Apple and Google CEO in Talks, Could a Compromise be Near? Discussion

[Valerie Sarnataro]

With a major victory behind him, it appears Apple CEO Tim Cook is ready to put his weapons down, or at least begin talks to find a resolution, as he is rumored to have held preliminary discussions this week with Google CEO Larry Page.

Read the full content of this Article: Apple and Google CEO in Talks, Could a Compromise be Near?

[Varjak]

I really think you should have someone with legal experience review some of these things before making statements like Google's not being a 'direct competitor' of Apple's lets them off the hook. The only thing that matters is comparing the product (OS) head to head with the other product. There might be some effect on the monetary settlement as Google (technically) doesn't make money because it 'gives' Android away 'free;' but they can still be found to have infringed. If I copy Windows and distribute it free, I'm not free of legal repercussions.

I doubt that such a summit would have happened if Jobs were still alive. He practically swore to fight to the death. I think the impetus for the meeting is more about the fact that the Judge put off the next court date (for a possible injunction) to December, signalling that he wanted them to negotiate. Judges can put a lot of 'unofficial' pressure on parties to arrive at an outcome the judge thinks is more amenable and equitable.

[Mitlov]

I really think you should have someone with legal experience review some of these things before making statements like Google's not being a 'direct competitor' of Apple's lets them off the hook. The only thing that matters is comparing the product (OS) head to head with the other product. There might be some effect on the monetary settlement as Google (technically) doesn't make money because it 'gives' Android away 'free;' but they can still be found to have infringed. If I copy Windows and distribute it free, I'm not free of legal repercussions.

I doubt that such a summit would have happened if Jobs were still alive. He practically swore to fight to the death. I think the impetus for the meeting is more about the fact that the Judge put off the next court date (for a possible injunction) to December, signalling that he wanted them to negotiate. Judges can put a lot of 'unofficial' pressure on parties to arrive at an outcome the judge thinks is more amenable and equitable.

Considering Apple filed an amended complaint yesterday seeking to bar sales of the Galaxy S3 in the US, I'd say the negotiations are going just swimmingly

I do think the judge is hoping for a settlement--you're reading the long time frame before the treble damages issue and the injunction issue exactly right--but I think the chances of an Apple-Samsung negotiated agreement over all patent issues has miniscule chances of success. Apple-Samsung looks to me to be the Israeli-Palestinian conflict of the tech industry.

[Ed Hardy]

I really think you should have someone with legal experience review some of these things before making statements like Google's not being a 'direct competitor' of Apple's lets them off the hook.

I'm going to quote what Valerie actually wrote:

it is more challenging to get an injunction against a company that doesn't compete directly.

There's nothing there about "getting off the hook". The process is just more difficult.

Apple sued Samsung and not Google, even though proving the actual Android OS infringes on its patents would set up a situation where every Android device could be banned in the U.S., Samsung, Motorola, HTC, everyone Did you wonder why? For one simple reason: it is more challenging to get an injunction against a company that doesn't compete directly.

If I copy Windows and distribute it free, I'm not free of legal repercussions.

The situation is not this cut-and-dried. Microsoft sells Windows directly to consumers, and you would be a direct competitor if you sold or gave away a clone. Apple does not sell iOS to anyone. Google doesn't sell Android, it gives it away. That complicates the issue, and that is the sort of thing that lawyers can use to muddy the issue, making any jury decision almost a throw of the dice.

Step back a second. What we're talking about is not what you think is right or wrong. It's what Apple's or Google's lawyers could convince a jury of non-experts. Apple is negotiating with Google because it realizes that if it goes to court instead, it is more likely to lose that it was when it sued Samsung.

[Ed Hardy]

Considering Apple filed an amended complaint yesterday seeking to bar sales of the Galaxy S3 in the US, I'd say the negotiations are going just swimmingly

There such a thing as agressive negotiation. Apple is keeping up the pressure.

Also, keep in mind, the negotiations between Apple and Google are separate from the Apple v. Samsaung lawsuit. In the lawsuit, the jury found that some of Samsung's hardware infringes on its patents. No tweaking to the Android OS is going to help that situation.

[Mitlov]

There such a thing as agressive negotiation. Apple is keeping up the pressure.

Also, keep in mind, the negotiations between Apple and Google are separate from the Apple v. Samsaung lawsuit. In the lawsuit, the jury found that some of Samsung's hardware infringes on its patents. No tweaking to the Android OS is going to help that situation.

You know what's funny? Is I read the title and saw "Apple," "talks," and "could a compromise be near?" and I didn't even process that it was Google, not Samsung, in negotiation.

You're right, Google isn't going to sweep in and settle the Samsung suit for Samsung. They've openly said something that basically amounts to "this is Samsung's problem, not Google's." (I don't agree with that as the other major Android OEMs, HTC and Motorola, have also been sued by Apple grounds in parallel lawsuits to the Samsung one).

[Varjak]

Sorry, it does NOT make it harder to get an injunction. That's rubbish. All that needs to be determined is whether there was an infringement. The idea that they 'don't compete directly' (which isn't even true on the face of it) is ridiculous. They obviously compete.

Examples:

1. They both distribute a smartphone OS
2. Schmidt had to leave the board because in fact they DO compete. If they didn't, he wouldn't have to leave.
3. Google now owns a hardware manufacturer (Motorola).

I tried to be polite about it, making a constructive suggestion and you went overboard defending your writer (which I normally understand you have to do.)

[lelisa13p]

I don't think that Ed "went overboard". He was responding to posted statements. Personally, I enjoy reading lively discussion.

[headcronie]

V, I will not tolerate any further insults. You have been warned about this before.
Your trying to be polite, and then backslapping in the same sentence is absolutely uncalled for. If you can't read other forum participant's responses without taking personal insult, I suggest you take a time out. If you fail to figure this out, a time out will be given to you. Further failure on your part, will result in a permanent ban.

[Varjak]

Yes HC, we've had our issues before; but it's funny that you can push back but I can't by virtue of your position. So basically the threat is I shut up or get banned. That doesn't seem fair from my perspective; especially when Lelisa didn't seem to mind both Ed's position and mine. Unfortunately everything seems to be an 'insult' and I think you are LOOKING to kick me out.

I'd like to know SPECIFICALLY what is an 'insult.' Nothing I said was directed at a specific person. I didn't call anyone names or disparage anyone. I simply suggested a more nuanced legal view on this issue would be appreciated. Was I wrong to list those things b/t Google and Apple where they directly compete? Was I wrong? I'm trying to have an INTELLIGENT, SUBSTANTIVE discussion, which seems impossible. Every time I disagree with the powers that be, it can't be labelled an 'insult.'