The judge is basically telling them to settle. That is BS. Apple or any company should have the right to have judgment that their case has merit or not, and if they are in the right, force the offending company to change their practice of stealing and profiting off others IP and work
With the usual disclaimers about not being a lawyer, I have to disagree with your assertion that this is BS. While I'm not a large business, my personal experience, and in speaking with my lawyer, and other lawyers, is that judges routinely require that some form of mediation be attempted before going to trial or hearing.
My experience is further that this is a good idea. A courtroom does not provide a way for the parties to actually talk about the problems. A courtroom is quite adversarial, while a mediation session allows considerable flexibility to try numerous settlement scenarios.
In the case I'm thinking of regarding my business, we floated a totally unususal scenario that allowed us all to play into our strengths and all parties came out ahead. Let's see if these two companies can find a solution that benefits everyone.
The judge is basically telling them to settle. That is BS. Apple or any company should have the right to have judgment that their case has merit or not, and if they are in the right, force the offending company to change their practice of stealing and profiting off others IP and work
No, the judge is telling them to attend a settlement conference, not to settle. Going through a trial is a huge effort and lots of money gets flushed to the lawyers.
Settlement conferences are a last-ditch effort before a trial. The two parties don't even have to talk to each other if they don't want to. Hell, they could walk into that meeting and say "screw you, we're going to trial" if they want and walk out. The judge can't do a single thing about it. It's only his directive that they sit down in a room and talk - if they want to.
I've been through a few of these too personally. I've had conferences last for literally minutes with no agreement. What usually happens after that - from my own personal experience - is that when one party is so steadfast to go to trial, usually after the settlement conference the other party blinks and decides to settle before the trial begins.
However when two companies like Apple and Samsung, both with very deep pockets and egos on the line, it's all up in the air with who will blink first, if any of them even do. Methink Samsung will blink on some level. I really think Apple has the ball on this one.
No, the judge is telling them to attend a settlement conference, not to settle. Going through a trial is a huge effort and lots of money gets flushed to the lawyers.
Settlement conferences are a last-ditch effort before a trial. The two parties don't even have to talk to each other if they don't want to. Hell, they could walk into that meeting and say "screw you, we're going to trial" if they want and walk out. The judge can't do a single thing about it. It's only his directive that they sit down in a room and talk - if they want to.
I've been through a few of these too personally. I've had conferences last for literally minutes with no agreement. What usually happens after that - from my own personal experience - is that when one party is so steadfast to go to trial, usually after the settlement conference the other party blinks and decides to settle before the trial begins.
However when two companies like Apple and Samsung, both with very deep pockets and egos on the line, it's all up in the air with who will blink first, if any of them even do. Methink Samsung will blink on some level. I really think Apple has the ball on this one.
The first part makes sense, but when you say Samsung will blink first, well guess what, Apple won't accept a settlement so it doesn't matter, this thing is going to trial.
I really, really wish Steve Jobs were still here to attend that meeting. I'd love to see him give the Samsung execs the middle finger. They are probably relieved that he's not here to attend that meeting.
People really need to pay attention the the last few months Patents granted to Apple.
Samsung most certainly is paying attention to them.
Apple is shoring up all kinds of patents that strengthen their positions.
Amm, seeing as Samsung gets about 50 times as many patents as apple PER YEAR, I think they both have ammunition.
At some point Apple will realise that suing someone for having a rectangle or a 'slide to unlock' costs you (apple) millions in legal fees, leads to retaliation by the people you sue (goodbye push email on iphone) and at the end of the day.....AND MOST IMPORTANT
It just takes the competition 5 mins to do a workaround.....
I guess Cook realised that its wasted money and they can actually use another approach and LICENSE the patents.
Whats the point making someone put a border around their tablet and pay you nothing when you can license your patent on the black rectangle (US Patent #4,965,332) and have them pay for every black rectangular device they make.
I really, really wish Steve Jobs were still here to attend that meeting. I'd love to see him give the Samsung execs the middle finger. They are probably relieved that he's not here to attend that meeting.
Right, because I'm sure they'd be shivering in their shoes by his intimidating aura. And I'm sure you know how settlement meetings go.
