apple-vs-samsung-court-005

Before Apple and Samsung reconvene in court on March 31, a judge has encouraged the two companies to reconcile their differences in the interim. But according to FOSS Patents, reaching a settlement without the intervention of a judge seems unlikely, as Samsung doesn’t quite agree with Apple’s insistence on including an “anti-cloning provision.” If Apple is to agree to licensing its intellectual property, the iPhone maker wants to ensure there is a limit to licensing, and that a prohibition against cloning Apple products is in place.

According to FOSS Patents, Samsung “may hate” Apple’s anti-cloning provision, saying the Korean company agreeing to it would be at odds “with the strategy that enabled Samsung to become the global market leader in smartphones.” In a sworn declaration made last week, Apple’s Chief Intellectual Property Counsel, B.J. Watrous, said that discussions with Samsung have always included the same provisions despite Samsung’s assertions to the contrary. Apple’s insistence on the provision is to make clear to Samsung it has no interest in granting the Korean company a full, unrestricted license to “use any and all of its technologies.”

Apple has asked the court for a permanent injunction on Samsung products ever since the court ruled in Apple’s favor in August of 2012. Apple was denied a permanent sales injunction against Samsung’s infringing products, that decision was later appealed by Apple to the Federal Circuit. As the March 31 date nears, Apple has blamed Samsung for stalling the inevitable, saying Samsung is making every claim it can to extend the briefing schedule for Apple’s renewed motion.

Earlier this month, a report claimed Apple and Samsung were willing to meet in February to discuss a possible settlement. But without Samsung agreeing to Apple’s “anti-cloning” provision, it doesn’t appear talks will get anywhere without the mediation of a court. As of now, Samsung has been ordered by the court to pay Apple around $980 for infringing on its products.