HTC And Apple Settle Patent Dispute; Perhaps Tim Cook Realizes Patent Fights Are A Waste

from the one-would-help dept

While the Apple patent disputes with Samsung and Motorola seem to get most of the publicity, Apple’s first patent lawsuit against an Android phonemaker was against HTC, who quickly sued back. However, over the weekend, the two companies announced a settlement in which they’re cross-licensing all of their patents to each other for a period of ten years. While the full details are secret, all of the indications are that HTC is paying Apple, but not a huge amount. HTC has said that it won’t have “an adverse material impact” on its financials. While HTC remains a smaller player than Samsung, one hopes that this is actually a sign that Tim Cook has realized that Steve Jobs’ infatuation with killing Android in court is not a productive strategy. This, of course, won’t end many of the other patent fights around smartphones, but hopefully it shows that Apple has become less ridiculously “religious” about fighting in court, rather than focusing on the marketplace.

Filed Under: , , , , ,
Companies: apple, htc

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “HTC And Apple Settle Patent Dispute; Perhaps Tim Cook Realizes Patent Fights Are A Waste”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
yaga (profile) says:

Re: Different approach to this story

I would have to disagree as well. There’s a lot of that article that is nothing more than a pure guess. Plus it points out that Samsung is in a better position than HTC was but then goes on to mention the court lose and the ITC loss. Since lawyer wrote the article I would have expected him to mention that there’s still lots of life left in the Samsung/Apple court battle because of appeals and the losses that Apple has suffered everywhere else in the world.

Wally says:

Apple under Tim Cook has actually been more litigious and even more understanding since Forestall got fired.

The one thing people (especially Droid fans) don’t realize is that while HTC makes descent sub-$100 smart phones, the problem problem is that Google makes them pay a $20 licensing fee just for the use of their Android Software…per device sold. Add that to Microsoft’s $10 for Windows phones, that’s $30 a phone loss on their profit margin. Now add another $20 in subsidized purchases from your local carrier….that’s ZERO profit margin on a $70 HTC droid based phone.

Also, during the elections this year, I experienced first hand what a Samsung Galaxy IIIs looks like….I asked the polling station person if that was the new iPhone 5 and she said “Nope that’s a Samsung”.

Another thing Droid fans don’t realize is that Google is continually encouraging the patent war by giving phone makers and patent trolls alike “defensive patents”. HTC and Apple were probably the first to realize this and decided to just drop everything…you won’t see much if HTC I’m the droid market since they’ve switched mainly to Windows Phone.

Michael (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:


Neither of those make sense. Google does not license Android to HTC, just some of their specific applications (like Google Play). Microsoft DOES charge licensing fees for about 50% of the android devices out there – you know to license an OS that Microsoft had nothing to do with developing, but I don’t know which side of the fence HTC falls on that deal.

As far as HTC dropping Android for Windows phone? Well, they seem to have split the market and are producing both low-cost phones and high-end phones. It seems unlikely that they will want to suffer the cost of Windows phone licensing on their low-end phones as it is considerably more expensive.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

When they completely drop android features altogether, HTC will actually gain a Profit Margin. I’m not sure of what else HTC does outside of telecommunications. Heck they developed LTE. And yes it’s very difficult to see which side of the fence they are on except for ending things. An article on Ars Technica and Slashgear mentioned that it’s a non-royalties settlement.

As for Apple’s position. I’m seeing a lot of change since John Ives took over as supreme commander in design after Frestall got sacked. One has to remember that outside of the now fairly legitimate looking Apple complaint against Samsung on Design (iPhone 5 cases fit exactly on Samsung Galaxy SIII devices, and when covered I couldn’t tell the difference. So my guess is that Tim Cook wanted this all along but John Forstall was impeding progress because “his” designs were being copied.

balaknair (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

So Samsung copied the iPhone 5 and released the Galaxy S3 months before the iPhone 5 was released(S III – May 2012, iPhone 5 – Sept 12, 2012)? So apparently the next anti-Samsung lawsuit from Apple will accuse them of violating Apple’s patents on time travel.

And seriously, you mistook a Galaxy S III for an iPhone 5(or any iPhone)?

Time to pick up a new prescription at the optometrist’s.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

The iPhone 5 was in design stages since the iPhone 4 release in 2010 by Steve Jobs himself until the time of his death in OCTOBER LAST YEAR. It sports a slightly larger screen than the iPhone 4S and is 16×9. Samsung has made Apple’s mobile sevice chips for ages. It’s easy to see how similar they are in design and I’m not talking about rounded corners alone. You should look at the Samsung interface. Samsung had access to iPhone 4S schematics and iPhone 5 schematics in order to make their processors. Tell me, how does it take Samsung 3 months to design, develop, prototype something and then finalize the product release after they built the initial processors specifically to fit Apple’s design perimeters and specifications?

balaknair (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Are you suggesting that
a) Apple has been designing the iPhone 5 since 2010, but
b) Samsung designed, developed, prototyped and then released the S III in just three months?

I suppose I could point you to Wikipedia where it says work on the S III began in 2010, or how similar it is physically to the Galaxy Nexus(released in November 2011, a full year before the iPhone 5), how it uses a quad-core Cortex A9 processor with Mali-400 quad-core GPU and not the customised Apple A6 dual-core processor with a 3-core PowerVR GPU found in an iPhone 5.
But since you appear to be immune to reality within your RDF, I guess I shouldn’t waste my time.

