Apple and Samsung reached a major agreement in court. No, not to settle their claims against each other and put an end to the Patent Wars. Instead, the two business partners finally agreed on which products they would each allow the other company to add to the next super trial between their alter-egos in court. But aside from pithy headlines and ten-digit jury awards, are any of these products actually at risk of being banned in the United States?
The big courtroom brawl between the two companies, scheduled to begin March 2014 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, could prove to be just as fun for headlines as the case that was finalized last summer, the one that resulted in Samsung owing Apple over $1 billion. This next trial, however, is dealing with a completely different set of patents, and now includes even more products. Originally focused on the iPhone 5, Galaxy Note 10.1, and Galaxy S III, both companies realized they wanted to get more bang for the buck and, since they were going to be in court anyway, add more stuff to argue about.
The person in charge of deciding if such things can be added to the case, Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal, had already established that he would be lenient in allowing new products, but Apple and Samsung couldn't come to terms. Apple proposed a solution, Samsung balked, and Judge Grewal set a hearing for January 8. However, both Apple and Samsung requested and received an extension for a week, claiming that they were working it out, and then the night before the hearing announced that they had reached an agreement.
The agreement, according to Florian Mueller at FOSS Patents, is exactly the solution that Apple had originally proposed.
Even I am tired of being here.
So what products are now in the courtroom hopper? Samsung can bring their issues regarding the iPad 4, iPad mini, and 5th generation iPod; Apple, meanwhile, can now include a mix of new and older Samsung products: the Galaxy Note II, the Galaxy Tab 2 10.1, the Rugby Pro, the Galaxy SIII with the Jelly Bean operating system, and the Galaxy Tab 8.9 Wifi with Ice Cream operating system.
The larger question in this case, however, will be decided separately. Apple is pulling out all of the stops to have the US courts drop the big hammer on Samsung and ban infringing products from the store shelves. Apple was granted an injunction against the Galaxy Nexus smartphone, but that decision was overturned by a Federal Circuit Court; now Apple is requesting a full-bench review of that decision, and Samsung is trying to stop them. This is the decision to really keep your eye on, because it may outline what is likely to happen with the 2014 Apple v. Samsung trial. If Apple is unable to have the injunction reinstated, the entire notion of any company ever being granted an injunction in this industry is going to be questioned, and Apple's entire legal strategy may change. Quickly.
Without an injunction, the only recourse left to claimants in these types of cases will be jury awards. Which are then appealed and drag on through the courts and can ultimately just serve as leverage for the setting of a licensing agreement. You know, the type of agreement that both companies could have reached before all of this courtroom drama in the first place. As Mark Veverka writes in his debut column for USA Today, the one that states these ongoing lawsuits between Apple and Samsung smell like a pile of diapers, "The higher the jury award is, the greater likelihood of a settlement."
So, if the possibility of an injunction is removed, and if jury awards are only likely to lead to a settlement and a licensing agreement, why not just skip ahead to the part where you agree to a settlement and licensing agreement? Surely we pithy headline writers can find something else to be snarky about.
Follow this writer, Adrian Hoppel, on Twitter.
