x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Home
  • News
  • Any settlement offer from Apple to Samsung will likely include this deal breaker

Any settlement offer from Apple to Samsung will likely include this deal breaker

Posted: , by Alan F.

Tags:

Any settlement offer from Apple to Samsung will likely include this deal breaker
On March 31st, Apple and Samsung are scheduled to start the second patent trial between the two rivals. Judge Lucy Koh has sent both sides off to try to work out a settlement deal so as to avoid the headaches, mudslinging and sparring that took place during the first trial. And that was only what went on between the media! But in all seriousness, Judge Koh has ordered that both sides get together on or before February 19th.

If Apple does offer a settlement package, it will probably include an anti-cloning stipulation, something that HTC agreed to when it signed its deal with Apple. This provision would allow Apple to sue Samsung, even after a settlement is agreed to, if Apple feels that Samsung's design on a device resembles the design on an Apple device. One important part of the stipulation says that Apple could invoke this provision if Samsung's offending design could be easily avoided by a "designaround".

Samsung sees the anti-cloning provision as something that could get in the way of its goal of ruling the smartphone industry throughout the world. Samsung has been telling the court that Apple's settlement offers to it have not included an anti-cloning provision. As far as Apple's Chief Intellectual Property Counsel B.J. Watrous is concerned, Samsung's statements are incorrect. This issue is important because Apple's willingness to license its patents can actually hurt its chances to get an injunction issued in court. So Apple is trying to say that while it is working on a settlement, it isn't willing to give up everything. Samsung is saying that Apple never brought up the anti-cloning issue, trying to show Apple's willingness to license its patents. Ah, Law. Don't you love it?

For those who want to look at some actual court documents, we have Apple's reply in support of a permanent injunction against Samsung, below.
  



source: Scribd, FOSSPatents via AppleInsider

42 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 20 Jan 2014, 15:23 2

1. ihavenoname (Posts: 1456; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)


How long has this thing continued? I've forgot why they even are fighting.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 15:34 3

3. hung2900 (Posts: 808; Member since: 02 Mar 2012)


Yes, especially after a series of Apple's patent are reconsidered and dropped, and Samsung's design mostly are not rounded corner,

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 15:43 21

4. quesoesgrande (Posts: 217; Member since: 03 Aug 2011)


They are fighting because Apple feels threatened by Samsung. Obviously, Apple doesn't think that it can beat Samsung by creating new, innovative products. So, here we are.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 17:44 2

21. joey_sfb (Posts: 3012; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)


That's a 100 billon dollar questions. Samsung is a formidable foe but using lawsuit as leverage in never a good long term solution.

Apple have 100 billon dollars sitting doing nothing, I am sure it could be made to good use in R&D and other worthwhile investment like building their own silicon factories.

posted on 22 Jan 2014, 06:19

41. sgogeta4 (Posts: 392; Member since: 02 Feb 2011)


Why innovate when you can spend that money to sue.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 15:24 31

2. Planterz (Posts: 916; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)


Has anyone, other than Apple's lawyers, ever mistaken a Samsung device for an Apple device?

No?

Then go to hell, Apple.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 15:43 4

5. ajac09 (Posts: 1367; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)


and Iphonearena

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 16:02 7

8. eN16HTMAR3 (Posts: 111; Member since: 08 Oct 2013)


I agree. If you didnt notice at first glace you should be able to tell Android from iOS. If not, you shouldn't be using a smp.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 16:08 4

9. number29 (Posts: 185; Member since: 25 Jan 2013)


I don't think it's so much about mistaking one device for another, it's about profitting from someone elses work.

The iPhone hardware and software has a distinctive design and appearance. That took Apple a lot of time and money to develop. Following the release of the iPhone and it's success, Samsung then developed products that seemed to have an awful lot in common with Apple's distinctive design and appearance, and subsequently sold millions of them and made boat loads of money. Apple's contention is that Samsung's popularity and profits came about because their product so closely matched the iPhone design language that people who would have bought an iPhone instead went for a Samsung, because it was just like an iPhone, only cheaper. On this premise, Samsung have profitted and benefited massively from Apple's initial designs but haven't paid Apple a penny for the priviledge. This is what Apple is seeking to redress. In an ideal world, Samsung would have been banned from selling the infringing products from the get go so that they never were able to get the sort of leverage they now have on the market, but that ship has long since sailed. As such, the only recompense Apple can now hope for is monetary and an anti-cloning agreement to prevent Samsung from pulling the same sort of trick in the future.

Sadly, the plague of fanboyism often gets in the way of reasoned discussion on the matter, and usually results in the tables being turned because the only thing that matters to those people is that Apple burns a slow and horrible death in the firey pits of hell, no matter how valid their argument is. I've never quite understood why Apple are so often vilivied for trying to seek justice.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 16:25 8

11. tedkord (Posts: 4991; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


Apple has profited greatly from Samsung's radio IP in it's iPhone and haven't paid a penny for it. Without that tech, an iPhone wouldn't be a phone.

