Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple and Samsung Agree To Settlement Talks

Posted by Unknown on from the agree-to-pretend-to-talk dept.

tlhIngan writes "It looks like the Apple v. Samsung war might be over soon. Both parties have agreed to meet to attempt to reach a settlement. While they are not required to settle (Google and Oracle recently went through the same process), it could be a positive signal that Apple might be willing to license the patents under Tim Cook, versus fight it out in court under the late Steve Jobs."

7 of 97 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The dead by TWX · · Score: 5, Funny

    I donno, I can think of numerous films that have otherwise. Especially films starring Bruce Campbell...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  2. Apple willing to license? by sosume · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I still cannot understand why very technical inventions (such as 3G and GSM) can only be licensed under FRAND conditions, but fluff like 'slide to unlock' (have that in my toilet) or rounded corner ("they are everywhere!") yield massive license income.. I would really love to see this before a judge so we can finally get this mess cleaned up for good.

    1. Re:Apple willing to license? by AdrianKemp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      3G, GSM, etc. are not technical inventions.

      They are standards.

      When a standards body agrees to take a patent as part of the standard, they generally require FRAND licensing as part of that agreement.

      Nowhere anywhere does something *have* to be FRAND, but if you want it in a standard you're going to be going down that road.

  3. Sanity returning to Apple? by ilsaloving · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope that this is a sign that saner heads are starting to prevail now that they no longer have an ego-maniac at the helm. Steve Jobs definitely had a very good sense of aesthetics and industrial design, which led to excellent products and services. But by all accounts he was, to put it mildly, an asshole.

    I really hope that under the current leadership, Apple will start learning to play more nicely with others without sacrificing the aspects that brought them to the point they're at now.

    1. Re:Sanity returning to Apple? by Karlt1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      You mean Apple under Cook may consider allowing Flash on their devices? The most recent complaints I've heard about the iPads from coworkers is that their shiny new toy doesn't seem to be able to show all of the webpages they look at.

      Where have you been? Adobe is abandoning Flash for Android and every other mobile platform.

      http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations/2011/11/flash-focus.html

  4. Headline somewhat misleading (surprise) by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The court ordered them to talk and try to reach an agreement; something a judge can do. However, that does not mean they have to settle. Since it is both CEOs and senior council at the talks, you'd think they could reach an agreement. Cook seems like a rational person, and I assume the head of Samsung is as well. My guess is some sort of cross licensing deal with maybe an agreement to keep talking to avoid food fights in the future. This is a classic case of both sides needing the other and to try to find a way to put away the gun they've pointed at each others head without losing face.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  5. You are right, you don't understand. by Brannon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nobody forced anybody to license anything under FRAND conditions. The patent holders voluntarily committed them to FRAND licensing in order to get them included within a standard. That's how standards work. By the way, FRAND doesn't mean "free" as you seem to believe, some of those companies make a lot of money off of their FRAND patents. It means that you can't charge Apple more than you charge Toshiba--which is exactly what Motorola was trying to do.

    Also, design patents != standard patents. Nobody is claiming that rounded corners is some kind of technical invention, that isn't the purpose of design patents--they are *by definition* aesthetic. They exist so that a competitor can't make a look-alike replica of your product and then sell it to confused customers--which is exactly what Samsung was trying to do.

    All that said, I think Apple overstates their case sometimes by assuming every feature on another phone which is similar to an iPhone was copied from the iPhone. Sometimes there is a simpler explanation, like two people trying to solve the same problem came up with a similar answer, or the feature actually existed in an earlier product.