Sorry, this isn't some kindergarten sandbox faceoff. Leave the negotiations to the adults, yeah?
Quote:
Fighting a case on principles is always expensive and settling out of court will most likely be expected. However, I really believe this should be fought on principal as this would send a clear message to any copy-shop like Samsung that if they don't innovate on their own, they will get sued into oblivion. I think what Samsung has been doing is shameful to say the least. Is it any wonder that the one seriously blatant copy shop that copies Apple in just about every part of Apple's design also happens to end up being the #1 Android manufacturer?
In other words, you think Apple should continue playing the same, tired game of suing Samsung and getting their suits overturned? I take it you've never held a real job or paid your own rent? How's that working out for ya?
No, the judge is telling them to attend a settlement conference, not to settle. Going through a trial is a huge effort and lots of money gets flushed to the lawyers.
Settlement conferences are a last-ditch effort before a trial. The two parties don't even have to talk to each other if they don't want to. Hell, they could walk into that meeting and say "screw you, we're going to trial" if they want and walk out. The judge can't do a single thing about it. It's only his directive that they sit down in a room and talk - if they want to.
I've been through a few of these too personally. I've had conferences last for literally minutes with no agreement. What usually happens after that - from my own personal experience - is that when one party is so steadfast to go to trial, usually after the settlement conference the other party blinks and decides to settle before the trial begins.
That's pretty much how it works in litigation with most cases that have the potential of being taken to court. It's not often you'll run into a judge who doesn't have a full docket already.
But as many impassioned Apple fans would have it, Jobs was right in saying that Apple should spend its entire cash balance on litigating meritless suits.
Quote:
However when two companies like Apple and Samsung, both with very deep pockets and egos on the line, it's all up in the air with who will blink first, if any of them even do. Methink Samsung will blink on some level. I really think Apple has the ball on this one.
Have you actually been following the progress of the suits between the two? I commend you for actually having a smidgen of an idea of what you're talking about, but something tells me you're in Speculation Land. Apple hasn't won a single decisive victory against Samsung. One day it has a favorable ruling, then the next, some high court has already overturned them. Kind of an embarrassment when you think about it. Let's not even start with the monetary and nonmonetary costs this is imposing on both sides.
"he's "skeptical" that anything will come out of the meeting" - lets hope nothing does. Apple needs to keep their foot on the throats of these scumbags and push for complete annihilation! Samsung is ripping off and riding the coattails of Apple and its time to stop them full force.
That's pretty much how it works in litigation with most cases that have the potential of being taken to court. It's not often you'll run into a judge who doesn't have a full docket already.
But as many impassioned Apple fans would have it, Jobs was right in saying that Apple should spend its entire cash balance on litigating meritless suits.
Have you actually been following the progress of the suits between the two? I commend you for actually having a smidgen of an idea of what you're talking about, but something tells me you're in Speculation Land. Apple hasn't won a single decisive victory against Samsung. One day it has a favorable ruling, then the next, some high court has already overturned them. Kind of an embarrassment when you think about it. Let's not even start with the monetary and nonmonetary costs this is imposing on both sides.
Wow - we have a troll in the room who somehow thinks he's smarter than everyone else. He fails to see the obvious, which is that Apple has kept Samsung on their heels while this plays out, and that there is still a lot of dry powder on Apple's side as they press other issues regarding Google's theft of Apple IP. This is a marathon not a sprint, for which Apple is well prepared.
Amm, seeing as Samsung gets about 50 times as many patents as apple PER YEAR, I think they both have ammunition.
At some point Apple will realise that suing someone for having a rectangle or a 'slide to unlock' costs you (apple) millions in legal fees, leads to retaliation by the people you sue (goodbye push email on iphone) and at the end of the day.....AND MOST IMPORTANT
It just takes the competition 5 mins to do a workaround.....
I guess Cook realised that its wasted money and they can actually use another approach and LICENSE the patents.
Whats the point making someone put a border around their tablet and pay you nothing when you can license your patent on the black rectangle (US Patent #4,965,332) and have them pay for every black rectangular device they make.
