Apple Granted Injunction Barring Sale of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in European Union

[colinmack]

I don't own any Android devices, I dont even use gmail.

I do know that Android has had two point releases (3.1 and 3.2) since Apple announced iOS 5, and Ice Cream Sandwich is likely to come out the same time as iOS 5.
That kind of development speed means they're going to blaze past Apple pretty soon.

So let's be fair here - there have also been two point releases of iOS, not to mention 5 separate iOS 5 beta releases, so nobody is blazing past anyone. This discussion would be far more productive if people on both sides of the debate would tone down the hyperbole, it's a bit out of control.

Android is OK, the consensus of most neutral reviews is that the hardware seems less responsive, it's short on decent apps, and borrows a fair bit from it's neighbours. Apple certainly didn't invent tablets, but they most certainly figured out how to make it a viable market where nobody did before. As is often the case, reality tends to fall somewhere in the middle...

As far as Apple defending their turf, they probably learned their lesson from what happened with Microsoft. And for everyone defending Google as being pure and innocent, Google's lead lawyer for the Oracle lawsuit stupidly allowed into evidence some internal emails that basically proved that they debated licensing other people's stuff, but chose to infringe anyway (hoping that they would get away with it), so they're just as cutthroat as the next guy (not to mention sore losers, sorry David Drummond).

Here's a little fun experiment - try swapping Microsoft/OS/browser/Explorer/Netscape in this sentence with Google/search/mobile OS/Android/Apple:

Microsoft used it's monopoly position and war chest from the OS market to try and forcibly take over the browser market by offering Explorer (it's own interpretation of the market leader) for free, in the hopes of crushing the competition by putting Netscape out of business, and extending their monopoly and coercing more people back towards their primary business.

I don't think Apple is being a patent bully here at all - if they didn't have tons of money to compete with, Google might very well be swimming in antitrust territory.

 

[BC2009]

Copying? You should google Dieter Rams, the man Apple has stolen most of "their" designs from.

I googled it.... I like his ten principles to "good design". I think Apple follows them pretty well, especially since the first is "Is innovative". But I did not see anything resembling an iMac, an iPhone, an iPad or a Mac Book Air on that Wikipedia page. The list of principles are clearly something Apple does copy -- copying a methodology or set of principles is much different from copying a design. Samsung should adhere to this and then they would not be copying their competitors so much.

Here are those principles to good design:

Is innovative - Rams states that possibilities for innovation in design are unlikely to be exhausted since technological development is always offering new opportunities for innovative design. He also highlights that innovative design always develops in tandem with innovative technology and can never be an end in and of itself.

Makes a product useful - A product is bought to be used. It has to satisfy certain criteria, not only functional, but also psychological and aesthetic. Good design emphasises the usefulness of a product whilst disregarding anything that could possibly detract from it.

Is aesthetic - Only well-executed objects can be beautiful. The aesthetic quality of a product is integral to its usefulness because products used every day have an effect on people and their well-being.

Makes a product understandable - It clarifies the product’s structure. Better still, it can make the product clearly express its function by making use of the user's intuition. At best, it is self-explanatory.

Is unobtrusive - Products and their design should be both neutral and restrained, to leave room for the user’s self-expression. Products fulfilling a purpose are like tools and are neither decorative objects nor works of art.

Is honest - Honest design should not attempt to make a product seem more innovative, powerful or valuable than it really is. It should not attempt to manipulate the consumer with promises that cannot be kept.

Is long-lasting - It should avoid being fashionable and therefore never appears antiquated. Unlike fashionable design, it lasts many years – even when the trend may be in favor for disposable products.

Is thorough down to the last detail - Dieter Rams states that nothing must be arbitrary or left to chance in the design of a product since care and accuracy in the design process show respect towards the consumer.

Is environmentally friendly - Good design should make an important contribution to the preservation of the environment by conserving resources and minimizing physical and visual pollution throughout the lifecycle of the product.

Is as little design as possible - Dieter Rams makes the distinction between the common "Less is more" and his strongly advised "Less, but better" highlighting the fact that this approach focuses on the essential aspects thus, the products are not burdened with non-essentials. The desirable result would then be purer and simpler.

 

[the vj]

I'm an Apple fanboy as much as the next user of this site, but this is bad for the consumer in general.

