Apple, Samsung fail to reach agreement in court-ordered talks

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
After two days of settlement talks involving each of the companies' chief executives, Apple and Samsung failed to reach an agreement that would end their sprawling patent infringement suits.

The California trial between Samsung and Apple is now headed for a scheduled start in late June, after the companies could find "no clear agreement," a Samsung official told The Korea Times. Both companies reportedly held firm in their respective beliefs, as Samsung believes Apple should pay royalties for using wireless transmission technology, while Apple believes Samsung copied the design of its iPhone and iPad.

The lack of resolution is not surprising to onlookers, as the discussions involving Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook and Samsung CEO Choi Gee-sung were court-ordered. The two took part in discussions on Monday and Tuesday of this week in San Francisco, Calif.

A similar outcome occurred last year, when Oracle's Larry Ellison and Google's Larry Page took part in a court-ordered mediation. No settlement was reached in that case either, and the case eventually went to trial.

Though the discussions with Apple have concluded, Samsung CEO Choi and Shin Jong-kyun, the company's mobile division chief, remain in the U.S. and are reportedly inspecting the company's stateside operations before returning to their home country of South Korea.



Experts have said that thus far, there has not been much of an incentive for Apple to settle its patent infringement dispute with Samsung, as the iPhone maker has yet to lose an infringement claim lodged by Samsung. Instead, Apple has earned a handful of victories and won infringements barring the sale of various Samsung products around the world.

Apple hopes to find even more success in the courtroom with a new injunction filed last week in the U.S. against the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. An injunction against the device would not likely be a major financial issue for Samsung, which previously redesigned the device in Germany to avoid infringement. But it would be a publicity win for Apple, which has asserted that Samsung has illegally copied the look and feel of its popular iPhone and iPad product lineups.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 43
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,745member


    Of course they didn't! Why on earth would Apple be interested in "agreements" when they could just as easily get what they want out of a trial?  


     


    To what advantage is it to Apple to offer concessions, especially at this very point in the company's amazing performance?  Apple is set to own the next 5-7 years in consumer tech. There is no reason to not push their legal concerns as hard as possible. Consumers are on board, Apple has the money and the experience, etc.  Why bother negotiating with the competition? Just so you can chip away at your own level of differentiation? Differentiation is the rarest commodity in this turkey of an industry that Apple has turned on its head. To give *any* of that away via patent concessions or licensing agreements is madness. The only reason Apple is a force today (and a key reason for their unparalleled success) *is* a level of differentiation that no one else has employed or has been able to.

  • Reply 2 of 43


    Time to carry out Steve Job's wishes of "going nuclear"?

  • Reply 3 of 43
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 19,407member


    Wow. What a surprise.

  • Reply 4 of 43
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,409member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Of course they didn't! Why on earth would Apple be interested in "agreements" when they could just as easily get what they want out of a trial?  


     


    To what advantage is it to Apple to offer concessions, especially at this very point in the company's amazing performance?  Apple is set to own the next 5-7 years in consumer tech. There is no reason to not push their legal concerns as hard as possible. Consumers are on board, Apple has the money and the experience, etc.  Why bother negotiating with the competition? Just so you can chip away at your own level of differentiation? Differentiation is the rarest commodity in this turkey of an industry that Apple has turned on its head. To give *any* of that away via patent concessions or licensing agreements is madness. The only reason Apple is a force today (and a key reason for their unparalleled success) *is* a level of differentiation that no one else has employed or has been able to.



    Couldn't have put it better.  Be it a Kia or a few years back, Lexus / Toyota copying a BMW or Mercedes design or some cigarette lighter maker in Japan 40 years ago copying Ronson's design I am personally sick and tiered of this Asian MO of simply making what the west designs only cheaper (which easy in many cases if you are just copying).  It's about time some company stood up to them.

  • Reply 5 of 43
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,615member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Of course they didn't! Why on earth would Apple be interested in "agreements" when they could just as easily get what they want out of a trial?  


     


    To what advantage is it to Apple to offer concessions, especially at this very point in the company's amazing performance?  Apple is set to own the next 5-7 years in consumer tech. There is no reason to not push their legal concerns as hard as possible. Consumers are on board, Apple has the money and the experience, etc.  Why bother negotiating with the competition? Just so you can chip away at your own level of differentiation? Differentiation is the rarest commodity in this turkey of an industry that Apple has turned on its head. To give *any* of that away via patent concessions or licensing agreements is madness. The only reason Apple is a force today (and a key reason for their unparalleled success) *is* a level of differentiation that no one else has employed or has been able to.



    Well put. There may be agreements and compromises to be made on such things as wireless transmission technology, but when it comes to hardware and software design (as in the aesthetic qualities and the resultant user experience), it is a different story. 

