Apple, Samsung Patent Infringement Mediation Talks Fail

| News

The patent infringement mediation Apple and Samsung agreed to has apparently come and gone, and turned out to be a bust. The CEOs from both companies met last week, but weren't able to reach an agreement, which means they'll be squaring off in court this March for their second U.S. patent infringement trial.

Apple and Samsung fail to reach agreement ahead of patent infringement trialApple and Samsung fail to reach agreement ahead of patent infringement trial

The two companies agreed to meet after Judge Lucy Koh pushed for the talks. Judge Koh oversaw the first infringement trial where Samsung was found to have infringed on a long list of Apple patents, while a jury said Apple wasn't infringing on any of Samsung's.

Judge Koh will be presiding over their second infringement trial that includes mobile devices not listed in the first. Just like the previous trial, both companies are accusing the other of using their mobile device patents without proper licensing.

The idea behind the talks was to try to reach a resolution that would keep the new trial from moving forward. Apple and Samsung had a February 19 deadline for their talks, but it looks like they finished early.

News of the failed discussions first appeared in Korean news, according to The Verge. Sources said Samsung CEO JK Shin isn't flying to the U.S. next week for talks, indicating they already happened and failed.

Samsung submitted the list of witnesses it plans to call to the court on Thursday that includes Apple's senior vice president of worldwide marketing Phil Schiller, as well as vice president of iPhone and iOS marketing Greg Joswiak, and former senior vice president of iOS software Scott Forsall.

The new infringement trial is set to start in March, and if it follows the same path as the first trial, will turn out poorly for Samsung.

[Some image elements courtesy Shutterstock]

Sign Up for the Newsletter

Join the TMO Express Daily Newsletter to get the latest Mac headlines in your e-mail every weekday.

3 Comments

wab95

Jeff:

I suspect that these talks were never invested with anything more than demonstrable compliance and due diligence with court recommended action, rather than any hope of resolution, however remote. I can imagine the meeting between TC and JK Shin in Seoul being characterised by something like, ‘It’ll be a cold day in hell…’ and lasting all of 5 minutes before TC and company left the building to get lunch and fly home.

Samsung’s has so far not only been a losing strategy, but one characterised by either naiveté (which I don’t buy for a picosecond) or a cynical attempt at obfuscation from which they hoped to be the beneficiary of doubt. Unless they take a radically different tack heading into this next round, the headwinds they face are more likely than not to leave them disappointed, convicted and liable.

mhikl

Personally, I was shocked, “Shocked” I tell you.

Well, not really. That Slimy would admit its dastardly ways? That Apple would say, “Ah shucks. We knew you were really good guys all along.”
Doesn’t take precocious to figure that one out.

However, I was the only one not to cry over the shooting of Bambi’s mum in third grade- her voice was too old lady-like, or the nonsense that a fat little girl could chase a rabbit down a hole in the ground, Grade Four.
Fat Marnie looked too much like Alice for my liking.

However, did have a soft spot for Captain Hook, Grade Five, so I guess I had some element of fantasy. (Hook was my Hallowe’en ideal, but not out of choice. With six kids, mum didn’t have time for much originality in costumes and I claimed her old black coat and a bent coat hanger until stealing from my younger brothers was less embarrassing than begging from door to door. Besides, my voice cracked and no one wanted to pay me to sing.)

Sagacious Patent Analytics

So does that mean Samsung has to pay a hefty sum to Apple for infringement?

Log-in to comment