Nope, that is what is happening with corporations, they copy and the creative minds with new ideas are stoned. In the place I work the owner just want to copy other people, play safe. While we have already better ideas that in our experience work.

At the end, all your experience worth nothing and you get easily replaced it = meritocracy.

 

[*LTD*]

if apple had a strong case against NOkia, do you think apple would have "settled outside" court?

I think not.

a loss to Nokia would have been a major PR loss for apple and damaged reputation. so they've settled "outside" the court. heck, apple has more money than us gov't.

There was no possible case against Nokia to begin with.

Apple knew they had to pay licensing fees. This much they accepted. There was noting to go to court over. There was no way for anyone to get around Nokia's patents unless they innovated completely new international mobile standards. Good luck.

Apple's dispute revolved around how much Nokia demanded from them vs. how much Nokia demanded from everyone else. Nokia demanded more from Apple and Apple wanted parity. That's all. They settled on a deal that apparently both parties found agreeable.

There was no position for Apple to defend or enforce in the first place.

 

[Adidas Addict]

They are for sale in the UK:

http://www.dixons.co.uk/gbuk/r/galaxy 10.1/0_0_0/

 

[mrochester]

They are for sale in the UK:

http://www.dixons.co.uk/gbuk/r/galaxy 10.1/0_0_0/

I think they'll be gone tomorrow. This announcement seems to have come late on in the day so I doubt there's been a chance yet to remove these from sale.

 

[DesignerOnMac]

Haha, I remember everyone saying the lawsuit wasn't going to amount to anything and that they'd make peace with money...

I remember reading page after page here, that the iPad will NEVER sell, and I would NEVER buy one!

 

[Lochias]

A better place

I'm really tired of these patents. Let everyone share/take ideas and make humanity a better place.

I'm really tired of supermarkets demanding money, even for chips and beer. Let everyone share/take what they want or need and make humanity a better place.

What does that means exactly: humanity a better place?

 

[swagi]

I googled it.... I like his ten principles to "good design". I think Apple follows them pretty well, especially since the first is "Is innovative". But I did not see anything resembling an iMac, an iPhone, an iPad or a Mac Book Air on that Wikipedia page. The list of principles are clearly something Apple does copy -- copying a methodology or set of principles is much different from copying a design. Samsung should adhere to this and then they would not be copying their competitors so much.

Here are those principles to good design:

So...you googled and didn't find this?

http://blog.pedrocustodio.com/2008/01/18/excellent-design-by-dieter-rams/

 

[KnightWRX]

Do you really buy your own analogy?

Yes, I do find my analogy quite as ridiculous as the statement that spawned it, thus I buy that it is apt in proving that the original statement was without credibility.

 

[chirpie]

What does that means exactly: humanity a better place?

As an example:

Technology can bring parity to the disenfranchised. A.K.A. Facebook in the Middle-East, or an inner-city kid who can get to Khan Academy from a library computer.

 

[Adidas Addict]

I think they'll be gone tomorrow. This announcement seems to have come late on in the day so I doubt there's been a chance yet to remove these from sale.

I bet they are still on sale tomorrow in the UK.

 

[MrWillie]

What Apple really won is the fact that they will not have to push their development to the limit in response to other companies offerings, not good news for any consumer.

A fly on the wall in Apple R&D hears; "Stand down fellas we don't need to make iPad 3 any better than iPad 2 because no one else can"

I am a real Apple fan, have a MBP, iPad1, iPhone4, iPod classic, iPod Touch, magic trackpad etc, but am not blinded by this announcement.

Sure, if you say so. We are talking about Apple here, not Dell. Why do people keep stating that Apple won't keep improving their products without competion ?

So it's cool when Android handsets look like Blackberrys but not iPhones?
Those types of handsets STILL exist, and RIM doesn't give two hoots.
Apple are simply abusing a broken patent system to cling onto a market lead that is slowly eroding.

Is that why they sold more iPhones this past quarter than they have any other quarter. And they now take 66 % of cell phone profits ?

What a complete load of crap.

So what's the going rate for a judge these days?
Guess I should call Apple legal... they probably have a rate card for each country.

A complete idiot can tell the difference between the two tablets.
Guess these judges have defined a new standard for idiot.

