x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Samsung turned down Apple's offer of an olive branch 1 year ago

Samsung turned down Apple's offer of an olive branch 1 year ago

Posted: , by Alan F.

Tags :

Samsung turned down Apple's offer of an olive branch 1 year ago
Redacted court documents discovered on Saturday revealed that in November 2010, Apple offered to Samsung a license for its scrolling feedback patent. Eventually, IBM and Nokia took up Apple on the offer. This is the same patent that Apple has used as a club to wack HTC in the head with a lawsuit. Before agreeing to a cross-licensing deal, Nokia also had been sued over the infringement of this Apple patent.

The redacted court documents

The redacted court documents

Apple later sued Samsung over violating this patent as despite having a good idea that it would prevail in court, Apple tried to offer an olive branch to Samsung by offering them the license, but was turned down. Possible reasons why the Korean company would just say no to Apple include the latter asking too high a price for the license, or perhaps Samsung thought that with its countersuits, Apple would feel pressured and give in. Lastly, it just might have been that Samsung thought it was innocent and did not feel that it infringed on the patent.

What is interesting about the discovery of this deal was that it is known that the late Steve Jobs had threatened to finish off Android, and yet, by offering a deal to Samsung, Jobs had had his foot on the neck of the OS and then lifted his leg. The patent involved is number 7,469,381 which covers the scrollback feature of iOS that displays a background "texture" when a user scrolls beyond the edge of a web site or document. Apple enlisted this patent when it sought a ban against the sale of Galaxy products in the U.S. which was turned down as we reported.

source: TheVerge via electronista

53 Comments
  • Options
    Close






posted on 03 Dec 2011, 22:21 7

1. Dr.Phil (Posts: 1325; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)


November 2010 was one year ago not two years ago. Unless I am missing something...

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 02:06 6

12. The_Miz (Posts: 1496; Member since: 06 Apr 2011)


So in addition to some of the tripe they put in their articles, PA apparently can't differentiate time as well.

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 02:30

15. Dr.Phil (Posts: 1325; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)


Yeah I see they updated it though.

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 09:04

23. networkdood (Posts: 6330; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)


Page 2 still reads 2 years ago.

posted on 03 Dec 2011, 22:23 12

2. hepresearch (unregistered)


Apple: We will give you, Samsung, an opportunity to have our blessing to make Android products if you make us (cough) richer (cough)... ahem... more wealthy.

Samsung: Why should we bother?

Apple: Why not? We would not want to have to see you suffer if you pursue Android device designs... without our blessing. Savvy?

Samsung: Ummmm... haha... we see. Have a nice day!

Apple: Aww... what a shame. It would be terrible if we had to watch you pay some lawyers in a couple years... they really like getting paid a lot, ya know.

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 03:02 1

16. paulyyd (Posts: 338; Member since: 08 Jan 2011)


sweet story bro

posted on 03 Dec 2011, 22:40 5

3. cyborg009 (Posts: 112; Member since: 17 Sep 2011)


If apple followed the motto to Live n let others Live peacefully, we would be seeing a much drastic n awesomer technological revolution to what Lawyers r seeing now but on their front !!! .. Law schools must be having focus on teaching abt patent wars "How to get rich, the fast way" !!

posted on 03 Dec 2011, 23:24 6

4. Tech.Guru (Posts: 4; Member since: 01 Dec 2011)


When it come to copying design & technology all the manufacturers are same. We can not tell Samsung is innovative than Apple or Apple is better than HTC. It looks like all in the same boat. But in recent time Samsung is more into copying thing from other manufacturer.

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 00:28 7

5. SlimSoulja86 (Posts: 660; Member since: 03 Nov 2011)


Tech Guru, are you really a tech guru? I doubt... LOL

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 10:51 1

25. SlimSoulja86 (Posts: 660; Member since: 03 Nov 2011)


lol, just for the fun of it....
http://www.mobilitysite.com/2007/02/iphone-stolen-name-stolen-design/

posted on 05 Dec 2011, 06:06

41. elliotsilva (Posts: 13; Member since: 04 Sep 2011)


"We consider that Apple copycat the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006. We take that to mean ‘Apple stole our idea." omg they predicted the future!

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 00:34 4

6. Firedrops (Posts: 249; Member since: 06 Sep 2011)


Even my feature phone from 2005 had this "scrollback" feature described by PA. Don't even remember the model.