Its ok for samsung for to get 50 times more patents, apple is not ripping them off ...let's not even pretend that its ok business behavior to rip off your biggest customers.
Wow - we have a troll in the room who somehow thinks he's smarter than everyone else. He fails to see the obvious, which is that Apple has kept Samsung on their heels while this plays out, and that there is still a lot of dry powder on Apple's side as they press other issues regarding Google's theft of Apple IP. This is a marathon not a sprint, for which Apple is well prepared.
I know it's easier to view reality from a pair of rose-colored sunglasses, but in actuality, I just said it as it is. To be quite honest, I don't have a horse in this race beyond a desire to see things going back to normal minus frivolous lawsuits. Apple's not "keeping Samsung on their toes" as this isn't exactly a one-sided chess game. That's absolutely nothing to be gained from suing Samsung, losing, and subsequently helping Samsung create precedent that favors them and others. It all boils down to Apple losing one suit after another against Samsung and in the long term, losing any future chances it has of winning cases on similar causes of action against other Android licensees. I don't know of a single sport where losing streaks are commended.
If you feel otherwise, feel free to pull something out of your other hole and prove me wrong--I could use some free entertainment right now. Your logic is sound if you can show Apple just loves wasting money on lawyers and keeping judges employed.
Please, don't even try to pretend you're prithee to Apple's litigation strategy. I know fanboyism dampens your judgment, but you can do better than that.
Apple has no choice but to go all out to shut down companies like Samsung that copy Apple's designs. Like Samsung, Everyone would love to copy Apple because it's the only thing that sells. Samdung has no visible smart phone and tablet business if it doesn't copy Apple.
Samsung will lose Apple as a client and the courts could shut down Samsung's tablet and smartphone business in addition to any market lost due to consumer backlash.
Samsung is treading a highwire and the wind is picking up. And it's a long way down...
Comments
Why? What do you have riding on which horse?
How does it - remotely - affect your life one way or another?
It's then quite obvious that there's not much going on in your life, and that stuff that matters in your life is worth very little.
That's cool, bro'. Each to his own. Not making a value judgment or anything....
Ya, I make a joke on a forum so therefore there's not much going on in my life. Brilliant.
The judge is basically telling them to settle. That is BS. Apple or any company should have the right to have judgment that their case has merit or not, and if they are in the right, force the offending company to change their practice of stealing and profiting off others IP and work
With the usual disclaimers about not being a lawyer, I have to disagree with your assertion that this is BS. While I'm not a large business, my personal experience, and in speaking with my lawyer, and other lawyers, is that judges routinely require that some form of mediation be attempted before going to trial or hearing.
My experience is further that this is a good idea. A courtroom does not provide a way for the parties to actually talk about the problems. A courtroom is quite adversarial, while a mediation session allows considerable flexibility to try numerous settlement scenarios.
In the case I'm thinking of regarding my business, we floated a totally unususal scenario that allowed us all to play into our strengths and all parties came out ahead. Let's see if these two companies can find a solution that benefits everyone.
The judge is basically telling them to settle. That is BS. Apple or any company should have the right to have judgment that their case has merit or not, and if they are in the right, force the offending company to change their practice of stealing and profiting off others IP and work
No, the judge is telling them to attend a settlement conference, not to settle. Going through a trial is a huge effort and lots of money gets flushed to the lawyers.
Settlement conferences are a last-ditch effort before a trial. The two parties don't even have to talk to each other if they don't want to. Hell, they could walk into that meeting and say "screw you, we're going to trial" if they want and walk out. The judge can't do a single thing about it. It's only his directive that they sit down in a room and talk - if they want to.
I've been through a few of these too personally. I've had conferences last for literally minutes with no agreement. What usually happens after that - from my own personal experience - is that when one party is so steadfast to go to trial, usually after the settlement conference the other party blinks and decides to settle before the trial begins.
However when two companies like Apple and Samsung, both with very deep pockets and egos on the line, it's all up in the air with who will blink first, if any of them even do. Methink Samsung will blink on some level. I really think Apple has the ball on this one.
Samsung most certainly is paying attention to them.
Apple is shoring up all kinds of patents that strengthen their positions.