Fanboyism swings both ways, such that anything that resembles anything that Apple has done even if only in passing is considered copying.

posted on 21 Jan 2014, 13:02

35. number29 (Posts: 185; Member since: 25 Jan 2013)


You'd have a point if the IP you were talking about wasn't FRAND. Apple can profit as much as it wants from Samsung's FRAND patents without paying a penny because Samsung have agreed to let manufacturers use them. Disagreeing what counts as FRAND cannot and does not stop Apple from profitting from them. That is very different from Samsung profitting from something that they have no right to use in the first place.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 16:59 4

16. Ant34 (Posts: 193; Member since: 10 Aug 2013)


I completely disagree. Samsung is selling a lot of devices right now and no one right mind would mistake a Samsung phone for an iPhone. I'm still waiting for someone to come forward and say they bought the first galaxy because they mistook it for an iPhone.

Samsung has a big marketing budget and they throw a crap load of features/gimmicks into their phones and that's why their phones sell.

Lastly, Apple's big mistake was letting the iPhone be exclusive to AT&T. That gave Samsung and other Android manufacturers an opening in the market. I wasn't willing to change my carrier to get an iPhone.

posted on 21 Jan 2014, 13:04

36. number29 (Posts: 185; Member since: 25 Jan 2013)


Samsung got it's foodhold in the market precisely because it so closely mimicked the device people wanted. If Samsung were stopped dead in their tracks straight away, I seriously doubt they'd be anywhere near as succesful as they are now.

posted on 21 Jan 2014, 15:37

40. Ant34 (Posts: 193; Member since: 10 Aug 2013)


If you can't tell the difference between the Galaxy S and the iPhone you should check your vision. Second, all devices that shipped at that time had the same functions as the iPhone plus more (way more in Samsung's case). Third, the reason why the Galaxy S gained a foothold wasn't because of it's proximity to the iPhone but because of its next gen specs and the amoled screen. Samsung started the spec war with that phone. Lastly (and again), the AT&T exclusivity hurt the iPhone. I might have been an iPhone guy had it initially been available on Verizon.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 17:02 7

18. Topcat488 (Posts: 1164; Member since: 29 Sep 2012)


Iphone stole their design for LG Prada and didn't pay a penny so whats your point?
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/

@ Post#9 called "number29"

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 21:14

30. quakan (Posts: 1201; Member since: 02 Mar 2011)


Project Purple...enough said.

posted on 21 Jan 2014, 13:07

37. number29 (Posts: 185; Member since: 25 Jan 2013)


I don't think Apple stole their design from LG. Both phones were announced in the same month so it would be impossible for Apple to have developed a product so quickly (the average phone design and lead time is about 18 months). It took Samsung 3 years from the release of the iPhone to announce the Galaxy S; plenty of time to witness the success of the iPhone and then mimic it as closely as possible.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 19:01

26. DAMONORIBELLO (Posts: 93; Member since: 18 Mar 2012)


wait wait wait.....so you're saying that Samsung has copied the distinctive design and appearance of the Apple HARDWARE and SOFTWARE and then you go on to say that people bought the Samsung over the iPhone because the distinctive design and appearance of the Apple HARDWARE and SOFTWARE on the Samsung phones got their attention?

I call BS on that one.

BTW, have you put an "HTC First" phone next to an iPhone 5C lately? It's ironic that the HTC model is called FIRST!

posted on 21 Jan 2014, 13:12

38. number29 (Posts: 185; Member since: 25 Jan 2013)


I'm saying that Samsung's very close resemblance to the iPhone drew customers their way. It baffles me that people cannot see the resemblance between the iPhone and corresponding Galaxy S and Galaxy S2 models that followed. Combined, these two models solidified a base of users who would then go on to buy more Samsung smartphones in the future. Apple's claim is that these users would and should be iPhone users that Samsung unfairly poached, and that's what they sued (and won) damages for.

posted on 21 Jan 2014, 13:23

39. number29 (Posts: 185; Member since: 25 Jan 2013)


Actually, it doesn't baffle me that people cannot see the resemblance. Everyone can see the resemblance between the iPhone and Galaxy S and S2 models, and we all know that Samsung rode Apple's coattails. The issue is that some people cannot bring themselves to accept this.

posted on 22 Jan 2014, 06:21

42. sgogeta4 (Posts: 392; Member since: 02 Feb 2011)


Keep talking.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 15:56 1

6. Ant34 (Posts: 193; Member since: 10 Aug 2013)


This ongoing fight is making a lot of lawyers rich and increasing the price of devices over what amounts to frivolous patents.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 16:00 5

7. lyndon420 (Posts: 1772; Member since: 11 Jul 2012)


Anti cloning? Doesn't apple now own the rights to anything rectangular with rounded corners? Until apple steps up their game and starts coming up with something different, I don't see an end to their love of litigation coming anytime soon.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 16:17 1

10. number29 (Posts: 185; Member since: 25 Jan 2013)


And where does this iPhoneArena nonsense come from? All of the thumbed up comments in this thread are the anti-Apple posts. Surely that makes this AndroidArea?

