It goes without saying Steve Jobs’ pride and glory will do everything possible to limit the expansion of Android based products. The war patent with Samsung might have reached an end, but Apple complains the Samsung patent royalty is just too high.
You’d think a court ruling would suffice to end the debate between Apple and Samsung. But even if Apple finally managed to have it its way, is back at it with new demands. The Silicon Valley company argues the patent royalty Samsung is demanding is just too steep and exceeds what the industry average is.
On one side, Apple states that the patent royalty imposed by Samsung is just too large and they’re doing this on purpose just to stir them up. On the other side, Samsung contended that its royalty demands are consistent with industry norms.
Samsung is demanding a 2.4 percent rate on the “entire selling price” of Apple’s mobile products. Which, as Apple suggests, is way over what other developers pay in patent fees. “Samsung’s royalty demands are multiple times more than Apple has paid any other patentees for licenses to their declared-essential patent portfolios,” Apple said. A trial in San Jose is scheduled to start on July 30.
The real deal unfortunately sits on the back of the Korean developer. It’s said that they are encountering legal issues, and they were also accused of disregarding their obligations. Samsung is also being charged for deleting vital emails for the court.
Then again, Samsung firmly states that they are obeying the regulations imposed. Samsung said in a statement: “Samsung remains committed to complying with all information requests from the court”. Also, they stated that their fees are not that big and bad as Apple suggests, stating that their offer “is consistent with the royalty rates other companies charge” and that Apple never made a counter offer.
From the looks of it Apple will always have a feud with Samsung. So, it’s something fans should just sit tight and hope it will end within their lifetime. In the end all that time and money wasted arguing in courts can only cost the end user.