Print 103 comment(s) - last by superstition.. on May 31 at 10:39 PM

  (Source: Jason Mick/DailyTech LLC)
Steve Jobs gets his final wish, companies appear ready to fight to the death in court

Apple, Inc. (AAPL) and Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd.'s (KSC:005930) have made it clear that they're over cooperating and are gearing up for total war.

I. Samsung and Apple's Settlement Talks Collapse

According to a report by The Korea Times, the phone industry's two largest players, and two of the world's largest intellectual property owners, walked away from the settlement table despite the efforts of Magistrate Judge Joseph Spero to encourage their chief executives to work out a compromise.  With settlement talks failed the "nuclear war" will begin with Apple's trial, which is scheduled for July 30.

For Apple and Samsung the cost of battle may be enormous.  Both companies could see their products banned, at least temporarily in certain regions.  Samsung may be forced to abandon billions in chipmaking revenue it takes in from Apple on a yearly basis.

And Apple may be forced to find a new supplier for its smartphone CPUs.  With past trials reportedly not going well, that could mean inferior product and fewer upgrades for the iPhone.

Apple CEO Tim Cook sounded dejected in his company's last financial report, commenting, "I've always hated litigation and I continue to hate it we just want people to invent their own stuff."

Samsung v. Apple
Whoever wins in Samsung and Apple's full-blown court war could have a monopoly on the mobile market. [Image Source: The Telegraph]

But despite the seemingly promising signs early this month of a bilateral agreement to cut the number of patents asserted in the companies' lawsuits against each other, the pair could not reach a cross-licensing agreement, as both handset makers believed the other should be paying it licensing fees.

With Apple scooping up large LCD screens for its iPhone 5 (Samsung is the world's largest display manufacturer), the two companies' mutual business has reportedly ballooned to $12B USD for 2012 (up from $8B USD in 2011), even as the pair's public relationship has appeared to deteriorate drastically.

II. Steve Jobs Gets His Wish -- Full Blown "Nuclear" War With Samsung

But ultimately the two companies' leadership seem to believe they stand more to gain by destroying each other, versus working together.  

Samsung current has a larger slice of the smartphone market -- 29.1 percent compared to Apple's 24.2 percent in Q1 2012.  But Samsung trails Apple in profit, making just $4.45B USD in profit, compared to Apple's $11.6B USD haul.

Samsung girls
Samsung's attractive models beat out Apple in unit sales. [Image Source: Shootspeak]

Both companies control close to two-thirds of sales and 99 percent of mobile profits, and their cases are built on questionable legal foundations from a technical perspective.  Samsung is suing Apple mostly based on wireless standards patents.  But Samsung should be obligated to license those patents to Apple under the "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory" (FRAND) rules that govern standards patents.

Samsung is currently under investigation for its questionable discrimination of Apple licensing-wise.

Apple on the other hand, may have a bit of a case against the original Galaxy S, which narrowly mimicked the iPhone 3GS in case appearance and GUI (much more than any other Android).  

iPhone 3GS v. Galaxy S
(Click to enlarge) 
Samsung's TouchWiz version on the Galaxy S (left) presented a near identical interface, visually, to the iPhone 3GS (right). [Image Sources: Slashgear (left); Ubergizmo (right)]

But Apple's case becomes much more tenuous when you consider that Samsung’s newer handsets bear far less similarity in case appearance or GUI to Apple's new handsets.  
Still patent disputes are often less about technical merits and more about the persuasive power of a company's pricey legal team.  In that case, “Apple v. Samsung” will be fought by lawyers when it goes to trial this summer in U.S. federal court.

But one thing is certain; the collapse of settlement talks would have greatly pleased the late Apple founder Steve P. Jobs, even if his company ends up losing this war.  He vowed near his time of death to send Apple into full war mode and destroy Android at any cost -- or perish trying.

Steve Jobs
Steven P. Jobs' dying wish of "thermonuclear war" with Android has been fulfilled.

He commented, "I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this."

Well, that "nuclear" war is now almost upon us.

Source: The Korea Times

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Over before it began?
By HrilL on 5/24/2012 6:55:59 PM , Rating: 5
While I understand the sarcasm in most of your post the part of Jobs being in heaven I take issue with. He was a greedy person that stole more ideas and tech then anyone in the industry. He is surely rotting in hell for all the wrongs he has done. Apple has lead the way with stealing technology since it was founded. They've never invited anything on their own.

RE: Over before it began?
By spread on 5/24/12, Rating: 0
RE: Over before it began?
By Tony Swash on 5/24/12, Rating: -1
RE: Over before it began?
By zerocks on 5/24/2012 9:31:43 PM , Rating: 4
The implication of what you are saying is that Apple has managed to enter, disrupt and economically dominate three existing mature markets in the last decade by merely copying what everyone else was already doing. That's some trick :)

That's exactly what actually happened, where the hell have you been?

RE: Over before it began?
By slunkius on 5/25/12, Rating: 0
RE: Over before it began?
By bupkus on 5/25/2012 2:58:46 PM , Rating: 2
He just doesn't have a Steve Wozniak to befriend then bully into servitude while representing himself as the genius behind the Apple I.
By 1971, one year after enrolling, Wozniak withdrew from the University of California, Berkeley and developed the computer that eventually made him famous. By himself he designed the hardware, circuit board designs, and operating system for the Apple I.


RE: Over before it began?
By topkill on 5/25/2012 3:36:42 PM , Rating: 2
Actually that's like saying "people make lots of money selling drugs or pimping out why don't you do that and get rich too?"

Because, some of us don't like to make money by wrecking other people's lives. I assume you're just being a smartass, but seriously, that is flawed logic.

