Apple and Samsung Patent Cases Needs Peace According To Judge


While the world is getting tired of hearing about Apple and Samsung’s ongoing ‘patent disputes’, and it appears as though the judges hearing them have strong feelings of the same vein, with a judge in America claiming that the technology companies need to resolve their issues in order to preserve the industry as a whole.

US District Court Judge Lucy Koh, who presided over the American case in which Apple tried to up their takings from $1b to $3b, claimed that the pair need to work towards ‘global peace’ in the technology industry, and that she will do everything within her abilities to help this become a realisation.

She addressed the warring parties in a statement to CNET: “It’s time for global peace. Is there anything the court can do? I’m more than willing to issue orders. It would be good for consumers, good for the industry, good for the parties.”

Charles Verhoeven, who is working as a lawyer on Samsung’s side, claims that his client will be ‘willing’ to co-operate, but that “…the ball’s in [Apple's] court.”

Apple, who previously agreed a ‘cross-licensing deal’ with HTC (who they were facing lower-profile but similar patent disputes with), have not yet commented on Samsung, and while the pair currently seem to be nowhere near seeing eye-to-eye given the ongoing spate of court cases around the world on the many trivial features of their respective products, will Judge Koh manage to make any kind of breakthrough from her end?

2 Comments

  1. Samsung Rumoured For Flexible Approach To CES 2013 With New TV Announcement

    [...] Korean technology giants Samsung, while still fighting Apple over a number of technology patent disputes, still need to push on with other areas of their business, one of which is said to be the planned [...]

  2. Samsung Move On From Apple Patents With Sales Ban Rejection

    [...] Koh, the US District Court Judge who recently vowed to work with the two companies to reach a resolution, claimed that the Cupertino (USA)-based company did not have the rights to ban up to 26 offending [...]

Leave a Reply