Judge says 'it's time for peace,' asks Apple and Samsung CEOs to discuss settlement

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Apple v. Samsung presiding Judge Lucy Koh on Wednesday asked that the CEOs of both companies discuss possible settlement options at least once over the phone before the trial moves to jury deliberation next week.

Judge Koh made the request before proceedings began on Wednesday, saying "it's time for peace" in the ongoing Apple and Samsung patent dispute, which could have dear repercussions for one or both of the companies.

According to Reuters, after Judge Koh's urging to make peace, she said, "I see risks here to both sides if [the jury] goes to a verdict." Apple is seeking not only a sales ban of certain Samsung products alleged to have infringed on iPhone and iPad design and utility patents, but also monetary damages which could amount to over $2.5 billion.

Samsung has countered with its own claims, saying some of Apple's products infringe on wireless patents held by the South Korean company. Witnesses slated to take the stand later on Wednesday, including technical testimony from Tim Williams, will be speaking to that point.

Along with the settlement talk suggestion, Judge Koh once again asked the parties to narrow their respective cases before they reach the jury. "If you all want to keep overreaching that's up to you," Judge Koh said, according to an in-court tweet from Reuters reporter Dan Levine.

Judge Lucy Koh
U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh.
Source: U.S. District Court


Apple CEO Tim Cook and top Samsung executives already met to discuss possible settlement options in the past in court-ordered mediation, but the meetings bore no fruit. During Apple's second quarter 2012 conference call, Cook said he would rather settle the litigation, but at the same time vowed to defend the company's intellectual property if need be.

"I've always hated litigation, and I continue to hate it," Cook said, noting that if there was a guarantee against future patent infringement he would "highly prefer to settle versus battle."

The Apple v. Samsung U.S. trial is scheduled to wrap up testimony this week, with jury deliberation coming after closing arguments are completed next Tuesday.
«13456

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 103
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Good luck.
  • Reply 2 of 103
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,698member


    Hey Judge Koh, you're paid a lot of money to do your job.  Shut up and do it and quit whining.  Sure, we'd all like peace, but there comes a time where one has to stick to principle and make a statement that eventually benefits all.



    Otherwise, Scamscum and other degenerates will know they can piggyback off the work of others with little or no repercussions.



    Jeez, it irks the hell out of me when the legal system would rather people exchange money and not resolve the injustice that happened.

  • Reply 3 of 103
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,095member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    Good luck.


    Interesting that she comments both sides are over-reaching since the predominant view (and not just from AI articles) is that it's a clear win for Apple, as good as $2B+ in the bank and sales blocked in the US.

  • Reply 4 of 103

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Interesting that she comments both sides are over-reaching since the predominant view (and not just from AI articles) is that it's a clear win for Apple, as good as $2B+ in the bank and sales blocked in the US.



     


    Your observation likely means that Samscum may be more willing to settle than they were before. If Apple backs off 20%, Samscum may move 80% to avoid losing 100%.


     


    To come to a settlement also means neither party can appeal the non-verdict and drag this out for another year or two.


     


    An added plus is that both sides can save face (that's a biggie for Samscum's management), plus the Samscum lawyers, who are facing some serious fines and/or sanctions once this is over, might escape with their family jewels intact. 

  • Reply 5 of 103
    ssquirrelssquirrel Posts: 1,196member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post


    Hey Judge Koh, you're paid a lot of money to do your job.  Shut up and do it and quit whining.  Sure, we'd all like peace, but there comes a time where one has to stick to principle and make a statement that eventually benefits all.



     



     


    They have tried to settle before.  It didn't work.  We'll see if it can work this time.  Given how the trial is going, Samsung may be happy that hse has told them to try and settle again.  Settle w/Apple and have some control over the outcome or let the trial finish and accept a judgment they can't control.  I know which one sounds better in this situation.  This shouldn't be looked at as Koh not doing her job, this is her trying to offer both sides a way to end this quicker and possibly save face.  I don't see the problem.  Look at it this way.  It could cut more time off teh court case, which will save us (as in we, the people) money.


