Seeking Alpha

As Samsung (SSNLF.PK) continues making counter-arguments in its closely-watched California trial...

As Samsung (SSNLF.PK) continues making counter-arguments in its closely-watched California trial with Apple (AAPL), Judge Lucy Koh is calling on the combatants to try once more to reach a settlement."I see risk here for both sides if we go to a verdict," says Koh: her rulings have shown a pro-Apple tilt thus far, but the case will ultimately be decided by a jury. A prior meeting between Apple and Samsung's CEOs apparently failed to accomplish anything.
Comments (20)
  • Whitehawk
    , contributor
    Comments (3129) | Send Message
     
    Samsung should have made their UI not so suspiciously close to AAPL's. Will Samsung settle and pay a negotiated royalty or will they go to a jury?
    15 Aug 2012, 02:48 PM Reply Like
  • jswieter
    , contributor
    Comments (158) | Send Message
     
    Good luck on that one. I seriously doubt if that will ever happen. Why would Apple stoop so low as to settle with Samsung and forced to deal with mediocrity? Only if Samsung would agree to licensing... might Apple consider. We all know it is about money, especially the exposure Samsung has, but Apple's main focus has never really been about money. Apple is all about creating innovative and great products. The money is only a scoreboard. Apple can eventually find a supplier to replace Samsung. And I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't already planned on that. Apple is in this for the long run. They will continue to distance themselves from the copy cats and thief's like Samsung and Google over time.
    15 Aug 2012, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • FT1
    , contributor
    Comments (27) | Send Message
     
    Nothing will come from the CEOs meeting again. The US judiciary is so corrupt and broken that Samsung has absoluely nothing to fear. Imagine AAPL showing the legal Samsung presentation showing how they can Samsung make their features similar to the Iphone. Even the slide to power off feature is exactly the same. Only in America can such brazen theft be supported by the US legal system. Samsung literally copied all the iphone features frm the subcontracting work they do for AAPL.
    15 Aug 2012, 03:16 PM Reply Like
  • Mr. Knowitall
    , contributor
    Comments (6723) | Send Message
     
    @ef1 "Even the slide to power off feature is exactly the same."

     

    Interestingly, in 1987 IBM developed the Common User Access (CUA) standard for user interfaces. http://bit.ly/RiaWaz

     

    It was to solve the then problem of popular programs all doing the same task differently. For instance
    In WordPerfect, the command to open a file was F7, 3.
    In Lotus 1-2-3, a file was opened with / (to open the menus), F (for File), R (for Retrieve).

     

    I remember these days, It was awful.

     

    I hope that certain user interface elements like slide to unlock are made standards such that all of us can enjoy a common and intuitive user experience regardless of the phone we use.

     

    Now this is not to say wholesale UI copying should be allowed, it shouldn't, but standard FILE OPEN, DEVICE SHUTDOWN, and other common functions should be shared.
    15 Aug 2012, 10:32 PM Reply Like
  • jazzybest
    , contributor
    Comments (65) | Send Message
     
    When its a blatant copy even the packaging and button placement. it is joke that there is even a trial. My take is the only way to get any justice is if people stop buying copy-cats and start to think beyond price which I doubt will happen.
    15 Aug 2012, 03:36 PM Reply Like
  • emburns
    , contributor
    Comments (218) | Send Message
     
    So, by your definition... Apple has the rights to anything that resembles a black rectangle with a centrally placed button?
    15 Aug 2012, 04:48 PM Reply Like
  • Gary Bushwacher
    , contributor
    Comments (476) | Send Message
     
    I think the message is clear as the nose your face.

     

    The Judge is telling the parties (let's be specific - Samsung) . . .

     

    "you're far better off coming to a compromise, because if you let this go to jury of California Americans, you're likely to lose, big time"
    15 Aug 2012, 04:02 PM Reply Like
  • docproc
    , contributor
    Comments (84) | Send Message
     
    This Judge has no business stateing her opinion about what might happen at this time. By opening her mouth she may be affecting this jurys judgement. The time to settle would have been before we got to trial. The time for the judge to make such a statement would have been in private and before the trial. My faith in justice just took another hit. They might as well pick judges the same way they pick jurers.No integrity . No common sense.
    15 Aug 2012, 04:13 PM Reply Like
  • gensearch2
    , contributor
    Comments (1341) | Send Message
     
    Why do you assume that she made that statement in front of the jury?
    15 Aug 2012, 04:33 PM Reply Like
  • GeorgeTS
    , contributor
    Comments (75) | Send Message
     
    You're naive to how the courts actually work, a judge is always trying to both sides to strike a deal, through out the entire trial. A judge does just that explains the law to the jury and colors it as they see it, that is a very powerful impact on the juries outcome.
    15 Aug 2012, 08:09 PM Reply Like
  • Vipertom
    , contributor
    Comments (166) | Send Message
     
    No matter the outcome of the trial, the losing party will appeal. Guaranteed!
    15 Aug 2012, 08:43 PM Reply Like
  • Dialectical Materialist
    , contributor
    Comments (4458) | Send Message
     
    1) The judge made her statement in the morning before the jury was seated.

