Australian Retailer Ready for 'Cat and Mouse' Game with Apple over Galaxy Tab Sales

[Karnivore]

Hi everyone,

We respect everyone's views even if we don't agree with them.

However, before stating that:
1. we are breaking the law
2. we sell an illegal/banned product
3. we will kneel down to Apple etc etc

try to take some time out and read the facts surrounding the current Court proceedings in Australia.

The below link should help:
https://www.comcourts.gov.au/file/Federal/P/NSD1243/2011/actions

Apple, as big as their pockets may be, cannot, as of right now, stop us, or anyone else not associated with Samsung Australia, from selling the Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets to the Australian consumers.

So as much as some of you Apple fanboys think otherwise, we need to disappoint you.

Here's the crux of the matter:
1. The Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets are not banned in OZ
2. Apple, whilst trying to use its intimidation tactics, has no legal right to make the demands they had made

So take a chill pill and stay tuned. We pick our battles well

Cheers,
dMavo

Good for you! People deserve a choice so don't let Apple nazis intimidate you. Now that Der Fuehrer is dead maybe they'll become a more civil and humane company, but I am not holding my breath.

 

[dMavo]

Read the Court Orders

Really?

So then, why the need to set up servers specifically handling Galaxy 10.1 orders outside of OZ? Expecting an overwhelming flood of Galaxy 10.1 orders?

Why the need to import from parallel distributors in other parts of Asia? Didn't stock up and now Samsung Australia can't sell you any? Why is it that they can't sell you any?

If you have nothing to be afraid of, then all that maneuvering and statements about "we're ready" and "we pick our battles well" should all become unnecessary.

Unless there's something you're not telling us…...

Yeah really. Read the Court Orders in the link we provided instead of relying on hearsay or other unreliable channels.

Once you determine the current state of affairs and what the injunction is really about and who is affected, feel free to make a valid comment or post a meaningful question.

Cheers!
dMavo

 

[ReanimationN]

If that's true that seems like kind of a big deal. Why isn't the press reporting this alleged conflict of interest?

I have no idea, but it's true.

David Bennett- http://www.5wentworth.com.au/site/people/detail/11/

Annabelle Bennett- http://www.aim.com.au/DisplayStory.asp?ID=693 (The second section under 'The-less travelled path' talks about her husband).

The barrister heading Apple's case in Australia- http://www.5wentworth.com.au/site/people/detail/15/

 

[charlituna]

Many times these sort of injunctions include the issue of shipments passing through customs. As in, they are barred from it. So even if the company does 'sell' to Australian billing addresses with Australian shipping addresses, the orders might not be deliverable. Which means they will lose and Apple won't have to do anything new to make it happen.

 

[charlituna]

The one thing human society hates more than a loser is a winner and they seek to bring them down. Look at Microsoft. Without Bush's intervention, it would have been broken up.

They violated anti trust laws with their IE stunt. That was hardly Bush intervening. And they were hardly brought down. They are still in business and still have like 85% of the PC OS marketshare. All after that slap on the wrist. And even after the little slap they got for making Windows 3.1 a little too Mac OS like and getting hit with a trade dress complaint.

Martha Stewart made a fortune from nothing and yes, she had to be brought down.

Again, totally hyperbole. Martha wasn't 'brought down' for being a winner. She was found guilty of insider trading which is illegal. And she was punished for it and faced it with grace and is still one of the biggest names in cooking etc out there.

Apple is now in the unenviable position of leader in a number of categories with the whole world shooting at it and based on the past, this does not bode well for the future. But what does one do? Hobble one's self?

exaggeration extreme. Apple is in a top position because they made a wanted commodity. As current events have shown, they are following legal requirements by actively defending their IP from all possible offenders. The various 3g etc cases are all coming back as possible FRAND issues which means that Apple won't really be slapped on those because Samsung etc should have licensed the tech and didn't. So now they will be forced to and Apple will happily pay the fair and reasonable fees they were ready to pay all along and probably had sitting in the bank waiting for this moment.

Meanwhile they will sell millions of iPhones, next year millions of the next iPad etc. And even if they end up losing this whole trade dress case with Samsung and the injunction is lifted, they still win in regards to the fact that they were active in defending their IP so no one can use "Apple doesn't care about copying" as a defense for a more blatant offense.

 

[AppleFan1984]

I have no idea, but it's true.

David Bennett- http://www.5wentworth.com.au/site/people/detail/11/

Annabelle Bennett- http://www.aim.com.au/DisplayStory.asp?ID=693 (The second section under 'The-less travelled path' talks about her husband).

The barrister heading Apple's case in Australia- http://www.5wentworth.com.au/site/people/detail/15/

Thanks for the links. Seems unfair to the case: either Mrs. Bennett will be inclined to rule favorably for her husband's client, or inclined to rule the other way just to make it clear she wasn't favoring her husband's firm. Either way, a disservice to the case.

 

[charlituna]

They will, however, bow down to the courts.

