineties, when Microsoft almost crushed the life out of them, Apple are back and they mean serious business.

Agreed. If Apple truly believes in why it started this in the first place, it should unrelentingly stay the course. Either put the copyists out to pasture for good -- the dollar sum of compensatory damages is irrelevant -- or take it on the chin. Either way, it will be an unambiguous signal of what to do next, instead of the "let's hold hands and get to finish line" nonsense which merely kicks the can down the road.

 

Given all that has transpired, I believe strongly that Samsung will be swatted down like a fly by this jury.

post #21 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by smack416 View Post

These two companies are so closely tied together Apple should be able to gain from Samsung a public acknowledgment and large settlement, along with a cross-licensing agreement (similar to the one with Microsoft, where they're not allowed to clone Apple's products) in exchange for Apple's continued reliance on Samsung for future parts.
Samsung's long-term success should be it's CEOs primary concern. If they know they're in the wrong here, there shouldn't be too much of a hit to honour or ego in taking this approach and they can move on by empowering their designers to blaze new trails.

I think that Samsung has "slavishly copied" Apple's products, but I agree with this 100%. +1

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply
post #22 of 48

Here's a transcript of the phone call:

 

Tim: Kwon, good to talk to you again.  I want you to know that I really hate litigation.

 

Kwon: Yes Tim, let's resolve this to our mutual satisfaction.

 

Tim: Stop making Android phones

 

Kwon: LOL

 

Tim: See you in court forever

post #23 of 48

That's right - when someone your close with copies your work and profits from it - just ignore it and keep moving forward.

 

Great advice.
 

post #24 of 48

Apple licenses the cores from ARM and then they bought PA Semi to do the design of the SoC.  Imagination Tech was bought for its graphics core.  Actually Apple made a lame effort to have Taiwan Semi build the A class chips, but their fab was not up to specs.  With $120B in cash, there is no excuse to get multiple sources for the fab, or build their own plant.  The ROC or ROI can not be worse than treasuries.  

post #25 of 48

It's like Reagan and Gorbachev coming together… 

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #26 of 48
Winston Churchill had it right.

Talk, talk, talk is better than war,war,war.
post #27 of 48

There is no excuse for Apple to settle. Not with their importance in tech today, their money, and all the opportunity in the world to go it alone and succeed like no one else has.

 

No settlement! There is NO incentive for one. Neither financially, nor in terms of consumers (who don't care, anyway), nor in terms of IP. There needs to be a clear JUDGMENT in this case. Once and for all. And if Apple believes they can win this long-term, then they should by all means continue. At least then we'll get CLARITY, and hopefully precedent that will more easily govern similar patent disputes in the future. 

 

A settlement at this point, after all that has happened, will be a WASTE. Both in terms of moving patent law and the adjudication of patent disputes forward, and in connection with that, providing everyone with some clarity. 

 

If Tim Cook *does* agree to settle, I would be VERY interested to see those terms. Because there *is* an outside chance that he'd be giving the farm away. Apple, in my view, has to think about the long-term effects of this case, in terms of the future integrity of their IP. I think that taking a short term view in order to just focus on their relationship with Samsung, and the future of *that* relationship is sheer folly. I'll question any move Apple makes that is contrary to the fundamental philosophy that got them to where they are today. 

 

Have a look here:

 

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/152030/ipad-demand-expected-to-contribute-to-hps-largest-ever-quarterly-loss

 

iPad DEMAND. 

DEMAND for Apple gear. Everywhere you look, it's all about Apple. Apple Apple Apple. 

All that cachet and reputation Apple has built over the years is due to the integrity of their IP and their willingness to stand up and defend it. 

post #28 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by smack416 View Post

These two companies are so closely tied together Apple should be able to gain from Samsung a public acknowledgment and large settlement, along with a cross-licensing agreement (similar to the one with Microsoft, where they're not allowed to clone Apple's products) in exchange for Apple's continued reliance on Samsung for future parts.
Samsung's long-term success should be it's CEOs primary concern. If they know they're in the wrong here, there shouldn't be too much of a hit to honour or ego in taking this approach and they can move on by empowering their designers to blaze new trails.