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Interesting that she comments both sides are over-reaching since the predominant view (and not just from AI articles) is that it's a clear win for Apple, as good as $2B+ in the bank and sales blocked in the US.



     


    It may be a clear win for Apple on some counts, but even the most hardcore Apple fan doesn't think every single item in the trial is completely in favor of Apple.  Well, some may, who knows.  Maybe I'm just reasonable heh. 

  • Reply 6 of 103


    PEACE ?? Peace she says ???

     


    Apple lawyers should tell Samsung to Agree to everything Apple has requested and sued for.


     


    Else [email protected]#$%^ 'Em and take it to the Jury !!!

  • Reply 7 of 103
    It's a sad state of affairs when multinational corporations willfully infringe on/steal the work of others, knowing they will only have to spend a few million on legal costs -- instead of hundreds of millions for innovating/inventing.

    The patent system is not broken. The legal system is broken. These days, winning requires only:
    (1) a large legal team
    (2) paid-for "experts" who will say what you want
    (3) people willing to shred evidence, disregard court edicts -- knowing they won't be reprimanded
    (4) the ability to obfuscate issues and juries

    It's clear Samsung infringed on Apple's prior IP. They should be found guilty, and have punitive damages also imposed on them. When crime "pays", it will continue.
  • Reply 8 of 103
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post


    Hey Judge Koh, you're paid a lot of money to do your job.  Shut up and do it and quit whining.  Sure, we'd all like peace, but there comes a time where one has to stick to principle and make a statement that eventually benefits all.



    Otherwise, Scamscum and other degenerates will know they can piggyback off the work of others with little or no repercussions.



    Jeez, it irks the hell out of me when the legal system would rather people exchange money and not resolve the injustice that happened.



    Could I agree in some more powerful way than just a thumbs up and a quote in reply?

  • Reply 9 of 103
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    Interesting that she comments both sides are over-reaching since the predominant view (and not just from AI articles) is that it's a clear win for Apple, as good as $2B+ in the bank and sales blocked in the US.

    I think you are misinterpreting the use of "overreaching". I don't think she's saying that Apple has no case, she's just saying that Apple's lawyers are overreaching in their case, which seems to be how these thing go. You've done this with your parents growing up? You've never made an outrageous request knowing it will be shot down but then when you make your next request (still somewhat extreme) it hopefully seems reasonable but it's not contracted to the previous one?
  • Reply 10 of 103
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,095member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    I think you are misinterpreting the use of "overreaching". I don't think she's saying that Apple has no case, she's just saying that Apple's lawyers are overreaching in their case, which seems to be how these thing go. You've done this with your parents growing up? You've never made an outrageous request knowing it will be shot down but then when you make your next request (still somewhat extreme) it hopefully seems reasonable but it's not contracted to the previous one?


    Not misinterpreting at all as that's exactly the way I took it too.

  • Reply 11 of 103
    hjbhjb Posts: 278member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post


    Hey Judge Koh, you're paid a lot of money to do your job.  Shut up and do it and quit whining.  Sure, we'd all like peace, but there comes a time where one has to stick to principle and make a statement that eventually benefits all.



    Otherwise, Scamscum and other degenerates will know they can piggyback off the work of others with little or no repercussions.



    Jeez, it irks the hell out of me when the legal system would rather people exchange money and not resolve the injustice that happened.



    I think the Judge Koh sees that Apple will loose as Sammy started pouring out evidences, that's why she suggested a peace talk.  Or she may have been consulted by Apple for it?  Not sure, maybe she has done that for the benefit of her country, USA.

  • Reply 12 of 103
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    "[I]I see risk here for both sides if we go to a verdict[/I]” Judge Lucy Koh said on Wednesday... sans the '[I]one or both[/I]' AI-spin.