Why? What do you have riding on which horse?
How does it - remotely - affect your life one way or another?
Well I own stocks in both company's so this is a good thing.
Brilliant.
Nah, I was being sarcastic.
I mean, reverential.....
No, the judge is telling them to attend a settlement conference, not to settle. Going through a trial is a huge effort and lots of money gets flushed to the lawyers.
Settlement conferences are a last-ditch effort before a trial. The two parties don't even have to talk to each other if they don't want to. Hell, they could walk into that meeting and say "screw you, we're going to trial" if they want and walk out. The judge can't do a single thing about it. It's only his directive that they sit down in a room and talk - if they want to.
I've been through a few of these too personally. I've had conferences last for literally minutes with no agreement. What usually happens after that - from my own personal experience - is that when one party is so steadfast to go to trial, usually after the settlement conference the other party blinks and decides to settle before the trial begins.
However when two companies like Apple and Samsung, both with very deep pockets and egos on the line, it's all up in the air with who will blink first, if any of them even do. Methink Samsung will blink on some level. I really think Apple has the ball on this one.
The first part makes sense, but when you say Samsung will blink first, well guess what, Apple won't accept a settlement so it doesn't matter, this thing is going to trial.
Well I own stocks in both company's so this is a good thing.
Umm... Not necessarily.
It depends on whether the value gain to the winner of the case is equal to, less than, or more than the value loss to the loser.
Are you able to value that? If so, tell us, please.
I really, really wish Steve Jobs were still here to attend that meeting. I'd love to see him give the Samsung execs the middle finger. They are probably relieved that he's not here to attend that meeting.
Amen to that. I hope Tim doesn't wimp out.
People really need to pay attention the the last few months Patents granted to Apple.
Samsung most certainly is paying attention to them.
Apple is shoring up all kinds of patents that strengthen their positions.
Amm, seeing as Samsung gets about 50 times as many patents as apple PER YEAR, I think they both have ammunition.
At some point Apple will realise that suing someone for having a rectangle or a 'slide to unlock' costs you (apple) millions in legal fees, leads to retaliation by the people you sue (goodbye push email on iphone) and at the end of the day.....AND MOST IMPORTANT
It just takes the competition 5 mins to do a workaround.....
I guess Cook realised that its wasted money and they can actually use another approach and LICENSE the patents.
Whats the point making someone put a border around their tablet and pay you nothing when you can license your patent on the black rectangle (US Patent #4,965,332) and have them pay for every black rectangular device they make.
I really, really wish Steve Jobs were still here to attend that meeting. I'd love to see him give the Samsung execs the middle finger. They are probably relieved that he's not here to attend that meeting.
Right, because I'm sure they'd be shivering in their shoes by his intimidating aura. And I'm sure you know how settlement meetings go.
Sorry, this isn't some kindergarten sandbox faceoff. Leave the negotiations to the adults, yeah?
Fighting a case on principles is always expensive and settling out of court will most likely be expected. However, I really believe this should be fought on principal as this would send a clear message to any copy-shop like Samsung that if they don't innovate on their own, they will get sued into oblivion. I think what Samsung has been doing is shameful to say the least. Is it any wonder that the one seriously blatant copy shop that copies Apple in just about every part of Apple's design also happens to end up being the #1 Android manufacturer?
In other words, you think Apple should continue playing the same, tired game of suing Samsung and getting their suits overturned? I take it you've never held a real job or paid your own rent? How's that working out for ya?
Typical fanboy armchair expert rant.
No, the judge is telling them to attend a settlement conference, not to settle. Going through a trial is a huge effort and lots of money gets flushed to the lawyers.
Settlement conferences are a last-ditch effort before a trial. The two parties don't even have to talk to each other if they don't want to. Hell, they could walk into that meeting and say "screw you, we're going to trial" if they want and walk out. The judge can't do a single thing about it. It's only his directive that they sit down in a room and talk - if they want to.
I've been through a few of these too personally. I've had conferences last for literally minutes with no agreement. What usually happens after that - from my own personal experience - is that when one party is so steadfast to go to trial, usually after the settlement conference the other party blinks and decides to settle before the trial begins.
That's pretty much how it works in litigation with most cases that have the potential of being taken to court. It's not often you'll run into a judge who doesn't have a full docket already.
But as many impassioned Apple fans would have it, Jobs was right in saying that Apple should spend its entire cash balance on litigating meritless suits.
However when two companies like Apple and Samsung, both with very deep pockets and egos on the line, it's all up in the air with who will blink first, if any of them even do. Methink Samsung will blink on some level. I really think Apple has the ball on this one.
Have you actually been following the progress of the suits between the two? I commend you for actually having a smidgen of an idea of what you're talking about, but something tells me you're in Speculation Land. Apple hasn't won a single decisive victory against Samsung. One day it has a favorable ruling, then the next, some high court has already overturned them. Kind of an embarrassment when you think about it. Let's not even start with the monetary and nonmonetary costs this is imposing on both sides.
That's pretty much how it works in litigation with most cases that have the potential of being taken to court. It's not often you'll run into a judge who doesn't have a full docket already.
But as many impassioned Apple fans would have it, Jobs was right in saying that Apple should spend its entire cash balance on litigating meritless suits.
Have you actually been following the progress of the suits between the two? I commend you for actually having a smidgen of an idea of what you're talking about, but something tells me you're in Speculation Land. Apple hasn't won a single decisive victory against Samsung. One day it has a favorable ruling, then the next, some high court has already overturned them. Kind of an embarrassment when you think about it. Let's not even start with the monetary and nonmonetary costs this is imposing on both sides.
Wow - we have a troll in the room who somehow thinks he's smarter than everyone else. He fails to see the obvious, which is that Apple has kept Samsung on their heels while this plays out, and that there is still a lot of dry powder on Apple's side as they press other issues regarding Google's theft of Apple IP. This is a marathon not a sprint, for which Apple is well prepared.
Amm, seeing as Samsung gets about 50 times as many patents as apple PER YEAR, I think they both have ammunition.
At some point Apple will realise that suing someone for having a rectangle or a 'slide to unlock' costs you (apple) millions in legal fees, leads to retaliation by the people you sue (goodbye push email on iphone) and at the end of the day.....AND MOST IMPORTANT
It just takes the competition 5 mins to do a workaround.....
I guess Cook realised that its wasted money and they can actually use another approach and LICENSE the patents.
Whats the point making someone put a border around their tablet and pay you nothing when you can license your patent on the black rectangle (US Patent #4,965,332) and have them pay for every black rectangular device they make.
Its ok for samsung for to get 50 times more patents, apple is not ripping them off ...let's not even pretend that its ok business behavior to rip off your biggest customers.
Wow - we have a troll in the room who somehow thinks he's smarter than everyone else. He fails to see the obvious, which is that Apple has kept Samsung on their heels while this plays out, and that there is still a lot of dry powder on Apple's side as they press other issues regarding Google's theft of Apple IP. This is a marathon not a sprint, for which Apple is well prepared.
I know it's easier to view reality from a pair of rose-colored sunglasses, but in actuality, I just said it as it is. To be quite honest, I don't have a horse in this race beyond a desire to see things going back to normal minus frivolous lawsuits. Apple's not "keeping Samsung on their toes" as this isn't exactly a one-sided chess game. That's absolutely nothing to be gained from suing Samsung, losing, and subsequently helping Samsung create precedent that favors them and others. It all boils down to Apple losing one suit after another against Samsung and in the long term, losing any future chances it has of winning cases on similar causes of action against other Android licensees. I don't know of a single sport where losing streaks are commended.
If you feel otherwise, feel free to pull something out of your other hole and prove me wrong--I could use some free entertainment right now. Your logic is sound if you can show Apple just loves wasting money on lawyers and keeping judges employed.
Please, don't even try to pretend you're prithee to Apple's litigation strategy. I know fanboyism dampens your judgment, but you can do better than that.
Samsung will lose Apple as a client and the courts could shut down Samsung's tablet and smartphone business in addition to any market lost due to consumer backlash.
Samsung is treading a highwire and the wind is picking up. And it's a long way down...