Apple, Samsung settlement talks fail: Next stop, trial

Apple, Samsung settlement talks fail: Next stop, trial

Summary: Samsung and Apple have failed in their talks to resolve their differences over patents. The next stop -- unless the judge orders another round of talks -- is the court room.


Despite Apple and Samsung's chief executives being forced by a court order into a room for two days, there were still hopes the two companies could patch things up and sort out their legal differences ahead of a trial date.

As expected, however, the two chief executives couldn't push past their differences, according to a Samsung official speaking to the Korea Times.

Ding, ding, next stop: the case goes to trial.

It should probably come as no surprise that the two failed to work things out. Less than a fortnight ago, a U.S. appeals court overturned a lower court's decision giving Apple the green light to seek a ban on Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet in the United States.

Had Apple held off, it would have sent the strongest signal yet that the settlement could work. But Apple being Apple, it went ahead and sought the ban.

Assuming U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh, who ordered the settlement talks in the first place, doesn't decide on recalling the two companies back to the discussion table for a second time, it can be reasonably assumed a lengthy and costly trial is the final option.

Samsung chief executive Choi Gee-sung, along with mobile division chief Shin Jong-kyun, met with Apple boss Tim Cook and his legal team in California for nine hours on Monday and seven hours on Tuesday.

Samsung reportedly demanded Apple pay royalties for using its wireless transmission patents, and Apple continued to claim Samsung had copied its design in its Galaxy line of products.

Having said that, Apple already had the upper hand. Samsung would have likely gone into the talks to negotiate its position, knowing that Apple can pay for a license to Samsung's patents --- which must be licensed under fair and reasonable terms --- while Apple can withhold access to its own patents.

The court-ordered settlement talks were conjoured up in the hope that the two companies could resolve their respective claims over the two-day session. Though the two were never likely going to find a resolution outside a court room, it was hoped an unlucky jury could be spared the apparent hell of sitting through potentially weeks or months of battling in one of the most complex and confusing patent cases the U.S. courts has seen in years.

The case will go to trial on June 27 July 30, according to AllThingsD.


Topics: Hardware, Apple, Laptops, Mobility, Samsung, Tablets

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • is this still relevant?

    Are they only trying to get the first gen galaxy tab 10.1 banned? With the release of the galaxy tab 2 10.1 does it even matter?
    • I'm with you

      Not seeing the relevancy any more.
      Looking at a Galaxy S2, Galaxy S2 Skyrocket, iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4.
      Sorry folks, the Samsung and Apple don't even look like they belong in the same genus.
      As for the Tab 10.1 ...... huh? it is like a couple of models old now......
      • Galaxy S is only minor part of Samsung's smartphones

        Samsung celebrated sale of only 20+ million of Galaxy S2 after year of sales. Other Samsung smartphones, which still look like iPhone copycats, sell like three times more than that.

        And even SGS series have the packaging, cable, power charger, instruction, some icons and UI elements, a Siri clone, and even promo web page layout copied from Apple.

        So the relevancy stays, alas.


  • apple will fail just as oracle did

    the people demand that android should be left alone.
    The Linux Geek
    • Either

      You're a demented zdnet blogger trying to drum up page hits, or you're a security expert of the genius level of Bott but you're having an off millennia.

      Why don't you amuse yourself pondering the apparent ban some company has got in place (or at least in process) of XBox's coming into the USA or some other other world country?
      • It's an opinion

        Let him/her/it have it.

        Let's see.... popcorn, cold brew, watching the "Ban It Game" on my big ol' monster LCD ....... :D
    • Speak for yourself...

      You do not speak for "the people".
      • I speak for the jury

        since they have just agreed with me.
        The Linux Geek
    • Oracle vs. Google is NOT Samsung vs. Apple

      So no, they have not agreed with you in this particular case.
  • When you can't innovate

    [i]But Apple being Apple, it went ahead and sought the ban.[/i]

    • Or for maximum effect do both.... Like Apple:)

      Whats the point of innovation if you can't protect it?

      Pagan jim
      James Quinn
      • Please tell me...

        ...what Apple has done since Woz left the company that was an innovation, instead of simply cookbooking someone else's ideas?
      • @ Pagan Jim

        Whats the point of innovating if your going to get sued every time you take a breath?
        For example: Small company A comes up with a great new product completely original. Market it and begin to make some decent money. Evil patent troll company B sues because it resembles one the patent it holds. Evil company B will likely win because they have the bucks to keep it in legal system. ALL the big boys like MS, Apple, Google play this way.
      • you don't have to innovate

        if you have $100B in cash on hand and can hire all the lawyers you like - Apple does not stop at ideas, they steal names too - Apple, iPhone, iPad. then agree to not go into the music business then start iTunes (if if looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck - it must be duck unless you have enough money and can get into the US court system).

        All smart phones seem to look alike too - all are rectangular with rounded corners, about the same size and weight, as are tablets - and if you cannot tell that a tablet is an iPad - turn it over - if it has an apple with a bite out if it - it's an iPAd, otherwise it is someone else's - does not take much brain power to figure that one out.
      • indeed

        [i]and if you cannot tell that a tablet is an iPad - turn it over - if it has an apple with a bite out if it - it's an iPAd, otherwise it is someone else's - does not take much brain power to figure that one out.[/i]

        I've been thinking along the same lines, and I really wish I could find a number... How many people bought a Samsung Galaxy Tab thinking it was an iPad? If that number is greater than 5 I'd be shocked and awed.
      • @fairportfan: If you have to ask that question...

        ... you really haven't been paying attention to technology, have you?
      • @Badgered: There's a problem with that argument

        What if that 'badge' is covered? Say, by a protective case?
  • new word


    anything to do with Bonjour?
  • Completely ridiculous...

    It's like these companies are being run by 5 year olds. Seriously, how much more are you going to keep investing into legal expenses. Neither of these companies has won anything in court that could give them a competitive edge.

    This money should be invested in R&D, product development & marketing. Shareholders should be furious.