Apple's Tim Cook met with Samsung CEO in failed attempt to resolve patent dispute

Posted:
in General Discussion edited February 2014
Apple CEO Tim Cook and Samsung mobile chief Shin Jong-Kyun met in the U.S. last week but were unable to hammer out an agreement that would end their long-running intellectual property battle, Korean media reported on Friday.

Apple v Samsung


Samsung would not confirm the outcome of the meeting or if it actually took place, according to ZDNet Korea. A U.S. court had ordered the two parties to meet and discuss a settlement in advance of a new trial set to start next month.

Lawyers from both sides met Jan. 6 to work out a framework for the mediation session. Under that agreement, the session was to take place by Feb. 19 while each party's CEO and three to four in-house counsel were to be in attendance.

This would not be the first time executives from two of the world's largest electronics companies met but failed to make peace. Cook previously met with Shin and Samsung Vice Chairman Choi Gee-sung in July of 2012 in advance of the landmark Apple v. Samsung case which resulted in an award of nearly $1 billion after Samsung was found to infringe on Apple's intellectual property.

The new trial, set to begin March 31, looks to build on the previous case as the companies will argue over newer products like Apple's iPhone 4S and Samsung's Galaxy Nexus III. Apple marketing vice president Phil Schiller and former iOS chief Scott Forstall are both once again slated to stand as witnesses alongside outside experts and various other executives from both companies.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 34
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,408member
    Wasn't apples new terms really simple? Stop copying us?
  • Reply 2 of 34
    Samsung did not want that clause in the settlement agreement.
  • Reply 3 of 34

    SameDung loves to lose.  Go Tim!

  • Reply 4 of 34

    I can't even imagine what the two of them actually talked about being in the same room.  I'd be surprised if they actually tried to have a constructive discussion.

     

    It was probably just both of them chatting about trivial stuff or ignoring each other.

  • Reply 5 of 34
    Tim: Pay what you owe us, or you're heading for a world of hurt.

    The Other Guy: No.

    Meeting adjourned.
  • Reply 6 of 34
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,687member
    Don't be surprised if Sammy's CEO copies Tim's look.
  • Reply 7 of 34

    ~~This would not be the first time executives from one of the world's largest electronic company called Apple, and the other, one of the world's largest electronic copyist company called Samsung ...

  • Reply 8 of 34
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,980member
    jungmark wrote: »
    Don't be surprised if Sammy's CEO copies Tim's look.

    I guess you missed the pictures TS posted of a Samsung exec wearing the same suit/shirt/tie combo as Tim Cook. I literally laughed out loud.
  • Reply 9 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by emig647 View Post



    Wasn't apples new terms really simple? Stop copying us?

     

    They can't agree to those terms, that's cutting off the hand that feeds you your 'original designs'

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Disturbia View Post

     

    ~~This would not be the first time executives from one of the world's largest electronic company called Apple, and the other, one of the world's largest electronic copyist company called Samsung ...


     

    ..so Samsung called Apple, and Google called Samsung?

     

     

    Courts have already ruled mostly for Apple in these cases, so if a resolution wasn't reached, Apple was either asking for too much, or Samsung is just going to factor in these these $1B rulings as part of the expense to build phones. Unless the courts start to ban products in a timely manner, Samsung mobile will still make multi-billions every quarter

  • Reply 10 of 34
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,562member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by techguy911 View Post

     

    I can't even imagine what the two of them actually talked about being in the same room.  I'd be surprised if they actually tried to have a constructive discussion.

     

    It was probably just both of them chatting about trivial stuff or ignoring each other.


    i was thinking the same thing, when they said they both sides would have inside legal counsel there. It was probably more of the lawyers whispering things in their ears.

     

    I would like to believe if Steve was still around, he would have told the lawyers to leave the room and Steve would have just explain how he was going to use his $160B to burn them.

  • Reply 11 of 34
    Headline says they meet, then you keep on reeding and it says they havent confirmed the meeting?
  • Reply 12 of 34
    emig647 wrote: »
    Wasn't apples new terms really simple? Stop copying us?

    And look what they did: they did something contrary to what Apple wants; they didn't want to resolve the patent dispute¡ Quite original.
  • Reply 13 of 34

    It's easy for simpleminded folks in the peanut gallery to cheer and jeer. But is this really so simple anymore? How do you define copying and not copying in a world where every smartphone looks similar from 10 ft away? There must be more to an agreement than "don't copy". Details, details, details ...

  • Reply 14 of 34
    maestro64 wrote: »
    I would like to believe if Steve was still around, he would have told the lawyers to leave the room and Steve would have just explain how he was going to use his $160B to burn them.

    By doing what, exactly? Taking away all their orders? That wouldn't even make a dent in their revenue. I can't dream up what you expect Steve to do, hypothetically.
  • Reply 15 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post





    By doing what, exactly? Taking away all their orders? That wouldn't even make a dent in their revenue. I can't dream up what you expect Steve to do, hypothetically.

     

    Don't kill the superhero vibe, man.

  • Reply 16 of 34
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,687member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    I guess you missed the pictures TS posted of a Samsung exec wearing the same suit/shirt/tie combo as Tim Cook. I literally laughed out loud.

    I remember it now. Haha. What will Sammy copy next?
  • Reply 17 of 34
    It's easy for simpleminded folks in the peanut gallery to cheer and jeer. But is this really so simple anymore? How do you define copying and not copying in a world where every smartphone looks similar from 10 ft away? There must be more to an agreement than "don't copy". Details, details, details ...

    They look similar because they've copied the leader...Apple.
  • Reply 18 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post





    By doing what, exactly? Taking away all their orders? That wouldn't even make a dent in their revenue. I can't dream up what you expect Steve to do, hypothetically.

    instead of buying Apple shares, they can buy samsung shares which are a lot cheaper, gain controlling interest, get a board position and make puppet out of them. Or give the money to Icahn and let me works his miracles on Samsung.

  • Reply 19 of 34
    maestro64 wrote: »
    instead of buying Apple shares, they can buy samsung shares which are a lot cheaper, gain controlling interest, get a board position and make puppet out of them. Or give the money to Icahn and let me works his miracles on Samsung.

    'kay. If you think that'll work, cool.
  • Reply 20 of 34
    emig647 wrote: »
    Wasn't apples new terms really simple? Stop copying us?

    Yes, but Samsung can't lose face. Admitting to copying is something they cannot do. They cannot just move on. So they play the FRAND/SEP abuse game. Badly.
Sign In or Register to comment.