Apple and Samsung Said to Resume Settlement Talks Over Patent Dispute

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
47,518
9,355



Apple and Samsung have reportedly resumed settlement negotiations over their ongoing patent-infringement dispute, according to The Korea Times. A source from the Korean Fair Trade Commission (FTC) told the newspaper that the two companies are in "working level discussion" about a potential deal, adding that Apple and Samsung are attempting to narrow differences over royalty payments.

Samsung still prefers to sign a comprehensive "cross-licensing" deal, allowing the world's biggest smartphone manufacturer to access all Apple's design-related, some standard-essential and commercial patents; while Apple is asking Samsung to pay over $30 per device for Samsung's patent violations, which Samsung thinks is "too much," said another Samsung official who is familiar with the issue.
The report also states that Samsung Mobile CEO Shin Jong-Kyun may fly to the United States to discuss patent issues with Apple CEO Tim Cook early next year. Last year, Cook met with Samsung CEO Choi Gee-Sung to discuss the subject, however, those talks reportedly failed because Samsung would not accept Apple's demand for patent royalties. Both companies also met face-to-face in Seoul earlier this year, but there was said to be "no indication" of an imminent agreement as the discussions failed to progress.

Apple and Samsung have been in a long, ongoing legal battle that started in 2011, with the first U.S. trial awarding $1 billion to Apple in 2012. However, a judge voided nearly half of that amount in March, with a jury in the damages retrial last month ruling that Samsung is to pay Apple $290 million for willfully violating multiple patents. A second infringement lawsuit between the two companies will also be held on March 31, 2014, with a separate injunction trial centering around Apple's call for a U.S. ban on Samsung products potentially preceding it.

Article Link: Apple and Samsung Said to Resume Settlement Talks Over Patent Dispute
 

JaySoul

macrumors 68030
Jan 30, 2008
2,617
2,754
S: No, you hang up. :)

A: No, you hang up! :p

S: No, you hang up!! :D

A: NO YOU HANG UP. :mad:
 

dBeats

macrumors 6502a
Jun 21, 2011
635
213
A cross-licensing deal usually doesn't mean "I get all your cool design patents and you get our standard essential patents that we should already supply through FRAND, and we just call it even."

Just call it day at $15 per device to Apple from Samsung on every device using touchWiz going forward. Samsung will be on some other platform soon enough. Call it a truce already Samsung, you lost. You have fought well with great honor, now shut up.
 

the8thark

macrumors 68040
Apr 18, 2011
3,993
873
A cross-licensing deal usually doesn't mean "I get all your cool design patents and you get our standard essential patents that we should already supply through FRAND, and we just call it even."

Just call it day at $15 per device to Apple from Samsung on every device using touchWiz going forward. Samsung will be on some other platform soon enough. Call it a truce already Samsung, you lost. You have fought well with great honor, now shut up.
samsung is like almost every business though. it will never willingly admit when it was in the wrong. So the only way to get what you deserve with samsung is through the legal system (hoping the legal system does a just and fair job on the day).
 

PacificBeach

macrumors regular
Aug 20, 2011
241
0
Sounds like Apple realized it needs Samsung too much, kinda hard to produce millions of MacBooks, MacBook Pros, iMacs, Mac minis, iPads and iPhones without Samsung providing internals,chips,ram,screens and etc.....
 

roadbloc

macrumors G3
Aug 24, 2009
8,785
211
UK
A cross-licensing deal usually doesn't mean "I get all your cool design patents and you get our standard essential patents that we should already supply through FRAND, and we just call it even."

Just call it day at $15 per device to Apple from Samsung on every device using touchWiz going forward. Samsung will be on some other platform soon enough. Call it a truce already Samsung, you lost. You have fought well with great honor, now shut up.
That is until Samsung discontinue the manufacturing of all the Apple devices they make. Samsung holds just as many cards as Apple in this. And if you ask me, the entire thing is hilarious.
 

rdlink

macrumors 68040
Nov 10, 2007
3,226
2,434
Out of the Reach of the FBI
That is until Samsung discontinue the manufacturing of all the Apple devices they make. Samsung holds just as many cards as Apple in this. And if you ask me, the entire thing is hilarious.
Samsung doesn't make any Apple devices, unless you count the ones they've blatantly copied. They make components that go into Apple devices. They make a tremendous amount of money producing and selling those components, and would not stop doing so unless they had to.

And Apple has been diversifying their supplier base, giving fewer contracts to Samsung for manufacturing components.

Finally, Samsung doesn't hold much in the way of legal cards. They are getting their butts kicked in every court these days, including in Korea. That's why they're at the table. Cook doesn't like the litigation, and he'll talk to Samsung all day long if they bring reasonable royalty payment concessions with them.
 

roadbloc

macrumors G3
Aug 24, 2009
8,785
211
UK
Samsung doesn't make any Apple devices, unless you count the ones they've blatantly copied. They make components that go into Apple devices. They make a tremendous amount of money producing and selling those components, and would not stop doing so unless they had to.
But doing so would certainly cause majour problems for Apple. If they were really feeling dickish, I'm sure they would do it out of sheer spite. It isn't as if Apple is the only company Samsung supplies for nor is consumer electronics the only pie they own significant margains of.
 

PacificBeach

macrumors regular
Aug 20, 2011
241
0
Samsung doesn't make any Apple devices, unless you count the ones they've blatantly copied. They make components that go into Apple devices. They make a tremendous amount of money producing and selling those components, and would not stop doing so unless they had to.

And Apple has been diversifying their supplier base, giving fewer contracts to Samsung for manufacturing components.

Finally, Samsung doesn't hold much in the way of legal cards. They are getting their butts kicked in every court these days, including in Korea. That's why they're at the table. Cook doesn't like the litigation, and he'll talk to Samsung all day long if they bring reasonable royalty payment concessions with them.
Samsung is the largest components/internals/screens/etc supplier in the world period, Apple tried to get away from Samsung, their other suppliers could not meet the supply or demand. Samsung is just too big unfortunately.
 

TMay

macrumors 68000
Dec 24, 2001
1,520
1
Carson City, NV
But doing so would certainly cause majour problems for Apple. If they were really feeling dickish, I'm sure they would do it out of sheer spite. It isn't as if Apple is the only company Samsung supplies for nor is consumer electronics the only pie they own significant margains of.
Let me know when Apple's lawyer's aren't involved in the contracts that Apple has Samsung sign. Most likely there are enforceable penalties for non-delivery.

That said, the whole conflict is overblown outside of the courtroom.
 

rmatthewware

macrumors 6502
Jul 22, 2009
493
126
But doing so would certainly cause majour problems for Apple. If they were really feeling dickish, I'm sure they would do it out of sheer spite. It isn't as if Apple is the only company Samsung supplies for nor is consumer electronics the only pie they own significant margains of.
If Samsung just stopped supplying Apple with components, they'd have a new CEO tomorrow. Losing Apple as a customer wouldn't kill them, but it would definitely hurt their profits.
 

PollyK

macrumors regular
Apr 18, 2013
197
0
Anyone who thinks Apple doesn't need Samsung is just wishful thinking. How long has this been going on? How many attempts has Apple made at moving away? Each time coming crawling back to the company that the loyalists say can't innovate. Just give up Apple, unlike the other companies you simply just buy out, Samsung is too big to push around. Just be thankful for all the years of superior quality parts and volume you've been supplied. The quality of these parts are one of the bigger reasons you've enjoyed such a reliable reputation. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
 

TMay

macrumors 68000
Dec 24, 2001
1,520
1
Carson City, NV
Samsung is the largest components/internals/screens/etc supplier in the world period, Apple tried to get away from Samsung, their other suppliers could not meet the supply or demand. Samsung is just too big unfortunately.
...and Apple's needs are great. Besides, it's always good to have second sources; examples would be the floods in Thailand and the tsunami in Japan.
 

0xyMoron

macrumors 6502
Oct 5, 2012
434
3
California
Anyone who thinks Apple doesn't need Samsung is just wishful thinking. How long has this been going on? How many attempts has Apple made at moving away? Each time coming crawling back to the company that the loyalists say can't innovate. Just give up Apple, unlike the other companies you simply just buy out, Samsung is too big to push around. Just be thankful for all the years of superior quality parts and volume you've been supplied. The quality of these parts are one of the bigger reasons you've enjoyed such a reliable reputation. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Really.. So Apple should bite the bullet and let Samsung rip off whatever they desire just because Apple's business relies heavily on Samsung hardware? So what if in the future Apple no longer needs Samsung and sues the hell out of them, who's side would you be on then? Large companies do not handle relationships the way small ones do, they could be having the largest legal battles in court and yet sleep in the same bed together every night, it's all about the money in the end and they both need each other.

Apple already got what it wanted though, Samsung has been marked with the stamp of shame, despite Samsung's superiority when it comes to other products but as far as Smartphone business goes, it's almost a standard now for everyone (or most people) to think that a lot of the features are a rip off and that's one major victory for Apple that will live on for a very long time.
 

fredaroony

macrumors 6502a
Aug 1, 2011
670
0
samsung is like almost every business though. it will never willingly admit when it was in the wrong. So the only way to get what you deserve with samsung is through the legal system (hoping the legal system does a just and fair job on the day).
Isn't Apple the master of this? You're holding it wrong!

----------

If Samsung just stopped supplying Apple with components, they'd have a new CEO tomorrow. Losing Apple as a customer wouldn't kill them, but it would definitely hurt their profits.
lol sure, you have any idea how big Samsung actually are?
 

Karma*Police

macrumors 68000
Jul 15, 2012
1,856
1,369
Sounds like Apple realized it needs Samsung too much, kinda hard to produce millions of MacBooks, MacBook Pros, iMacs, Mac minis, iPads and iPhones without Samsung providing internals,chips,ram,screens and etc.....
I interpreted it the other way. With Samsung losing in the courts, with Apple buying more components from Samsung's competitors, with Samsung's high end mobile sales flattening and under assault by Apple's carrier hopping strategy, and with an even bigger case looming, I would think it'd be in Samsung's best interest to settle with Apple, not the other way around.
 

philips

macrumors regular
Oct 14, 2004
148
0
Baden-Württemberg, Germany
Really.. So Apple should bite the bullet and let Samsung rip off whatever...
No matter how many times you repeat that, it wouldn't become any more substantial. Considering that the design with grid of icons and rounded corners is sooooo old, it is only the lazy US patent system which could ever granted those in the first place.

In a way, I wish Apple has copied some things from Samsung. Oh wait... they have - in iOS7.

It is really pathetic and saddening when people can't see the substance beyond the surface polish. Apple is known for the better designs. But it is the substance which always had set Apple products apart. But not anymore.

I still prefer how it was in the old days: Apple, an underdog, an engineering company, making premium products not for everybody. The times when the "Think Different" was taken seriously, not with irony.
 

kdarling

macrumors P6
Two observations:

Re: Chip sales.

Almost two years ago, Apple accounted for about 9% of Samsung Electronic's chip sales. Since then, Apple's move to other suppliers has dropped that portion to about 6% IIRC.

At first, this caused a slight hit to SE revenues. But then, as Apple moved to suck up the supplies from other manufacturers, the previous customers of those manufacturers have had to move over to Samsung to continue getting chips. That's likely better profits for Samsung, since those chip sales are not based on Apple quanitity discount lower prices.

Moreover, early this year, Samsung passed Apple as the world's biggest buyer of chips. So Samsung itself is becoming one of their own biggest customers.

Re: Cross licensing

Don't forget that HTC made a ten year deal with Apple for complete cross-licensing of all current and future utility patents.(*)

It's suspected that the license costs HTC $10 a device or less.

From what I've read, it appears that Samsung would rather fight to get as many of Apple's patents invalidated as possible, instead of rolling over and acknowledging them.

(*) Design patents are not included. Also, any HTC use of an Apple utility patent cannot look exactly the same. For example, HTC can use the slide-to-unlock patent as long as they use different graphics.
 
Last edited:

SockRolid

macrumors 68000
Jan 5, 2010
1,560
118
Almost Rock Solid
You have a link for that?

I found this that says they are increasing http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2573415
What? A link about Samsung's high-end smartphone sales flattening?
Oh yeah. I think I can find one or two. Here ya go:

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/business-news/samsung-logs-another-record-high-profit-on-smartphone-semiconductor-business/

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/06/only-one-third-of-samsungs-smartphone-sales-are-in-the-class-of-apples-iphone-aapl

And Samsung missed their high end smartphone sales goals.
And that got their investors in a panic:

Samsung Electronics to talk strategy with investors, skeptics
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/us-samsung-meeting-idUSBRE9830BM20130904

If that's too much clicking and reading for you, here's an excerpt from that Reuters story:

"Samsung's stock has been hit by weaker-than-expected sales of the Galaxy S4 smartphone, analyst downgrades, and investor concerns..."
 

springsup

macrumors 65816
Feb 14, 2013
1,105
804
That is until Samsung discontinue the manufacturing of all the Apple devices they make. Samsung holds just as many cards as Apple in this. And if you ask me, the entire thing is hilarious.
No they don't; stopping manufacturing would be an incredibly stupid move from Samsung's perspective.

