Ban on Galaxy Nexus U.S. Sales Upheld, Software Patch to Circumvent Forthcoming

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jul 3, 2012.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001


    Last week, Apple won a preliminary injunction banning U.S. sales of the Samsung Galaxy Nexus, a high-profile Android phone that was the lead device for Android 4.0 "Ice Cream Sandwich" and given away to attendees at last week's Google I/O conference to show off the forthcoming Android 4.1 "Jelly Bean". The ban followed a similar injunction barring sales of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 that was issued a few days earlier.

    Samsung immediately appealed both of the injunctions in hopes of continuing sales of the devices as the cases over Android software features proceed through full trials. But the judge overseeing both cases rejected Samsung's appeal in the Galaxy Tab 10.1 case over the weekend and today similarly declined the company's appeal in the Galaxy Nexus case. AllThingsD has more on the developments:
    Just minutes after the decision, AllThingsD also reported that Google and Samsung have developed a software workaround they believe will satisfactorily address the infringement issue being claimed by Apple, which involves a unified search function related to Siri's abilities.
    Google and Samsung are also continuing to pursue the matter on other fronts, persisting in their battle against Apple in the case while also seeking to have Apple's patent ruled invalid through reexamination by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

    Article Link: Ban on Galaxy Nexus U.S. Sales Upheld, Software Patch to Circumvent Forthcoming
  2. JGowan macrumors 68000


    Jan 29, 2003
    Mineola TX
    Glad Apple won. Glad Google can write their own code work-around to satisfy the courts. Sounds like a win-win. Apple's competitors need to see that they can't rip the boys from Cupertino off, but it also shows that with a little elbow grease, they can get the results they need to be competitive.
  3. unlinked macrumors 6502a

    Jul 12, 2010
    I think it is still a preliminary injunction. Google just want to put out a patch so they can continue to sell while the court case works itself out.
  4. Hakone macrumors 6502a

    Oct 5, 2011
    Southern California
  5. RocketRed macrumors 6502a

    Jan 25, 2012
    Something isn't quite right here...

    Attached Files:

  6. BC2009 macrumors 68000


    Jul 1, 2009
    So I wonder how it works when you win an injunction pending a full court battle but in the interim, your competitor patches their software to avoid infringement. I imagine the infringer has to petition the court to relax the injunction and if so, I would imagine that Apple gets their bond money back and then drops the case. It seems this would be resolved way before the actual case is fully decided.

    If so, that is great for Apple. They get to protect their IP and not have to risk $96M bond to enforce the injunction. I know that when Samsung and Apple battled it out in Germany that Samsung had to propose multiple alternate designs for Galaxy Tab before the courts lifted the ban.

    I think the #1 thing that Apple wants here is for their products to be distinctive in the market place -- that means enforcing the ease-of-use/user-experience patents they hold as well as their trade dress, trademarks, and design patents. Apple makes their money on having distinctive products so its no wonder they so vehemently defend their IP.
  7. superman23 macrumors regular

    Nov 10, 2011
    i have an iPhone, 2 MacBooks, a cinema display, an iPad, an iPod Nano, and an iMac G4. I'm not in favor of this. This is bad for all consumers. Unless you are a huge shareholder or an executive at Apple, you shouldn't be in favor of this ban.
  8. rudigern macrumors member

    Apr 20, 2010
    Would like to see how they try and make the patent invalid. If it was a logical thing for anyone to do Google would be better placed than most companies to make it. Then once Apple did it, it only took what 9 months to make a direct competition to it? Sounds like a pretty valid patent to me.
  9. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Oct 9, 2006
    I say they should still be out it for what turned out to be and invalid suit and if patent is invalid education increase it to double.
  10. AbyssImpact macrumors 6502a

    Aug 6, 2010
  11. east85 macrumors 65816


    Jun 24, 2010
    Apple spent millions to make this happen. Google answers with a patch. :D

    I'm sorry but I find this comical. :apple:
  12. notabadname macrumors 65816


    Jan 4, 2010
    Detroit Suburbs
    Here comes another 1,000 post war of words as people without ALL the facts say how improper this was of the court.
  13. dwd3885 macrumors 68020

    Dec 10, 2004
    Android has had unified search in android long before it was in iOS.
  14. WindWaker macrumors regular

    Oct 13, 2011
    whether you're an android fan or an apple fan, you can't help but be a little sad about how patents are being handled nowadays...
  15. kdarling, Jul 3, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2012

    kdarling macrumors demi-god


    Jun 9, 2007
    Cabin by a lake with leaves softly falling
    Supposedly Google did do it on their own. They just apparently didn't apply for, or search for, a patent about something that must've seemed so obvious to them.

    What took months, was for the courts to decide to grant a preliminary injunction before trial even started.

    Making a workaround probably took just hours, if even that long. There just wasn't any need for it until the injunction.

    I've read (but not confirmed) that the search box will now only go to the web instead of also searching local files.

    So there would be no effective change for the overwhelming majority of users who just wanted to search the web in the first place. Heck, maybe it'll even be faster.

    Hmm. Come to think of it, many of us have our contacts and email stored in the cloud as well. No need to search locally.
  16. ChazUK macrumors 603


    Feb 3, 2008
    Essex (UK)
    And Apple have applied for patents long before Android and iOS existed.

    They aren't newbies when it comes to operating systems.
  17. rick98761 macrumors 6502

    Feb 18, 2005
    Kansas City, MO
    How dissapointing as an owner of iPhone4s, iPad Retina, Apple tv 2 & 3, a macbook pro, and iMac. This is bad for all consumers.
  18. Pyrrhic Victory macrumors regular

    Feb 6, 2012
    These legal battles are becoming so epic that some game developer should make an MMORPG featuring the Android Alliance vs the Apple Empire...or something.
  19. Chabba macrumors regular

    Jul 17, 2011
  20. nanotlj macrumors regular

    Jan 15, 2008
    I do not get all these ****ing lawsuits.

    So they issue a possible workaround then they need not pay for previous infringement? In the similar case with HTC, HTC got around with kind of a fix and continue sell their devices. So what Apple got from all these lawsuits? Not a penny! Why Apple still continues these stupid lawsuits?
  21. blackhand1001 macrumors 68030


    Jan 6, 2009
    I don't care when it was filed being able to patent something like a universal search is ridiculous. Googles implementation isn't even close to the same as apples. Even worse is the fact that this judge seriously believes that people are buying this phone instead of the iphone because of the search box. Samsung argued that it was not a major factor in customers decisions and therefore an injunction is completely unecessary and the so called infringement isn't negatively effecting apple and I agree. This whole ordeal is ridiculous and I seriously have lost a ton of respect for both apple and this Judge Koh lady.
  22. billystlyes macrumors 6502a

    Jul 5, 2004
    Can't wait until Google sues Apple for ripping off the pull down notification menu in iOS. It will be hard to work around that one. But you know what they say, what goes around comes around.
  23. simon48 macrumors 65816


    Sep 1, 2010
    But it's just a preliminary injunction.
  24. chocolate macrumors newbie

    May 4, 2007
    What's it all about?

    Lawyers in love. Opposing parties with limitless bankrolls. A system that feeds upon itself.
  25. tylersdad macrumors member

    Jul 26, 2010
    Am I reading this correctly? That this is all because of the search functionality? Does apple really think they'll lose sales because of that one feature?

    I can't figure out how they were able to patent that. It's been part of most desktop operating systems for ages.

    I hope the patent is nullified.

Share This Page