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 16:29 3

12. tedkord (Posts: 4991; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


It comes from the perception that PhoneArena publishes with a pro Apple bent. And in the case of some authors here, it's blatantly true. But there are others who offset it, and overall I think PhoneArena is close to center. The postings by readers have zero to do with it.

Now if you want an Apple PR site, go to BGR.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 16:42 4

13. reckless562 (Posts: 871; Member since: 09 Sep 2013)


only kuz we like good, CUSTOMIZABLE, therefore open tech. i love the apple design. and their computers are OBVIOUSLY customizable, kuz its a damn computer. but their phones are jus TOYS, and Android phones ARE lil mini Computers. Android devices will do what u want it to, if u tell it to do it. Iphones?? maby you can ask Siri??? (Red vs Blue Caboose voice)

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 17:01 3

17. hapticg (Posts: 4; Member since: 12 Jan 2014)


ANDROID is the future while iOS is a bubble. Growth of Android will burst the iOS bubble soon and even the hardcore Apple fan will also jump the ship.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 22:18

31. roscuthiii (Posts: 1847; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)


While I agree with the sentiment... I think I have to conclude that it's just not the reality. PC/Windows has dominated the computer market for decades the same way Android now has a hold on the smartphone industry, yet Apple has still not only survived, but maintained a profitable business model.
I think they'll be around for a long while... but, that's good for competition so I'm all for it.

posted on 21 Jan 2014, 13:01

34. audiblenarcotic (Posts: 108; Member since: 16 Nov 2011)


Apple really only survived because Microsoft bank rolled them a ton of money so that they wouldn't have to claim bankruptcy. If not for Microsoft, Apple would have died long ago.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 18:17

23. PBXtech (Posts: 980; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


A lot of it is from people who are fed up with these stupid lawsuits.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 16:45 1

14. darkkjedii (Posts: 12054; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)


This trial is going to get really ugly

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 16:51

15. tedkord (Posts: 4991; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


You're like Kreskin! ;p

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 18:18

24. PBXtech (Posts: 980; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


Too late, already passed that point.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 17:10

19. kevkyle (Posts: 71; Member since: 21 Oct 2012)


Cloning?.....5 years ago a smidgen probability.

but now.....hhhmmm - nah

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 17:39 1

20. techaman (unregistered)


anti-cloning war this means everytime apple sales are down they will sue samsung any phone whats white or black or actual gold color

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 17:48

22. VZWuser76 (Posts: 1623; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)


So HTC signs this anti cloning agreement with Apple and the first phone they come out with is the HTC One, which looks more like the current iPhone than any previous HTC phone. Seems like a wasted clause to me. Either way, how is this a solution if it doesn't curb the amount of lawsuits they bring on each other? This whole thing seems like a giant farce to get the judge off their backs.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 18:40 2

25. tedkord (Posts: 4991; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


HTC is getting not being sued because they aren't a threat. Had the One taken off and HTC gained considerable market share, they'd have been hauled into court.

Secondly, the cross agreement got Apple access to enough LTE patents to avoid a thumping from Samsung, who hold a lot (and no, they aren't FRAND).

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 22:46

32. VZWuser76 (Posts: 1623; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)


The point I was trying to make was, the first time HTC produced a phone that even remotely resembled the iPhone, was after they agreed to this anti cloning clause. That doesn't seem odd to anyone?

Either way, from the sounds of this agreement, it won't curb any future lawsuits, it'll be business as usual, or in other words, pointless. It's only there to show they're trying. Apple knows Samsung's not going to go for it, but they can say they tried.

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 19:20

27. Killertech2099 (Posts: 143; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)


I wish i was a lawyer

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 19:22

28. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 6609; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)


i hope they both just drop the damn law suit. this is getting ridiculas

posted on 20 Jan 2014, 19:26

29. superduper (Posts: 151; Member since: 20 Oct 2013)


Samsung should be happy to sign the anti-cloning agreement if they have nothing to hide. But then they might need to scrap their forthcoming iOS 7 inspired UI...

posted on 21 Jan 2014, 11:12

33. ZayZay (Posts: 565; Member since: 26 Feb 2011)


Nope don't see an Apple on the back, and it has "Samsung" engraved on it, so it must be the iproduct I want.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories