Apple vs. Samsung – Lessons in futility

The only winners are the lawyers. 

• Yet another round of tit for tat was launched this week with the date of yet another trial being set for November 12^th 2013.
• The purpose of this trial is to argue the value of the award that was set at the 2012 trial where Apple was awarded $1.049bn in damages, which was subsequently reduced to $598m.
• By the time all this jumping and down is finished I would not be surprised to find that Samsung has spent more than the current award in legal fees.
• At the height of its war with Nokia, Qualcomm was spending $300m a year and this was nearly 7 years ago.
• The real problem here is that the life cycle of a mobile phone these days is shorter than the legal cycle.
• This basically means that by the time one has succeeded in getting a product banned for patent infringement, it will no longer be shipping.
• Hence the only recourse that one has is one of back royalties and punitive damages and these issues can be argued endlessly ending up in fights that go on for years.
• This one is a classic example.
• The heart of the matter is that it is rapidly becoming in Apple’s interest to settle this case.
• That way it will at least receive some royalties and the cripplingly expensive legal expenses can be stopped.
• The onus is on Apple because it is Apple that is losing out as a result of the Samsung Galaxy products shipping in huge numbers and at very healthy margins.
• Unfortunately, the late Steve Jobs had a very pugnacious attitude when it came to seeking redress against those that he deemed to be copying his innovations and this still seems to be the order of the day.
• The longer this carries on, the more pointless it all seems and the less scope there is for either side to end up winning anything meaningful.
• Hence it is in the interest of both Samsung and Apple to settle their claims and get back to the business of making products.
• I would like to believe that both of these companies have some degree of pragmatism and as a result I hope to see them settle their differences this year.
• It is their job to enrich their shareholders not the legal profession and the sooner they remember that, the better.