Running head: CONFLICT RESOLUTION
For quite some time, Apple ant the Samsung companies have had long-running battle
concerning patent. The central question revolves around whether Samsung had copied the Apple
Company. The conflict revolved around numerous utility patents as well as design for essential
functions regarding a smartphone including the grid for screen app and the tap to zoom.
However, the case was hashed out with certain patents. In addition, the conflict was definitely
about whether Samsung had copied Apple in the period when smartphones were new in an
attempt to obtain an upper hand in the market.
There are numerous primary sources of the conflict which were majorly to do with utility
patents. The first utility patent was the enlarging of documents through tapping through tapping
the screen where Apple has the patent. Samsung had violated the same using 12 of its mobile
phones. Another patent was the bounce back feature which is available when scrolling past the
edge of pages. The aforementioned is also referred to as rubber band right. When one scroll all
the way to the end of an application, and it bounces, then you are enjoying the patents of Apple.
Samsung violated the above patent with 21 of the models of their phones (Duhigg & Lohr,
2012). The patent of distinguishing between single and the multi gestures of touch. Pinch to
zoom is a perfect example of the above violation. Another primary source of conflict was the
design patent which Samsung had infringed with 12 of their models. The ornamental design,
which is the white colour as well as the shape and fundamental design, belongs to Apple. In
other words, the rectangular shape along with form is owned by Apple. Samsung infringed the
design patent in 12 of their models of phones. Lastly, the design patent was violated by Samsung
which deals with the round icons which are on the interface with thirteen mobile phone models.
The design and shape of the two companies were similar.
As a result of the violations by Samsung, the mercurial chief executive at Apple was
furious. The teams at Apple had worked hard for a long period to create a breakthrough phone
which had ended up being stolen in terms of its design and several features by one of their main
competitors which is less than a supplier of Apple. The chief operating officer of Apple had
taken the initiative to talk to the Samsung President concerning the issue and express their
concern regarding the matter at hand of the similarities between the two phones. However, the
efforts were futile since he failed to receive a satisfactory answer (Duhigg & Lohr, 2012). After a
long period of delicate dancing, impatient urgings and smiling requests in an attempt to resolve
the issue, the chief executive of Apple decided to take affirmative action. As a result, the Seoul
meeting was arranged. Apple meets with Samsung to suggest a licensing deal. The deal required
Samsung to pay Apple some amount of money for every sale of the violated products. The above
arrangement was in com...