Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) is still in its tug-o-war with Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. over patents. Many, many patents. Apple has had or is pursuing cases against Samsung – and vice versa, we cannot forget – in several countries around the world, focused primarily in the United States, Europe and Asia.
And the reason we call this a tug-o-war is because the flag in the middle of the rope is not being pulled very far in one direction or the other. It seems that for every Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL), there is defeat. There seems to be a general belief that one company did potentially steal, or at least “borrow” from the other to some extent. But as far as determining which company is one and which is the other, is still yet to be decided.
Back and forth they go, though Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. did win a second straight round in a Japan courtroom, as Apple lost its appeal of a patent ruling at the Intellectual Property High Court, which held a lower-court ruling that Samsung did not infringe an Apple patent regarding synchronizing music and video on a Galaxy smartphone. The Tokyo District Court ruled last summer in Samsung’s favor, and Apple -which is David Einhorn‘s top holding, as you can see here – appealed last fall.
In a statement, Samsung said, “We welcome the court’s decision, which reaffirmed our long-held position that our products do not infringe Apple’s intellectual property.” Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) had claimed for several years that Samsung had been “slavishly” copying Apple patents. If that is the case, then Samsung has scored one for the slaves. Thus, it seems that this battles of the smartphone titans will keep going on, since that darn tug-o-war flag just refuses to budge one way or ther other.
So if “slavish” copying is alleged by Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) against Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., then what is it that has half the courts saying there is no slavery, but innovation, happening? Have you seen or executed you own comparison of an Apple device with that of a Samsung smartphone? Do you see any similarities that might suggest at least a patent-license agreement between the companies? which company do u think will win in the end? Give us your feedback in the comments section below.