1. It doesn't actually solve anything. It's just vindictive. The infringement suits wouldn't go Samsung's way just because they did this; in fact it could be seen as an admission of guilt (i.e. trying to put pressure on Apple because they can't win in court)
2. There would be punitive penalties in the supply contract. It would cost Samsung a lot of money.
3. It would irreparably damage Samsung's reputation as a component supplier. All of Samsung's other customers would take note: you can buy Samsung components, but then you're Samsung's bitch - they can steal whatever they want from you, and you have to let them win in all of the bazillion electronics markets in which they operate or they'll stop your supply.
4. It would probably be anticompetitive. Conglomerates like Samsung always run the risk of being broken up by the courts; would Korean courts have the guts to do this to Samsung? They wouldn't do it lightly, but in this extreme situation (which would also result in a lot of diplomatic pressure from the USA), it wouldn't be unthinkable.

Samsung doesn't make any Apple devices, unless you count the ones they've blatantly copied. They make components that go into Apple devices. They make a tremendous amount of money producing and selling those components, and would not stop doing so unless they had to.

And Apple has been diversifying their supplier base, giving fewer contracts to Samsung for manufacturing components.

Finally, Samsung doesn't hold much in the way of legal cards. They are getting their butts kicked in every court these days, including in Korea. That's why they're at the table. Cook doesn't like the litigation, and he'll talk to Samsung all day long if they bring reasonable royalty payment concessions with them.
It's a shame that Apple even has to accept royalties, and if I were CEO I wouldn't. Apple only survives while its products are unique. Giving Samsung a license would be tantamount to modern-day cloning. Like you say, Apple are winning in the courts all over the planet. Samsung are big and have lots of cash, so they're making sure they stall the process as long as they can. This is a case of "justice delayed is justice denied".

The lesson from the clones saga is simple: Apple licensed their unique software in order to generate quick cash, but doing that cannibalised their higher-margin hardware sales. These days computing is sufficiently advanced and these companies big and flush with cash; licensing the commercially valuable patents is not really very different from licensing away iOS itself.

This is especially true since we're talking about Samsung. We all know they have no shame, and we know that they do business by just making whatever people seem to want, making it cheaper, then delaying and stalling all efforts from the original rights holders to get justice. "Anti-cloning provisions" don't mean jack to a company like Samsung. They will find a way.
 

Renzatic

Suspended
It's a shame that Apple even has to accept royalties, and if I were CEO I wouldn't. Apple only survives while its products are unique. Giving Samsung a license would be tantamount to modern-day cloning. Like you say, Apple are winning in the courts all over the planet. Samsung are big and have lots of cash, so they're making sure they stall the process as long as they can. This is a case of "justice delayed is justice denied".
Cloning what? The iPhone? Even it's a well designed piecemeal of other technologies that came before it. There's very little in it that's truly 100% unique.

As "for winning in courts all across the planet", they're...uh...doing alright. Same as anyone else in the big corp sue game, they win some, and they lose some.
 

fredaroony

macrumors 6502a
Aug 1, 2011
670
0
What? A link about Samsung's high-end smartphone sales flattening?
Oh yeah. I think I can find one or two. Here ya go:

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/business-news/samsung-logs-another-record-high-profit-on-smartphone-semiconductor-business/

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/06/only-one-third-of-samsungs-smartphone-sales-are-in-the-class-of-apples-iphone-aapl

And Samsung missed their high end smartphone sales goals.
And that got their investors in a panic:

Samsung Electronics to talk strategy with investors, skeptics
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/us-samsung-meeting-idUSBRE9830BM20130904

If that's too much clicking and reading for you, here's an excerpt from that Reuters story:

"Samsung's stock has been hit by weaker-than-expected sales of the Galaxy S4 smartphone, analyst downgrades, and investor concerns..."
Yes their smartphone business is still increasing. Either way, they are winning...

Also, I ignored the link from Appleinsider as it was bound to be utter nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.