Strategic Business Solutions in a Global Context

I imagine that the majority of people reading blogs listen to much of their music on an MP3 player -- and international travel makes them even more imperative.  When your week consists of a succession of 8 to 14 hour flights, the 14 or so CD limit imposed by some countries' import restrictions just doesn't cut it for a music library.  I started with a Creative Jukebox almost 10 years ago before the iPod was a twinkle in Steve Jobs' eye, and thanks to Apple's next generation improvements, I'm now burning my way through my second iPod.

So if you're like me in any of these respects, you may have noticed the headlines today regarding the settlement of the patent disputes between Apple and Creative -- for example "Apple to Pay $100 Million to Creative in Settlement" posted on Yahoo! news from Reuters.  There is of course a global dimension to this settlement -- Apple is based in the U.S. and Creative Technology, Ltd is a Singapore company.  The main competitors whom I am sure were anxiously monitoring this from the sidelines are South Korea's Samsung and Japan's Sony Corporation.

But what struck me most about this deal was not the $100 million that Apple will pay (enough to raise Creative's earnings this year by $0.85 per share), but something that relates directly to a passion of mine -- strategic business solutions to disputes mired in otherwise intractable litigation.   A key part of the settlement is that Creative will take part in the "Made for iPod" program, and begin manufacturing accessories expressly for Apple's product, extending greatly the market opportunity for its existing products and creating opportunity for new lines as well.  It seems investors got it -- Creative's shares rose 37% following the announcement of the settlement and I doubt most of that was brought on by the significant but fleeting one-time push from the settlement payment.

Apple secured another tie-in platform from which to support its already gaudy market share and freed itself up to focus on innovation without the constraint of tip-toeing around Creative's patents.  Creative gains Apple's support in going after a market that is greater than Creative's own MP3 players can command.  My only question is, why did it take potentially destructive suits and countersuits for these two companies to get talking about a win-win deal that furthers the strategic objectives of both companies?

(Note: The irresistable "Think Win-Win" poster was found on http://ameblo.jp/panda2103/  and originated with poster.net).