  • Reply 6 of 43
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    paxman wrote: »
    Well put. There may be agreements and compromises to be made on such things as wireless transmission technology, but when it comes to hardware and software design (as in the aesthetic qualities and the resultant user experience), it is a different story. 

    There's really nothing to agree to on wireless transmission technology. Those patents are FRAND. The negotiation doesn't need to be any longer than this.

    Samsung: We demand payment for our wireless transmission patents

    Apple: OK. What is the amount you are charging everyone else?

    Samsung can easily get the amount they're charging everyone else. They can not get more from Apple. So the discussion on that issue shouldn't take long.
  • Reply 7 of 43
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,215member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    There's really nothing to agree to on wireless transmission technology. Those patents are FRAND. The negotiation doesn't need to be any longer than this.

    Samsung: We demand payment for our wireless transmission patents

    Apple: OK. What is the amount you are charging everyone else?

    Samsung can easily get the amount they're charging everyone else. They can not get more from Apple. So the discussion on that issue shouldn't take long.


     


    Yep, those FRAND patents are supposed to be like 90% of what Samsung is trying to use against Apple. The other 10% are patents of questionable validity. Apple would want them slammed in court on the FRAND issue because Samsung deserves it. And would want the other bits invalidated in court to avoid going through this again at any point. 


     


    Just like they want their design patent validated by the courts because once a court says yes it is valid it will make it easier to get other courts to say the same, especially if they get it up to a higher level that would have precedent setting authority over lesser courts. One victory in the right court and Apple could move and get summary judgment on a good dozen similar cases. 


     


    Also as I have heard it, Apple isn't fussing over the actual fee being asked for as much as the form of payment. Samsung is basically refusing to take cash for those FRAND patents but wants it paid in access to Apple patents that are vital to the uniqueness of the iOS lineup and are not FRAND (so Apple doesn't legally have to license them to anyone). That it seems is Apple's major issue even before the issue of the actual fee comes into play. 

  • Reply 8 of 43


    Samsung has a huge amount of IP, unfortunately most of it is FRAND or related to their semiconductor business. Samsung literally has thousands of patents related to manufacturing of semis, DRAM, Flash and processors. Unfortunately, when someone buys components (like Apple) the IP is included so there's no way this huge cache of IP can be used in any way in their legal battles.


     


    I find it funny that out of all the legal wrangling so far, the only thing Samsung has achieved is to get an official antitrust investigation from the EU for using FRAND patents to seek injunctions against Apple. It's one thing to file a suit and get denied (this has happened to Apple as well), but wuite another to have a suit denied and then be faced with the possibility of substantial fines.

  • Reply 9 of 43
    ufwaufwa Posts: 64member


    Exactly who was doing the talking in this?


     


    Was in Tim and Samsung's CEO and possible a translator involved with lawyers to advise and nothing more? Or was it their lawyers doing the talking with the two there to merely observe and give a thumbs up or thumbs down?


     


    If it was their lawyers then its obvious it would've failed. those guys have no interest in a resolution. Long drawn out battle = more money for them.

     

  • Reply 10 of 43
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    ufwa wrote: »
    Exactly who was doing the talking in this?

    Was in Tim and Samsung's CEO and possible a translator involved with lawyers to advise and nothing more? Or was it their lawyers doing the talking with the two there to merely observe and give a thumbs up or thumbs down?

    If it was their lawyers then its obvious it would've failed. those guys have no interest in a resolution. Long drawn out battle = more money for them.

     

    That's not how most lawyers work. Good lawyers have plenty of work to keep busy and are better served by doing what's best for their clients.

    More importantly, Apple would probably be using its in-house lawyers for this negotiation and they are on salary.
  • Reply 11 of 43

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post




     

    There's really nothing to agree to on wireless transmission technology. Those patents are FRAND. The negotiation doesn't need to be any longer than this.



    Samsung: We demand payment for our wireless transmission patents



    Apple: OK. What is the amount you are charging everyone else?



     


     


    There is no way Apple should pay as much as everyone else.  They will be buying bigger volumes or licenses, and their creditworthyness is better than anybody else.,


     


    Apple should by right pay LESS than anybody.

  • Reply 12 of 43
    harbingerharbinger Posts: 570member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Couldn't have put it better.  Be it a Kia or a few years back, Lexus / Toyota copying a BMW or Mercedes design or some cigarette lighter maker in Japan 40 years ago copying Ronson's design I am personally sick and tiered of this Asian MO of simply making what the west designs only cheaper (which easy in many cases if you are just copying).  It's about time some company stood up to them.



     


    Asian MO?


     


    Wow!

  • Reply 13 of 43
    sleepy3sleepy3 Posts: 244member


    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

     


    Couldn't have put it better.  Be it a Kia or a few years back, Lexus / Toyota copying a BMW or Mercedes design or some cigarette lighter maker in Japan 40 years ago copying Ronson's design I am personally sick and tiered of this Asian MO of simply making what the west designs only cheaper (which easy in many cases if you are just copying).  It's about time some company stood up to them.