    Anyway... At this point it's all just a bunch on nonsense and the best thing that can happen is a blanket invalidation of any/all ridiculously generic patents claims.
  • Reply 13 of 103
    sricesrice Posts: 115member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hjb View Post


    I think the Judge Koh sees that Apple will loose as Sammy started pouring out evidences, that's why she suggested a peace talk.  Or she may have been consulted by Apple for it?  Not sure, maybe she has done that for the benefit of her country, USA.



     


    Your profile says you are from New Zealand, but your mastery of the English language makes me suspect Korean is your primary language.  :-/
  • Reply 14 of 103

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hjb View Post


    I think the Judge Koh sees that Apple will loose as Sammy started pouring out evidences, that's why she suggested a peace talk.  Or she may have been consulted by Apple for it?  Not sure, maybe she has done that for the benefit of her country, USA.



     


    When you say silly things like this, you should probably just keep it shut.

  • Reply 15 of 103


    If I were Apple, I would just buy Samsung and put an Apple TV into every one of Samsung's televisions. I would also put iOS on every single Samsung device and take over the market. That's what JR would do...

  • Reply 16 of 103
    pendergastpendergast Posts: 1,358member
    hjb wrote: »
    I think the Judge Koh sees that Apple will loose as Sammy started pouring out evidences, that's why she suggested a peace talk.  Or she may have been consulted by Apple for it?  Not sure, maybe she has done that for the benefit of her country, USA.

    L
    O
    L

    What's with all this crap? I hear one group of trolls posting how Koh is in Apple's pocket and hates Samsung, and the other trolls posting how because Koh is of Korean descent, she is pro Samsung. Which is it? Maybe neither?

    An "American judge" siding with an "American company" versus a "foreign company" does not in some way benefit the United States. It's not like the U.S. has a protectionist philosophy (unlike, ironically, S Korea). Apple, while founded in the U.S. is technically no more "American" than Samsung, who has a U.S. division that pays U.S. taxes and is subject to U.S. laws. Samsung also has production plants in the U.S., while Apple also has production plants overseas. In the days of MULTINATIONAL companies, a company is not "American", "Korean", etc.
  • Reply 17 of 103
    I think Judge Kohl was giving Samsung a hint that their case is on shaky grounds and if it goes to jury, Samsung will lose a whole lot of money, maybe even more...

    For the record, I wanna see Sammie burn.
  • Reply 18 of 103
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,383member


    That's what Apple wanted in the first place.  But Samsung is too stubborn and arrogant.  Well, I'll still buy Apple products but Samsung products?  Nope. Sorry, there are other companies I can buy a TV, washer/dryer and other appliances from.

  • Reply 19 of 103
    just_mejust_me Posts: 590member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post


    Hey Judge Koh, you're paid a lot of money to do your job.  Shut up and do it and quit whining.  Sure, we'd all like peace, but there comes a time where one has to stick to principle and make a statement that eventually benefits all.



    Otherwise, Scamscum and other degenerates will know they can piggyback off the work of others with little or no repercussions.



    Jeez, it irks the hell out of me when the legal system would rather people exchange money and not resolve the injustice that happened.



     


     


    Hey Judge Koh, you're paid a lot of money to do your job.  Shut up and do it and quit whining.  Sure, we'd all like peace, but there comes a time where one has to stick to principle and make a statement that eventually benefits all.


     


    Otherwise, Crapple and other degenerates will know they can piggyback off the work of others with little or no repercussions.


     


    Jeez, it irks the hell out of me when the legal system would rather people exchange money and not resolve the injustice that happened.
  • Reply 20 of 103
    ronboronbo Posts: 669member


    One party has poured time and treasure into innovation. One side has copied meticulously and then lied shamelessly... and continues to lie shamelessly. What peace comes of this? 


     


     


    Is she grandstanding?

Sign In or Register to comment.