If it hasn't happened in three rounds of pre suit talks it won't now. Apples patents are non SEP so they can't be forced to license them and likely won't at this point. And they sure won't link that issue to production contracts.

For Samsung, they say they didn't do anything wrong. They arent about to admit it. They want a jury to say the design patents are invalid and their SEP terms were FRAND.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #29 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by simpleankit View Post



Apple should understand that message is already delivered to Android camp.  By stretching this case, they risk many things,  a, Risk of patents being held invalid b, Risk of scope of patents getting too narrowed to avoid copy cat products c, Risk of  very less damage award. It will have an opposite effect of what Apple wants.

What message? That Apple will sue, so what. It won't stop the copying attempts. What Apple needs is a victory. Thus giving out the message Apple will sue and very likely win, so why risk it.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #30 of 48

Cook: "Wassup Oh Hyun?"

 

Kwon: "Yo Timaaaaaayyyyyy!  Way to go on the stock market, bro.  Sell me some shares at $500?"

 

Cook: "Would if I could.  Hey listen.  Judge wants us to talk.  Again."

 

Kwon: "I feel like a broken record.  Same offer.  Split the diff.  2.5 billion minus 400 million is 2.1 billion for you."

 

Cook: "Still can't do it.  We need to set an example.  Sorry it had to be Samsung, buddy."

 

Kwon: "Had to ask.  But yeah, you're right.  Anyway, how's the wife and kids?"

 

Cook: "Awesome.  Hope your family is doing great too.  Gotta run, boss.  Talk again soon."

 

Kwon: "Laters."

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #31 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

Judge Koh screwed Apple with her jury instructions, either because she's more interested in how she herself comes across in the trial than she is in getting a jury verdict that actually just... or because she thinks screwing Apple forces them to the bargaining counter. Either way, it was a sad moment for the American judicial system.

If either side believes there was bias they will appeal. If Apple loses and they believe this lak of instruction was the issue, they will appeal.

We didn't hear the actual testimony to know if Apple was allowed to question anyone about the lack of emails. If they were, if they even got it said with an objection from Samsung, the instruction might not be needed since let's face it even if the Judge tells them to disregard the question, they heard it.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #32 of 48

Have a hunch it will settle because Apple has a MUCH BIGGER BONE to pick with Google/Moto.

post #33 of 48
Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post
Have a hunch it will settle because Apple has a MUCH BIGGER BONE to pick with Google/Moto.

 

Can't pick that bone without teeth, and concrete proof of Samsung's copyist nonsense is the teeth they need.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #34 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

most of the circuitry in the A class CPU's is designed by Samsung

 

until apple makes their own CPU from scratch they have to buy from samsung

That is absolutely incorrect apple bought 3 semiconductor companies and brought there entire staffs in-house.  The A series chips are designed completely in house by apple and start from an  ARM Cortex-A9 MPCore CPU to which apple adds custom layout and other silicon to  such as the PowerVR SGX543MP2 GPU with NEON SIMD accelerator and an "earSmart" unit from Audience for noise canceling.  Plus custom memory effects and pipes for there particular application, ARM holdings makes the basic cpu for license to anyone, Imagination Technologies makes the graphics portion, earsmart is made by Audience.  Notice that Samsung owns none of those they do not make them or design them.   The only thing that Samsung does is manufacture the the A Series chips.  Period.   The design layout and combination of the licensed technology in the A5 is completely apples design. In fact samsung has started licensing and using arm cpus from arm holdings now as well.

I wish people would stop regurgitating the same old "samsung builds the iphone crap"  Because it simply is not true.   

post #35 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Can't pick that bone without teeth, and concrete proof of Samsung's copyist nonsense is the teeth they need.

 

The biggest gamble is, what if Apple loses? Juries do strange things. We've all written this case off as a slam dunk for Apple (and it should be) but what if...