And disregard my comment about the optometrist’s prescription earlier. That’s not the prescription you need.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

HTC is repsonsuble for the LTE antenne that most LTS phones have. To answer the AC’s rebuttal on Android licensing, it is $20 per device. Due to Microsfot’s patent suit they pay $10 per device using droid. This settlement was not based in monetary licensing or FRAND agreaments. It was a “lets drop the fight and see what happens” settlement allowing HTC to develope more mobile phone standards like LTE.

Furthermore, with Forestall out of the picture at Apple, it seems Apple has become more kind under Sir John Ives’ complete control and oversight of design at Apple.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

The fund is strong with this one.

So I suppose Google is also charging Amazon 20 dollars per kindle fire to license Android (an open source OS) as well. :roll eyes:

The few dollars Google actually does charge for their closed source Apps (not to be confused with the OS which is free without the Google Apps), pales in comparison to the 10s of dollars per phone MS charges for windows phone 8 licenses, with the same carrier fees on top of it.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Example: You have to pay for a licensing fee for making a Unix based operating system in which you have to pay for using the core kernel of Unix, but you may design the shell as much as possible.

As far as Apple licensing its technologies, 7 to 8 dollars per device sold was the average fee for Macintosh clones and compared to anything Motorola Mobility has put at as FRAND and Industry Standards Patent licensing fees, is quite reasonable too.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: In other news

Samsung still gets the butt end of it because the judge ordered Apple to also state that Samsung “Is not as cool, and therefore did not copy Apple’s design.” Though after personally confusing a polling station worker’s phone for an iPhone 5, I’d disagree that Samsung did not copy brcause the Samsung Galaxy IIIs was what I was seeing. I has to ask twice.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: In other news

Then how do you explain that a cover meant for the iPhone 5 fits exactly onto a Galaxy IIIS? The home button has the same shape and square symbol…sonething that has been on the iPod touch sunce its firs generation. At a glance in a cover, the only way you can tell them apart is by the interface alone. Even then from the average consumer’s point of view, it’s still hard to tell. Google did not copy Apple’s interface design features, Samsung did. The initial interface and OS shell is made by the phone’s manufacturer. The kernel is Android. So keep that in mind.

balaknair says:

Re: Re: Re:2 In other news

Dude, wtf are you smoking?

iPhone 5 dimensions
123.8 x 58.6 x 7.6 mm

Galaxy S III dimensions
136.6 x 70.6 x 8.6 mm

Unless the iPhone 5 cover you’re talking is elastic, it cannot ‘fit exactly’ onto an S III.
Have you even seen a Galaxy S III? The home button has the same shape with a square symbol? Forget the home buttons, even the phones themselves are shaped different. I’d say your polling station worker had an iPhone 5 and was just ‘coitusing’ with you, maybe she felt you were an Apple fanboi and wanted to mess with your head.
Just take a look at the pic I linked to above to see the iPhone 5 and S III side by side. Or read this

balaknair (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 In other news

What does the 5 feet distance have to do with anything? Or do you mean to say you determined that the S III was identical to the iPhone 5 from five feet away?

And actually, yes I can make out that a ~124 x 59 mm object is smaller than a ~136 x 70mm, even at five feet. And I can see that a flattened trapezoid button does not look like a circle with a square symbol on it. And I can definitely spot the difference between a 100 mm screen and a 120 mm screen from 5 feet away.

Seriously, go take a look at an actual S III or at least a picture of it on google image search or something before typing such utter BS.

The eejit (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 In other news

Wait, so let me get this straight:

You’re arguing against someone that has used both phones to do the same thing and had to use different methods of getting there, have radically different shapes and different methods of betting tot he main screen.

…and you’re syaing that Samsung copied Apple?

Samsung have had the one-touch-home thing for at least ten years. I still have my old Samsung phone lying around. So, remind me again why that’s patented?

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 In other news

You failed to look at the snowflake next to my name and when I claim my account to the name used here, you will see I’m a separate person. I have been known to have people rethink their position from time to time. For you lovely historians out there saying the GS3 was released in 2011 almost a full year before the iPhone 5, you seem to forget that the iPhone 5 was scheduled for release in 2010 but nixed by Jobs in favor of the iPhone 4S. There also seems to be a number of people who forget that iOS had been around since the inception of the first Generation iPod touch which predates Samsung’s non-droid OS, which came out in 2010, by 4 years.

Wally (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: In other news

It’s also hard at 5 feet away without a side by side comparison at an odd angle. The mere fact it took me a double take and a question to figure it out (as it was covered by a case and facing up so I couldn’t see labeling or a camera lens) is enough to assume consumer confusion. Try field testing yourself under similar conditions with a friend setting up both phones randomly without telling you which is which in a similar case cover.

indieThing says:

Re: Re: In other news

Sorry Wally, but I think you need your eyes testing 😉

I currently have a Samsung Galaxy SIII and it’s nothing like an iPhone from a design view. The top and bottom are rounded where the iPhones are flat, the phone itself is much larger, the buttons are different shapes and there are even more differences I could mention.

And, let’s face it, mobile phone design is pretty much converging on a basic shape/design. Form follows functionality.

Having been in the mobile industry for over 10 years, I can tell you for sure that Apple didn’t produce much that was new in the phone world – they just done it better than most – with things such as smooth screen interfaces, more sensitive touch screens and an all round more pleasant user experience.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...