So another day and another session in court for Apple and Samsung. What was interesting this time was the fact that the judge denied Samsung a mistrial and Apple a ban on Samsung products.

This seems like the Judge having had enough of the constant legal wrangling between these two companies. But the piece I find interesting is the judge denied a sales ban on Samsung phones due to the fact Apple hadn’t and won’t get impacted by Samsung phones. If that is the case what merit does the billion dollar settlement figure against Samsung hold true? In the UK, the courts threw out most of Apple’s claims. They weren’t interested. HTC settled with Apple. It would be interesting to understand the monetary values apportioned to that agreement and then compare it to the billion dollars Samsung is meant to pay to Apple. I doubt for one minute there is any similarities.

There is no question Samsung copied Apple to try and compete, but they had no choice. That is what consumers wanted. But their copying didn’t impact Apple sales. The US patent system sure doesn’t make sense. A smaller settlement should be paid but not a billion dollars. But then are the features found on iPhones unique and patentable? The same question could be asked for Samsung. And should essential mobile technologies that we as consumers need, be allowed to be patented. And if they are, a separate ruling body should set out the agreed amount other companies that use this technology should pay. Simple solution.

What both these companies now need to do is innovate and not litigate.