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #36 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post

That is absolutely incorrect apple bought 3 semiconductor companies and brought there entire staffs in-house.  The A series chips are designed completely in house by apple and start from an  ARM Cortex-A9 MPCore CPU to which apple adds custom layout and other silicon to  such as the PowerVR SGX543MP2 GPU with NEON SIMD accelerator and an "earSmart" unit from Audience for noise canceling.  Plus custom memory effects and pipes for there particular application, ARM holdings makes the basic cpu for license to anyone, Imagination Technologies makes the graphics portion, earsmart is made by Audience.  Notice that Samsung owns none of those they do not make them or design them.   The only thing that Samsung does is manufacture the the A Series chips.  Period.   The design layout and combination of the licensed technology in the A5 is completely apples design. In fact samsung has started licensing and using arm cpus from arm holdings now as well.

I wish people would stop regurgitating the same old "samsung builds the iphone crap"  Because it simply is not true.   

That's the A5 yes, for the A4 it was true.

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #37 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

 

The biggest gamble is, what if Apple loses? Juries do strange things. We've all written this case off as a slam dunk for Apple (and it should be) but what if...

 

This thread is so full of trolling. If you look at everything that was claimed, it's not possible to say "slam dunk" without some legal understanding. The articles themselves generate a lot of uninformed comments where posters rather than looking for how something might be interpreted by a given legal standard, project how they think something should work. "Slam dunk" is also a dumb thing to say when you have an entire matrix of claims. Note some of the prior graphics posted on here indicating which claims were applied to which devices and the inclusion of Samsung's FRAND dispute included within the case. To just figure this is as simple as all in or out shows a lack of willingness to even consider anything you've read.

post #38 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

most of the circuitry in the A class CPU's is designed by Samsung

 

until apple makes their own CPU from scratch they have to buy from samsung

 

Isn't that what they're doing now?
 
 
post #39 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Agreed. If Apple truly believes in why it started this in the first place, it should unrelentingly stay the course. Either put the copyists out to pasture for good -- the dollar sum of compensatory damages is irrelevant -- or take it on the chin. Either way, it will be an unambiguous signal of what to do next, instead of the "let's hold hands and get to finish line" nonsense which merely kicks the can down the road.

Given all that has transpired, I believe strongly that Samsung will be swatted down like a fly by this jury.

The advantage of settling is to not publish the terms. Both Samsung and Apple can benefit from that. Both parties can get a global solution rather than risking looking like petulant children. In the end, the two companies still need to work together.
post #40 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

most of the circuitry in the A class CPU's is designed by Samsung

 

until apple makes their own CPU from scratch they have to buy from samsung

 

Correction... Apple designed the A series chips.  Samsung merely fabricates them for them.

Apple bought  P.A. Semiconductor, so they could do this

The original iPhone chip was a Samsung  designed chip though , so you're right there.

 

Technically, Apple could leave them if they wanted to ( at some major cost to margins if they did it in a hurry )... it was rumored even that Intel proposed to make ARM chips for them in 2011.

The new Texas instruments facility in ( Austin I think it was? ) is rumored to be making the A6 or some of them anyway. Don't know if that was substantiated ever. Seems unlikely for them to be ready yet if it's true.

 

The thing about Samsung is that Apple has a fantastic deal with them... Apple gets their CPU's *and* memory, flash memory, and displays from Samsung and prepays massive contracts with them...in exchange for a significant discount.

 

Even if Apple loses this suit, IMO Samsung ultimately loses... Apple will shift their components away from Samsung as "punishment" when they can (maybe not right away). They're doing it to Google with mapping and search, and they're probably going to do it to Samsung too.

I'm not sure Samsung really wants that to happen. Apple clearly has the upper hand there.

Yet if Apple has tried to strong arm, they haven't been successful so far.

 

We'll see what happens I guess!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Samsung CEOs to hold last-minute lawsuit settlement talks