     

    2) It is absolutely the business of a judge to try to get both sides to settle their dispute. Before you blast people for lacking common sense you may want to delve more deeply into the matter at hand.
    15 Aug 2012, 08:47 PM Reply Like
  • DanoX
    , contributor
    Comments (2522) | Send Message
     
    The judge is concerned that two 1%'s are fighting each other in public not a seemly sight, also both have lots of money to appeal a judge likes nothing less than to have a high profile case with a guaranteed appeal.
    15 Aug 2012, 04:24 PM Reply Like
  • John N. Heil
    , contributor
    Comments (63) | Send Message
     
    Samsung would be wise to settle; Apple would be wise to accept. So the only consideration is a fair remuneration to Apple. If it isn't about the money, then I see no positive outcome here for Apple. People ignore right from wrong in terms of what products they buy. These are amoral issues, where companies do battle not consumers. My take is that a fair settlement is in the $1 billion area, and be done with it.

     

    Big J in L..A., retired security analyst
    15 Aug 2012, 04:29 PM Reply Like
  • Lochias
    , contributor
    Comments (104) | Send Message
     
    The CPA schedule comes up with total damages on the order of $2.8B, of which $554M is lost Apple profit and $2.2 B "ill-gotten" Samsung profit. So you are saying that Apple should be willing to accept getting its lost profit and the same again from Samsung's profit, and that Samsung, still ahead on the deal, ought to be happy.

     

    Unfortunately, it does not seem like a thermonuclear result, but more like Apple - Microsoft footsie, as played lately.

     

    I cannot imagine either side going for anything close to the middle, Apple in part because of the evidence for deliberate behavior, hence triple damages, and Samsung because they think that they can and/or should get off over prior art or obviousness or any of a number of the lines skated about the blogs for the past year.

     

    Both of these guys sincerely want to roll the dice.
    15 Aug 2012, 06:40 PM Reply Like
  • dook
    , contributor
    Comments (40) | Send Message
     
    We can moralize about the evils of copycatting, but whether legally or illegally, intense competition is to be expected for successful technologies. Legal proceedings may slow the flood of imitation, but in the end, most IT discoveries will become commodities. For Apple, it will be necessary to run very fast just to stay even and even faster to stay ahead.
    15 Aug 2012, 05:16 PM Reply Like
  • raymundo
    , contributor
    Comments (5) | Send Message
     
    once something like that is on the market,from a marketers standpoint,if the said phone was already an infringement of copyrifghts,would there really be an arguement over detail?RDD Samsungs wholesale shoes from the 80's...
    15 Aug 2012, 05:49 PM Reply Like
  • rubicon59
    , contributor
    Comments (1335) | Send Message
     
    Someone tell me. What is the incentive for Apple to settle at this point?

     

    A measly few $$bill won't make a difference, there is no downside to losing (things remain as they are now), and all kinds of upside to winning and the latter is high probability.

     

    P.s.

     

    Besides, everybody knows that a Sunflower means Pictures. And Samsung icon designer spent countless hours picking it from the myriad of other possibilities and without relying on Apple iphone apparently.
    15 Aug 2012, 06:55 PM Reply Like
  • bjnflicks
    , contributor
    Comments (1655) | Send Message
     
    Samsung has a lot more to lose than Apple. Think about it. Apple already has Samsung competition and won't likely get worse with the upcoming iPhone 5. But Samsung, if they lose to a jury, could be liable for -- the sky's the limit really -- Apple could own them. Or at least get a nice cut from every Samsung sold. Like Qcom does from every cell phone. COuld be worth tens of billions to Apple over time or even put Samsung out of the smart phone business. I am bullish Apple and hopeful that this trial will add more $$$$ to the Apple coffers one way or another, at least a few billion.
    15 Aug 2012, 06:57 PM Reply Like
  • casselp_2000
    , contributor
    Comments (97) | Send Message
     
    I expect that Apple will win the advantage over Samsung, altho I would not hazard the terms of settlement. It will encourage Samsung to emulate Apple's playbook and assemble a crack industrial design team to define future products; they already know the manufacture and merchandising elements.
    16 Aug 2012, 02:05 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)