. . . of the injunction prohibiting the sale of the device in that country.

Their argument is that they aren't IN the country. And the injunction, they say, doesn't include selling TO the country.

So it comes down to whether they are right about the wording of the injunction and if it includes a ban on importing product into the country particularly as pre sold items. If shipments of all kinds are stopped at customs and never make it to the stores or customers then who cares where they are

----------

However, even as a diehard apple fan, I still find the whole iPad concept totally useless for 99% of people, especially with the cost of a MBA + USB LTE being not much more than an iPad (949€ vs. 799€).

You find it that way because you falsely believe that 99% of people are technologically savvy like you are and actually want to do things like configure their tablet.

They don't. Your 'people' are more like 5-10% of the world. The rest want something they just take out of the box, turn on and use with minimal fuss. THey are thrilled with the notion of a tablet for reading email, watching movies, etc. Which is why they line up like lemmings to buy the iPad. and yes even the Kindle Fire for that group of the 90-95% that just want an ereader and perhaps bigger iPod screen for video or solitaire game (which is probably as much as 40-50% of that non geek group)

----------

The fact that Samsung has said they will not honour warranty on these imported units would put me off immensely.

They pretty much have to say that and honor the statement. Otherwise they could be accused of condoning the behavior.

Rather like when someone sold TJ Maxx a bunch of 16GB wifi iPads and they put them up for sale last holiday for like $250. Apple came right out and said that TJ Maxx is not an authorized reseller and thus those iPads would have no warranty coverage.

----------

Right or wrong, Apple is going to try to crush the competition

by building the best and most wanted product.

This is NOT about killing competition. If Samsung created a totally unique tablet with a unique UI etc, Apple would welcome them to the game. And may the best man win. Just like how they welcome the Kindle Fire. Getting folks that aren't using a tablet to use one, any one, is good for all.

But, according to Apple, Samsung cheated. They copied UI elements etc to confuse people. Heck even their own lawyers couldn't tell an iPad from a Tab at 10 feet in a court of law when the devices were turned off. Add to this some of the 'a little too similar' UI elements including copying the style of the photo gallery icon (which is not an 'obvious' icon choice like say a camera lens for the camera taking app) and the issue is more muddled.

Apple has a legal obligation to try to defend their IP against any even slight offense or they risk losing their rights all together. Great example of this is aspirin. Many folks have no idea that that was a Bayer trademark for a time. But they ignored folks using the term for their pain killer of a similar formula, use as a generic term in the media etc and when they did finally try to reclaim the term, they lost. Now anyone can make aspirin.

 

[charlituna]

I have a very hard time believing that publication-quality figures were "authored" on an iPad. Perhaps the content was created elsewhere and displayed/presented with an iPad?

Clearly you haven't actually used an iPad that much because there's a lot you can do in Keynote to make very pro looking presentations

In addition, there's no USB slot for a "presenter" (slide changer/green laser point in one device).

Don't need it when you can either

a. wire to a display so it mirrors what you are seeing on the iPad
b. use Airplay mirroring via an Apple TV to mirror to the display
c. use an iPhone or iPod touch with Keynote remote to control the presentation while the iPad is sitting next to the display.

In addition, people look like they're trying to hard to be cool/hip when presentating with one.

in your opinion. Many others believe that it shows that the presenter is in touch with modern computer tech and thus more likely to be in touch with current tech etc for any field of interest (i.e. they are 'with the times')

 

[charlituna]

However, before stating that:
1. we are breaking the law

You are probably right that someone screwed the pooch on the injunction and shipping into Australia is not 'illegal'

but good luck with those sales since it seems that Samsung has said they won't honor warranties on any products sold in the manner you are using. Few folks are going to want to be a tablet that has no warranty if it is a dud

----------

Thanks for the links. Seems unfair to the case: either Mrs. Bennett will be inclined to rule favorably for her husband's client, or inclined to rule the other way just to make it clear she wasn't favoring her husband's firm. Either way, a disservice to the case.

Or not. In Australia, making a preliminary judgement might not be considered a conflict of interest. If she's overseeing the final case that would be different.

 

[AppleFan1984]

Or not. In Australia, making a preliminary judgement might not be considered a conflict of interest. If she's overseeing the final case that would be different.

This preliminary injunction is scheduled to last through the Christmas season. Seems like a lot of responsibility, not the sort of thing one should take lightly.

 

[something3153]

It's not hard to guess Apple's answer. It was a pretty dumb question to ask in the first place, since consumers don't care about corporate litigation. You really think they'll forego an iPad or iPhone 4S because one company is suing another tech company over patent technicalities?

LOL, right.

LOL indeed.

 

[Oletros]

Thanks for the links. Seems unfair to the case: either Mrs. Bennett will be inclined to rule favorably for her husband's client, or inclined to rule the other way just to make it clear she wasn't favoring her husband's firm. Either way, a disservice to the case.

I highly doubt that there is any conflict, if so, Samsung lawyers would had tried to recuse her

 

[JAT]

"Double" only applies for the base WiFi iPad. Given how in any discussion of tablets here people talk like 3G is essential, you're suddenly talking about the much more expensive 32GB/64GB WiFi models, which are "almost the same" as a base MBA, yes.

And given that a stock, top MBA is $1600, the range is generally double that of an iPad. People talk about all the models. Quit being stupid.

 

[something3153]

And given that a stock, top MBA is $1600, the range is generally double that of an iPad. People talk about all the models. Quit being stupid.

That top MBA is substantially larger than an iPad. Who's being stupid, again? And aren't insults not allowed here?

 

[JAT]

That top MBA is substantially larger than an iPad. Who's being stupid, again? And aren't insults not allowed here?

Both size MBAs are at least twice the area of an iPad (when open: ie, usable), and virtually twice the weight or more. I'm already claiming the comparison is stupid, you like giving me ammo? Thanks.

The poster (it wasn't you, don't know why you are responding) claimed that an MBA is vastly superior for 99% of people because of (for one thing) price being 'nearly the same'. Ridiculous assertion. Low end vs low end = MBA precisely double price. High end vs high end = nearly double.

Sure, I can compare one high priced thing and one low priced thing and make almost anything match up. We could compare a Touch with a beat Mac Pro sold for parts. WTF does that mean?

 

[dMavo]

12mth warranty is provided by Samsung

You are probably right that someone screwed the pooch on the injunction and shipping into Australia is not 'illegal'

but good luck with those sales since it seems that Samsung has said they won't honor warranties on any products sold in the manner you are using. Few folks are going to want to be a tablet that has no warranty if it is a dud

Correction:
Samsung Australia had stated that they will not provide any warranty as they are not supplying the units. All the tablets we sell have a full 1 year warranty from either Samsung US, HK or Singapore. Don't forget that Samsung does NOT provide international warranty on these tablets and that is another reason why Samsung Australia won't service OS sourced models (even if there was no injunction against Samsung Australia in the first place).

Should a fault develop, the unit will be sent back at our cost for servicing by one of the 3 Samsung entities mentioned. All customers are aware of this and they have no issue with it since they only have 2 choices:
1) not get the product at all, or
2) get the product with the OS warranty arrangements mentioned above

There is a lot of misinformation out there but we would not be making such a public stand if we weren't certain that we are in the clear.

So pls try to take some time out and read up on it (Hint: go direct to the source and read the Court Orders) instead of relying on the various media articles' 'apparent reality'.


Cheers,
dMavo

 

[SingaporeStu]

dMavo,

No-one going to read. And no-one's going to care. Why? Because no-one's going to buy.

Sure, you'll have some sales, and I hope you make profit from it, cos it sounds like your costs are gonna be huge just for this stand-up act, but it'll never come anywhere near the iPad's dust trail...

But good luck anyway...

You are probably right that someone screwed the pooch on the injunction and shipping into Australia is not 'illegal'

but good luck with those sales since it seems that Samsung has said they won't honor warranties on any products sold in the manner you are using. Few folks are going to want to be a tablet that has no warranty if it is a dud

Correction:
Samsung Australia had stated that they will not provide any warranty as they are not supplying the units. All the tablets we sell have a full 1 year warranty from either Samsung US, HK or Singapore. Don't forget that Samsung does NOT provide international warranty on these tablets and that is another reason why Samsung Australia won't service OS sourced models (even if there was no injunction against Samsung Australia in the first place).

Should a fault develop, the unit will be sent back at our cost for servicing by one of the 3 Samsung entities mentioned. All customers are aware of this and they have no issue with it since they only have 2 choices:
1) not get the product at all, or
2) get the product with the OS warranty arrangements mentioned above

There is a lot of misinformation out there but we would not be making such a public stand if we weren't certain that we are in the clear.

So pls try to take some time out and read up on it (Hint: go direct to the source and read the Court Orders) instead of relying on the various media articles' 'apparent reality'.


Cheers,
dMavo

 

[dMavo]

dMavo,

No-one going to read. And no-one's going to care. Why? Because no-one's going to buy.

Sure, you'll have some sales, and I hope you make profit from it, cos it sounds like your costs are gonna be huge just for this stand-up act, but it'll never come anywhere near the iPad's dust trail...

But good luck anyway...

Thanks

The reason we are posting these comments is to get ppl familiar with the facts as opposed to hear say.

It's obvious that visitors to the MacRumours forum are likely to be Apple supporters. We have no issue with that.

However, one look at the Court Orders will show that, under the current injunction, we are not liable for any damages or costs that some ppl may refer to.

We do not take any comments against us personally as those usually involve the poster's lack of understanding of the current situation. If we had the time, we could discredit all of them but then again why bother?


Cheers,
dMavo

 

[adder7712]

Since we're attacking Samsung, why not other Android tablet manufacturers as Android "clearly ripped 100% off" iOS.