RE: Over before it began?
By TheJian on 5/26/2012 11:15:36 PM , Rating: 1
That might be worth reading if I actually believed they created most of that stuff FIRST. No, I didn't say were first to patent it. I said if they CREATED it first. I don't believe you should be able to patent anything someone else has already done. There should always be a way for a company to approach the company that came up with the idea and buy it or do some deal with the originator to bring the product to market. But what Apple is doing is ripping off others and calling it their own, then complaining when someone basically does the exact thing to them.

You really can't argue that Apple has been ripping people off when Steve himself openly claims they have been the most prolific thieves of the century, perhaps EVER!

Note I admit apple is very smart and runs a great business. They have great products too. They have great management and have mastered the art of lying better than any other company from what I can see (and I've been in IT for 15yrs, pc biz for 1/2 that, note all companies lie, just some far worse). But that doesn't make what they're doing good, or say anything good about their ethics. Which I'm not sure if they have any at all at this point.

They are making a complete mockery of the patent system. Also, they should NEVER have been allowed to get half of these asinine patents which propelled them into this 100bil cash company. Is the patent office completely ASLEEP? They should be fired (whoever let these through) and the patents revoked and money gotten with those patents returned to anyone who paid on these. Without them, nobody would have caved to licensing and they'd be just better than they were when ipods were king (which are no longer raising the bottom line). They've amassed 95% of their 100bil since the iphone debut. A good portion of that is appstore, macs etc. But how much of it could have continued to expand without iphone getting traction which propelled appstore and everything else (no different than windows is used to propel everything MS tries to push)? I doubt they'd be anywhere near 25bil today without this nonsense from our patent office.

There's not really a trick here. Just an abuse that is being ALLOWED by our patent office. I really can't understand how they're letting this through without just being BOUGHT off and we haven't found out how yet. Heck, companies like ATT just come out and SAY they're going to BUY our govt off...LOL. SERIOUSLY? In voice and print you say that, straight from the CEO etc? HUGE TITANIUM BALLS on these companies today. Forty years ago there wouldn't be a discussion of whether to break them up or not, it would just be a question of how many pieces do we want them to be in? None of the patents Apple is suing over currently would have passed even 20yrs ago if you ask me (maybe 30, but there's a point where what I'm saying is TOTALLY and UNEQUIVOCALLY true - their patents would have been laughed out of court). You can only make a phone, computer, tablet so many different ways. I'd argue that all cellphones today look the same for the most part (aside from having a keyboard or not), with very little differences between them. They're all shooting for super tiny and light, which means by default you're going to end up with a lot of stuff that will be pretty much the same.

When we coded a solution to a problem in Adv Pascal (years ago in HS/1st yr college), there were only a few correct ways to do the program. You couldn't tell half the class they cheated when there may be only 1-2 ways to code the problem. There were literally a good 50% on each side, or in some cases only ONE answer. You might have an X as a variable when I use A etc, but essentially we wrote the same crap no matter what. A few had useless lines of code here and there, but by and large they were dupes of each other. They were much smaller programs than today's OS etc, but you get the point.

How many different ways can you make a phone where everyone has the same goals? Smaller, faster, lighter, same screen's used across many models, same cpu's, memory etc. We all know green means go, red stop etc. I expect a green power button, and a red off button no matter what the product is...LOL. I would NEVER expect to see a patent over these. But I'm starting to wonder if I should try to patent breathing or some other stupid thing we all do. Can I trademark breathing through any air holding device(lungs?) with the goal of survival? $1/hr sounds good? I know you all have lungs, but Apple didn't patent that yet so sorry suckers. If I really don't like you I'll sue for $5-15/lic per lung...ROFL (you can donate one if you don't want to pay for the multi-lung lic...LOL). IF only to cause someone to go WTF? Why did you come here with this crap? Umm, because of all the crap you let companies like apple have that are completely generic in nature, or already done by a bunch of others first; just not patented because back then it would NEVER have made it through.

RE: Over before it began?
By Tony Swash on 5/27/12, Rating: 0
RE: Over before it began?
By Cheesew1z69 on 5/27/2012 10:10:35 AM , Rating: 2
This is what he said...

“Good artists copy, great artists steal. And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas .”

Can't YOU get YOUR facts straight? Oh, that's right, it's YOU, if it doesn't suit YOUR agenda, you won't post it. And YOU will never believe that SJ could POSSIBLY steals others ideas.

All kinds of posts on the net with you trashing Google and praising Apple....

Really, how much does Apple pay you to troll sites? It must be a good size amount eh?

RE: Over before it began?
By AnnihilatorX on 5/25/2012 4:25:20 AM , Rating: 4
I still remember the famous interview of young Jobs saying the best innovation come from (sic: copying) people's ideas

RE: Over before it began?
By GotThumbs on 5/29/2012 2:09:50 PM , Rating: 2

Jobs is NOT in heaven.

The man stole/withheld half of a $5,000 bonus in 1979 from his good "friend" Steve Wozniak...who helped earn the bonus by doing Jobs job. Steve Jobs was an egotistic thief/salesman.

No respect for the man and karma kicked his A$$.

RE: Over before it began?
By superstition on 5/31/2012 10:39:21 PM , Rating: 2
Oh yeah, "karma" made him extremely wealthy, powerful, influential, and all that. It even hot him a replacement liver despite being way down on the list.

No, what killed him was his reliance on "alternative" medicine.

It's mind-boggling how people continue to attribute some sort of divine influence to people's circumstances, when the evidence is overwhelming. There is no karma and there is no old man up on a cloud pulling strings.

"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain

Latest Headlines
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki