The next phase of the continual trials between Samsung and Apple are expected to kick off in the US on July 30th, but as has been the case previously, no-nonsense Judge Lucy Koh ordered both parties to try and resolve their differences by means of a mediation meeting. According to an article previously accessible over at The Korea Times, Apple head honcho Tim Cook met with Samsung execs Choi Gee-sung and Shin Jong-Kyun on July 16th, but no agreement could be reached.
Before the last court case in the United States, which saw an Apple-funded injunction against the Samsung Galaxy Tab, a similar clear the air meeting was also held, but to no avail. What’s particularly fascinating about these ongoing court cases, is that both companies maintain a strong business relationship which sees Samsung creating many iDevice components, and The Korea Times’ sources have even noted Samsung regards Apple as a “very important business partner.” The relationship has its boundaries however, and with Apple feeling strongly that its Korean rival has plagiarized a number of its products, such meetings between the bosses are unlikely to prevent further litigation.
Apple has taken Samsung to court across the world, claiming the Galaxy Tab and Galaxy Tab 10.1 unlawfully utilize many of its own patents. While some cases have been won and others rebuffed, yesterday’s UK ruling – in which the judge insisted Apple post adverts in newspapers and on its website clearing Samsung of any wrongdoing – will have dealt a huge blow to Apple’s cause. Naturally, the fruit company has appealed the decision, but if the decision remains, the implications in other cases could be significant.
As for the court date in question in the United States, a settlement has been discussed by both parties, but neither have yet been able to agree. With reports of Samsung, Google and even HTC joining forces in search of cross-licensing agreements, the Android affiliates seem the keenest to end this – at times – bitter dispute.
The two companies have been ordered to give clear, concise, and abridged versions of their patent claims by Koh, who fears the jury could become bamboozled by excessive amounts of information both parties would put forward.