     


    Yeah, I agree.


     


    The mobile projector


    quad core processors


    voice controls


    8 megapixel cameras


    4g LTE


    wireless syncing


    multitasking


    pressure sensitive styluses


    curved glass


    deep black AMOLED displays


    NFC


    Face Unlock


    Burst mode photo shooting


    taking pictures while shooting video


    pop up video players while using another app


    eye recognition anti-lock


    ....the list goes on


     


    ....all things the iphone had FIRST that these asian manufacturers just slavishly copied and put onto their handsets


     


    Downright disgusting


     


    I mean, what next? They gonna steal the 4-inch screen that apple came up with first?

     


    Apple on the other hand, all of the things in the iphone were done by them FIRST. They didn't copy anyone. I still wonder how they came up with the brilliant idea for a drop down notification menu or a messaging application that allows free iphone messaging...maybe if RIM think of something like that they wouldn't be in so much trouble right now.

  • Reply 14 of 43
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    sleepy3 wrote: »
    Yeah, I agree.

    The mobile projector
    quad core processors
    voice controls
    8 megapixel cameras
    4g LTE
    wireless syncing
    multitasking
    pressure sensitive styluses
    curved glass
    deep black AMOLED displays
    NFC
    Face Unlock
    Burst mode photo shooting
    taking pictures while shooting video
    pop up video players while using another app
    eye recognition anti-lock
    ....the list goes on

    ....all things the iphone had FIRST that these asian manufacturers just slavishly copied and put onto their handsets

    Downright disgusting

    I mean, what next? They gonna steal the 4-inch screen that apple came up with first?

     
    Apple on the other hand, all of the things in the iphone were done by them FIRST. They didn't copy anyone. I still wonder how they came up with the brilliant idea for a drop down notification menu or a messaging application that allows free iphone messaging...maybe if RIM think of something like that they wouldn't be in so much trouble right now.

    Why don't you show us where Apple claimed to have done all of the above first?

    Put up or shut up.
  • Reply 15 of 43
    sleepy3sleepy3 Posts: 244member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    Why don't you show us where Apple claimed to have done all of the above first?

    Put up or shut up.


    Show me where i said APPLE said that. Put up or shut up.


     


    I was simply saying that I, like the rest of this forum, am of the opinion that all asian manufacturers do is copy apple ideas and i simply listed the ideas that apple came up with first which were then copied. You can't deny, Samsung and company stole all of those ideas from apple. All they do is steal, they could never have come up with even something as simple as wireless syncing if apple didn't show them the way. Its MY opinion that they stole it from apple, and the opinion of the rest of this forum as well.

  • Reply 16 of 43
    icoco3icoco3 Posts: 1,460member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post....I still wonder how they came up with the brilliant idea for a drop down notification menu...


     


    I do believe that was a feature added by an app on jailbroken iPhones.

  • Reply 17 of 43

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Wow. What a surprise.



    Yeah! I never saw this coming at all!! 


    I thought Apple was just gonna roll over and pee on itself in awe.

  • Reply 18 of 43
    fredaroonyfredaroony Posts: 619member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Couldn't have put it better.  Be it a Kia or a few years back, Lexus / Toyota copying a BMW or Mercedes design or some cigarette lighter maker in Japan 40 years ago copying Ronson's design I am personally sick and tiered of this Asian MO of simply making what the west designs only cheaper (which easy in many cases if you are just copying).  It's about time some company stood up to them.



    Nice one you bigot. You think Apple never copying anyone right?

  • Reply 19 of 43
    fredaroonyfredaroony Posts: 619member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post


    Its MY opinion that they stole it from apple, and the opinion of the rest of this forum as well.



    Hey that is YOUR opinion and donn't speak for everyone else as you certainly don't speak for me.

  • Reply 20 of 43
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    quadra 610 wrote: »
    Of course they didn't! Why on earth would Apple be interested in "agreements" when they could just as easily get what they want out of a trial?  

    To what advantage is it to Apple to offer concessions, especially at this very point in the company's amazing performance?  Apple is set to own the next 5-7 years in consumer tech. There is no reason to not push their legal concerns as hard as possible. Consumers are on board, Apple has the money and the experience, etc.  Why bother negotiating with the competition? Just so you can chip away at your own level of differentiation? Differentiation is the rarest commodity in this turkey of an industry that Apple has turned on its head. To give *any* of that away via patent concessions or licensing agreements is madness. The only reason Apple is a force today (and a key reason for their unparalleled success) *is* a level of differentiation that no one else has employed or has been able to.

    Because there's always the chance of losing just like Oracle did and you get nothing.
Sign In or Register to comment.