I can't tell the difference, I guess I am not a "complete idiot".

Then why do they feel and perform like ass?

Anyone . . . ANYONE can toss in more nuts and bolts, bigger cameras and faster processors. It's easy. That does not a great product make, unfortunately.

iOS devices use hardware encryption, Android uses software based. I am not sure if that is the reason/ only reason they perform like ass, but that's my therory.

to me that means the US system is better.

I am also of the opinion if granted an injunction and you loss then you should have to pay the company you got said injunction on all money loss on potential sells at full retail value.
Basically make it at least somewhat risky to demand one.

So let's say $500 (even though they will end up in bargin bins for $300-$350)per device. So $ 500,000 sounds about right. Pocket change for Apple

 

[chirpie]

So...you googled and didn't find this?

http://blog.pedrocustodio.com/2008/01/18/excellent-design-by-dieter-rams/

From the comments section:

http://retrothing.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/regencymagazineadvert.jpg

In other words, nothing new under the sun.

 

[lincolntran]

wow

The Asian education values on memorization and reproduction more than creativity though.

That's why Asians are so good at playing instruments (aka repeating the ideal).

Name one Asian company that made something truly innovative on their own! They steal and cheat and rip off the Americans every day.

Wow! Are you this ignorance?

You know that Japan robotic research companies are very advance and innovate everyday right? You do know that asian car companies like Honda, Toyota (beside recent recalls), and Nissan are making innovations and inventions in their fields right?

Question: What is an american in your book? What make an american an american?

 

[aaaaaaron]

this is ridiculous and some people in here are saying ridiculous things. my first question is why is anyone here worried about what apple spends on r&d? they've 76 billion dollars, they aren't hurting, and neither is anyone who works for them. second question, why are we defending apple and hating on samsung? they saw something that made money and wanted to make money.

apple is the only company i want a computer from, because i love the mac os, but apple is ridiculous. i am not blind to that. they want to dominate the market, not because the ipad is the best (which it may be, that is not my point here), but only by not letting anyone else who threatens sales into the market place.

it's time to wake up and see that they don't have these patents to protect their IP, it's only to sue company's and keep them from trying to make products.

it's all about money, nothing else.

 

[DesignerOnMac]

And there is the crux of the problem. What defines "innovation"? Apparently not common sense looking back to Amazon One-Click patents. Compuserve retroactively going after people using the .gif format, and what about domain squatters just buying up dictionary words and brand names 15+ years ago?

You're right in that I agree if a company has true innovation, not just a slightly different combination of existing prior work (one click shopping cart), and files a (sane) patent, they should have a period of time in which to enjoy the fruits of their labor. If they file patents and don't release a product, and that patent is simply extending prior art or is common sense, versus true technical achievements, like a new synthetic material, a new CPU (which technically builds on top of existing ideas, so should not be able to be copied intact, but that does not mean the ideas such as for example, L1-L3 cache, can not be), should be protected for a period of time, but common sense or prior art enhancements should be very limited, if at all.

Apple didn't write the first graphical user interface (xerox parc) nor invent the mouse, nor were they particularly great at multimedia or graphics (contrasted to Amiga, Atari etc.). They didn't invent the LCD, nor the tablet. They weren't the first touch interface, either. One could easily argue that anything based on those items is simply a common sense extension, and assuming no apple copyright images were used, and no one secretly stole Apple's design files and CPU 'blueprints,' then once it entered the public eye, it shouldn't have protection at all, or for a very limited time, in that there is little actually revolutionary there.

Forbes said it well almost 10 years ago - the world is becoming insane with IP and litigation, where companies are formed solely to try to introduce and get approval on patents, to do little work of their own, to later try to 'blackmail' real companies based on those patents. There are quite a few areas, software certainly included, that it's entirely out of control. Common sense and intelligence should rule, but instead, lawyers and cash does, no matter how idiotic much litigation is. The mentioned Forbes article, an interesting read in hindsight.
http://www.forbes.com/asap/2002/0624/032.html

Inkswamp - if you have a true technological innovation, it should take quite some time for most to reverse-engineer it or duplicate it. If not, and it's simply common sense or an extension of the ideas and work of others, then it's called competition - do it well enough that it will fare well once the copycats jump onboard. If it's something that can easily be copied within 6 months or so, I'd say it falls into common sense, not a patent. Somewhere between those two points is a balance, but it's unlikely that the current state of fairs is that balance. I'll take honest and reasonably fair (but perhaps a bit less profit) competition any day over a monopoly built on patents and the abuse thereof.