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 04:40

18. E.N. (Posts: 2610; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)


Yes because we totally had touch screen phones with full html websites back in 2005. Its actually really annoying how so many manufacturers copy even to the nitty gritty details. I definitely noticed Samsung's addition of the scroll back when watching videos of the galaxy products. Why are companies still copying a phone that has been supposedly outdated for years now? So lame Samsung

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 11:09 2

26. jbash (Posts: 345; Member since: 07 Feb 2011)


actually we did, I had an hp touchscreen(with full html web) that ran windows mobile. It also had the texture background as well, probably why apple never seeked anything from MS

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 19:08

30. E.N. (Posts: 2610; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)


Feature phone? Really? Any images or links?

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 23:51

33. geedup (banned) (Posts: 74; Member since: 01 Dec 2011)


Fandroids are delusional. I can't believe they would compare phones 2005 to an iPhone.

posted on 05 Dec 2011, 01:09

37. hepresearch (unregistered)


Yeah, I can not believe it either... the iPhone in 2007 was so awesome... not like anything from 2005... it is so incomparable that it is darn near impossible that the iPhone would stoop to running on either GSM or CDMA networks... they were so mundane... it must have had LTE even back then because it was sooooo amazing! Yeah, absolutely nothing like it. It can not have been actually made of anything plastic, either... would have been too comparable to some other phones from 2005 if it had actually had plastic parts in it. All those Fandroids out there, even the ones who do not have an Android phone yet... well, that really means anyone who does not have an iPhone (do not even try to relativate with me! I refuse your interpretation of my statements!)... must be absolutely delusional.

posted on 05 Dec 2011, 15:45

47. stealthd (unregistered)


No you didn't.

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 00:54

7. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


IMO, the primary reason that Judge Koh declined Apple's request for an injunction against Sammy was due to her concern the patent would be ruled to be invalid. Sammy probably came to the same conclusion (patent would be ruled invalid) when they were offered a license to the patent. Just because Steve had a bunch of patents that he could hold over the various industry players, doesn't mean he would have prevailed.

Guess what - Apple is not batting 100% in their patent enforcement litigation efforts.

Stay tuned. Cook up some more popcorn. In the end, Apple's attempts to enforce its patents (patterns?) is going to be a mixed bag. Which will lead to a business decision to cut more cross-licensing deals and it will be time to move on and focus on the business of making better smartphones than everyone else.

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 02:10

14. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)


Hey DxD -- when is ATT going to start their hostile takeover of TMobile USA since you are the guru of business speak???

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 08:51 4

21. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


hey look, another off topic and pointless attack. go figure.

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 13:29 2

27. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


I really think that ardent took a financial hit on the AT&T-Mobile effort. He has been such a sourpuss ever since. Maybe he should change his ID to strident1? (Dunno)

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 23:52

34. geedup (banned) (Posts: 74; Member since: 01 Dec 2011)


I agree Apple will win some and lose some. That's how it goes with patents. What's annoying is the people that want to attack everything Apple. Here we see they attempted a license deal. Pretty reasonable.

posted on 05 Dec 2011, 08:23

42. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


taco,
did you read the story at all?

just wondering

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 01:21 5

8. networkdood (Posts: 6330; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)


How about a patent for how the on/off button works on a phone? Or, a patent on how someone speaks into the phone? How ridiculous is this going to get? Stay tuned....

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 08:07

20. robinrisk (unregistered)


motorola has one that is a system and method to display the time on a phone. Talk about dumb patents.

However, they are not using that patent to sue OEMs out of existence.

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 01:40 4

9. Ikvnik (Posts: 14; Member since: 01 Dec 2011)


Stupid apple and their silly patents

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 01:42 2

10. Ikvnik (Posts: 14; Member since: 01 Dec 2011)


How about one for how your thumb presses then home key. Rubbish

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 01:42

11. Ikvnik (Posts: 14; Member since: 01 Dec 2011)


How about one for how your thumb presses the home key. Rubbish

posted on 04 Dec 2011, 02:08 2

13. jibraihimi (Posts: 764; Member since: 29 Nov 2011)


Droid_x_dough, I thnk, u didn't read the transcript of Judge Koh's hearing completely.......... She refused to give injunction primarily due to the reason that, Apple was unable to prove that the sale of Galaxy series devices will cost apple some irrepairable damages...... Though she does observed that samsung product are infringing on Apple's patents.............. I thnk Samsung shud hav done the deal with Apple nd licensed their patent, if price was high then there is always sumthng called 'negotiation' nd ny ways Apple is biggest customer of Samsung, becoz most of the parts used in their iproducts are manufactured or licensed by Samsung........... Most of Android device manufacturers are already paying Microsoft, so thr was no big deal in it............

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories