Judge tells Apple and Samsung to "get along"

by Nicole Kobie | Tuesday 21 June 2011

Patent case between tablet rivals may be resolved out of court.

A judge in a patent case between Apple and Samsung has asked the firms to "get along" and resolve the dispute out of court.

Apple's legal claims put to the test: Just how similar is the Samsung Galaxy S II to the Apple iPhone 4?

Apple sued Samsung in April, saying its rival "slavishly" copied the design of its tablets and phones. A judge has ordered Samsung to show its future design plans to Apple, and Samsung has requested the same from Apple.

While the two firms are fierce competitors - with the Samsung's Galaxy II courting the same type of customers as the iPhone 4 - Apple buys billions of dollars worth of chips from Samsung. That close relationship prompted Judge Lucy Koh to ask the pair in court: "Can't we all just get along here?"

Judge Koh suggested the two firms try to resolve the issue outside of court, according to a report from Reuters. "I will send you with box of chocolates, whatever," Koh said.

Apple's lawyer Harold McElhinny said high-level executives at both firms had the same idea: "They are in fact meeting and talking."

The case is just one of many such lawsuits amongst mobile makers, with Apple last week agreeing to pay Nokia a settlement over handset patents.

This article originally appeared at pcpro.co.uk

See more about: judge | tells | apple | samsung | get along

Readers of this article also read...

CodeMaster 21 June 2011	I, for one, am glad that there are other similar phone alternatives available to people who don't want to jump on the Apple bandwagon. Comment made about the PC & Tech Authority article: Judge tells Apple and Samsung to "get along"? Patent case between tablet rivals may be resolved out of court. What do you think? Join the discussion.
photohounds 21 June 2011	I too am very glad there are alternatives to ONE company pretending they invented everything and making us all pay for a deceitfully concocted, illusionary 'privilege'. Tech development would be absolutely nowhere without the work of OTHER PIONEERS before them. It is about time these bullies (especially thiose who actually make very little hardware themselves) acknowledged that fact. What's this about? A phone that is rectangular with a large clear touch screen and minimal buttons can be made by only one maker? What a joke! (LG were first with the Prada anyway, even winning a design award) Next, TV makers will be suing weach other for just as ridiculous a premise. A big rectangular screen? I 'invented' that. NO I did .... no it was ME (tussle ensues in the kindergarten playground).
rubaiyat 21 June 2011	What utter total rubbish photohounds. Apple does not claim to have invented everything. Honestly you are on this side of incoherent.
photohounds 21 June 2011	Oh really, the claim that someone is copying them is the most laughable bit of litigation I've seen from an otherwise SMART company, and brilliant marketers. Even the Judge implies it is stupid (read "I will send you a box of chocolates, whatever" above). What do you think she's saying? The claim that someone has copied a rectangular box with a flat glass screen is ridiculous as is attempting to defend this idiocy. The Big A DO claim to have 'invented' the shape and seek to imply that no one else is 'original'. FACT: the Big A product looks almost exactly like the preceding LG Prada (a device about I give not one hoot either). Clever marketing has the fan boys believing them and defending their idiotic and indefensible claim. Great publicity for Samsung - probably .... time to think about something that actually matters? maybe: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13796479 ??
rubaiyat 22 June 2011	You are broken record on this photohounds. The only source of "claiming Apple invented everything" is you. Apple licences lots of technology. It also creates an enormous amount itself and like everyone in high technology and design tries to hang onto their IPR. Sometimes they test the extent of the IPR. Apple and Samsung will spar over this until they reach the inevitable agreement. That's they way it is done these days. However there is a reason just about every laptop now looks like a Macbook and every tablet looks like an iPad and most smart phones look like iPhones. That is because the "obvious" was not so "obvious" until Apple made it so. Just as happened when Uhgg invented the wheel. After all there had been thousands of years of logs preceding it. There would have been a "Myheadhurts" Rockpaintingdogs grumbling resentfully at the back of the cave over the troglodytic chics fawning all over "Smartarse" Uhgg as well. Human nature doesn't change.
photohounds 11 August 2011	Actually, it is apple who are the broken record, Many are disgusted with the transparent bully boy tactics, shake their heads and say nothing. Even the Judge (above) says appears to think this 'case' is frivolous
rubaiyat 11 August 2011	It took you a month and a half to come up with that ?
photohounds 11 August 2011	rubaiyat wrote: It took you a month and a half to come up with that ? Nope, perhaps I can fight stupidity with stupidity - seems to work with fire, or so they say ... ](*,)
amcmo 12 August 2011	Photo, So you have decided that the judge telling them to attempt a settlement says it's frivilous. Possibly she can see it will end in an agreement before it gets to judgement, as many do, so wants to save herself and the court that time. Strange how you have decided it's Apple that's being the bully and not your beloved Samsung that's being the copyist. Comes back to the fact that if you have spent years and 10's of millions of dollars developing: a: the phone that really changed the smartphone market (forget your precious Prada, it was a dog and didn't light the market) b: the tablet that finally generated a tablet market (despite everyone else swearing it would be a flop) You have a right to defend your innovation and your market. Strange how once both the iPhone and iPad became hits, everyone had their 'copy' rushed through development. Just because you have decided it's Apple in the wrong does not make it so, no matter how many times you say it. I can see where Apple are comming from, I would defend any of our patents against copiers. Personally I struggle with some of the statements I have heard from both sides, however not being an international patent law specialist, I will wait for an outcome. In the meantime, I won't brand Samsung a copier, nor Apple a bully.
photohounds 12 August 2011	Well, she offered to buy them a box of chocolates. Seems to me that isn't a large bribe to keep this stupid issue out of court. Perhaps if she offered a jumbo jet as appeasement would tell us is isn't more than a stupid spat? Fighting stupidity with stupidity. Monoculture is what they all want, it is in all our interests if we can deny companies that. Remember WinDos when Apple was on its knees? Why do anything - we have the market?
amcmo 12 August 2011	I wouldn't read too much into the box of chocs. A case of a judge thinking that too many cases end up in court, when the party that knows they have crossed the line should fess up and pay, while the other party should agree to reasonable terms, not screw them silly. I don't agree they all want monoculture - that is unachievable regardless of how many patent lawyers you have. What they do want is to maintain their competitive advantage - that's business! Another fact of business life that any company that wishes to stay in business has to learn is NEVER just give up market share, no matter how much you have. Let a competitor gain sufficient traction and get a leap on you and suddenly you're the one fighting to survive. (Quark??) Apple haven't gone after a large number of smartphones, just a number that cross specific lines from what I can see. A guage of what levels Apple will go to may be the new HP tablet. HP seem to have gone about it from their own angle with enough differentiation. Let's see what happens there.
photohounds 13 August 2011	Sure - time will tell, but surface appearance is frivolous, there are many forms of innovation. See the suppliers dry up if litigation prevents them from producing any of their own product WITHOUT the apple,brand on it ... The goose that lays the golden egg, may just stop laying for apple.
amcmo 15 August 2011	The only supplier that could happen with is Samsung (GL possibly, though much less significant), and they'd be downright stupid to walk away from how many billions a year? Actually, if Samsung did, there are any number of alternative suppliers knocking at Apple's door. Apple is the goose that lays the golden eggs for the suppliers, keeping their production lines running at full capacity.
photohounds 7 November 2011	All this APPublicity has worked very well FOR Samsung. They could not buy coverage approaching the media frenzy we've seen - not with a coupe of billion dollars in advertising. The effect of hypocritical bullies litigating with wild claims can be easily seen in the sales - (a form of voting - as fan boys USED to point out when apple was way ahead in sales and app count). Now of course it probably "doesn't count", the main reason (no matter how the facts are retro-rationalised) being that the boot is resides on the other foot now. There are of course, other feet vying to wear that boot as well. With nearly double the sales of their nearest rival, Samsung still 'need' to OEM to just ONE re-marketer? I pointed that out months ago and now I doubt that claim even more. It is curious that outside some fan boy circles, Samsung ARE considered an innovative company. It doesn't mean they invented everything that makes a difference to our lives - NO company can do that, and would amount to no more than hypocritical puffery as we see in current court cases. Samsung screen tech appears second to none (at least for now). Their research in flexible screens seems ahead of the pack as well. They were among the first to MAKE and market digital music players (copied as Apple did years later) from the ideas of others. They were apparently quality appliances nonetheless and a few colleagues still use them with their now tiny memory capacities) Also along with LG, they made the first glass slab, software driven touch phone -before that litigious company sprayed its claims about. Yes, the FIRST, a fact that no retro-justification can erase. Neither company were wildly successful, but the IDEA was there, ready yo copy and remarket. New tech: Doesn't matter HOW big a bendy phone is - not if you can roll the screen up or fold it, sit on it, drop - or replace it cheaply. These will be MUCH lighter than current phones if that’s important to you. When this tech takes off, the game will change due to innovation - forever. Y’see - the current style of slab phone probably has 5 years left at the vanguard of phone technology. Perhaps makers will need to ensure that these thing don’t fly away in a stiff breeze, though :-) Credit where it's due, I NEVER thought Samsung would arrive at this juncture, probably among so many reasons that I'm not their CEO :)
amcmo 7 November 2011	And Apple has also enjoyed massive publicity from the reports of Samsung slavishly copying their products. People other than Android fanboys see that there are amazing similarities. I haven't a clue how it's all going to end up, however at present Apple is 3 - zip up on Samsung in court. Perhaps Samsung is the bully trying to use their industrial might to simply steal their way into a market rather than innovate. Samsung may well be a Litle ahead in flexible screens, using someone else's invention. Let's face it, they are masters at refining a concept usually invented elsewhere. (AMOLED, LCD, FLEXIBLE SCREENS, ARM PROCESSORS, DRAM, FLASH, The list is a mile long) As long as they pay the licence fee's, that's what patents are all about. See Photo, 2sides to every argument, including your stuck-record on frivolous bully law suits. At this stage most courts don't agree with you.