Innovation
The term innovation derives from the Latin word innovatus, which is the noun form of innovare "to renew or change," stemming from in-"into" + novus-"new". Although the term is broadly used, innovation generally refers to the creation of better or more effective products, processes, technologies, or ideas that affect markets, governments, and society. Innovation differs from invention or renovation in that innovation generally signifies a substantial change compared to entirely new or incremental changes.

 

[gnasher729]

if apple had a strong case against NOkia, do you think apple would have "settled outside" court?

I think not.

a loss to Nokia would have been a major PR loss for apple and damaged reputation. so they've settled "outside" the court. heck, apple has more money than us gov't.

I guess you didn't actually follow what Nokia vs. Apple was about. There was never any doubt at all that Nokia had valid patents, and nobody, including Apple, claimed that Apple didn't have to pay license fees. They both disagreed about the amount of license fees (Nokia wanted to charge Apple significantly more than other companies), and Nokia wanted Apple to throw in some touchscreen related patents as well. The result was that they agreed on the amount of license fees, and no touchscreen patent licenses. The amount of license fees looks quite in line with what other phone makers are paying, about $5 per phone. Rumors are that Android phone makers pay $15 to Microsoft in fees.

 

[Karnivore]

Looking at the picture in the summary, I can't quite see which Apple design this copies exactly.

It doesn't. There are no similarities between the two, take it from someone ho owns both.

 

[KnightWRX]

I can't tell the difference, I guess I am not a "complete idiot".

Wait, you're telling us you can't tell which of these is the iPad ?

Seriously ?

 

[AaronEdwards]

I googled it.... I like his ten principles to "good design". I think Apple follows them pretty well, especially since the first is "Is innovative". But I did not see anything resembling an iMac, an iPhone, an iPad or a Mac Book Air on that Wikipedia page. The list of principles are clearly something Apple does copy -- copying a methodology or set of principles is much different from copying a design. Samsung should adhere to this and then they would not be copying their competitors so much.

Here are those principles to good design:

Anyone complaining about Apple being copied and not seeing the rather striking similarities between these designs are, well... rather one-eyed.

Should Samsung adhere to what Apple did here?

 

[MacinDoc]

it's time to wake up and see that they don't have these patents to protect their IP, it's only to sue company's and keep them from trying to make products.

it's all about money, nothing else.

It is Apple's responsibility to its shareholders to protect its property, including intellectual property. Just the same as protecting its physical property by requiring its stores' doors to be locked outside of business hours. If you don't protect your IP, you lose it, and thereby lose the value of your research and rip off your investors.

As posted earlier in this thread, why don't you rag on Google, whose executives have been shown to be aware of intellectual property infringement and decided to ignore it in the hopes of getting away with it?

 

[blackhand1001]

No, innovation like the fact that your Android phone would look like this were it not for Apple, and instead looks more like this, which in turn looks a lot like this. See a pattern?

Things like the camera shutter button and the notification system are minor implications.

You do realize that the screenshot you posted is not the home screen for the samsung but it only looks like that when you open the full application list. The home screen is completely different than apples. I am tired of people blowing this part out of proportion.

 

[Karnivore]

Wait, you're telling us you can't tell which of these is the iPad ?

Seriously ?

Apple thinks their customers, and consumers in general, are idiots. Nothing new here.

 

[kdarling]

Samsung isn't being sued (excuse me, BARRED from selling their device in a key market) over general likeness.

All the online news articles (which are mostly just copies of one another... isn't that ironic, btw?) seem to indicate that it's barred over an EU design registration of a generic rounded rectangle look:



Which seems silly, since rounded rectangle tablet ideas have been around:

I googled it.... I like his ten principles to "good design". I think Apple follows them pretty well, especially since the first is "Is innovative". But I did not see anything resembling an iMac, an iPhone, an iPad or a Mac Book Air on that Wikipedia page.

In addition to the other Rams-Braun images that have been linked to, the iPhone took a lot of design cues from a Braun calculator.