German Injunction Against Sale of Galaxy Tab 10.1 Upheld

[Winni]

That doesn't change the fact that they are single handedly one of the most unethical companies out (at least from 2007 on) there in tech right now.

I put my signature under that statement.

That being said, I've still had some hopes that my country's law system wasn't run by complete idiots only. Obviously, I was wrong. This is a sad day for consumers, a sad day for common sense and also a sad day for freedom of choice and technology in general.

I'm glad that I sold my iPhone and bought the Galaxy S2. It's a much better product and no injunction in the world will change that fact. Should I ever really want to buy a tablet, I'll make sure that it'll run Android.

 

[hot spare]

Except no one really wants them. A lot of them are DOA or soon to be on fire-sale.

Apple's "monopoly" by popularity and product strength. Horrible! Fie!

2 factual blunders here:

do you mean "no one"? really? willing to place a bet?
monopoly? are you so sure?

Everyone knows why Apple is running to the court. They know that they can't compete with Samsung.

http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUK23024911

Check the growth rate of Samsung. Apple can never compete fairly with Samsung.

http://www.uswitch.com/mobiles/mobile_tracker/

Check the graph after GS2 was released. Yea, apple is definitely worried about Samsung.

 

[*LTD*]

2 factual blunders here:

do you mean "no one"? really? willing to place a bet?
monopoly? are you so sure?

Everyone knows why Apple is running to the court. They know that they can't compete with Samsung.

http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUK23024911

Check the growth rate of Samsung. Apple can never compete fairly with Samsung.

http://www.uswitch.com/mobiles/mobile_tracker/

Check the graph after GS2 was released. Yea, apple is definitely worried about Samsung.

I'd be worried too if they copied me and got away with it.

 

[DeathChill]

blah blah blah.

You know, it might mean something coming from anyone but you. You rail so hard against Apple in every one of your posts.

 

[AidenShaw]

I'd be worried too if they copied me and got away with it.

Don't worry, you are one-of-a-kind.

 

[adamtore]

Samsung, if you had innovated to begin with, you wouldn’t be in this predicament. Don’t twist words and expect us to accept your spin.

innovation |ˌinəˈvā sh ən|
noun
the action or process of innovating.
• a new method, idea, product, etc.

Samsung, if you’re second or third to the market (by quite a margin) with a device essentially mirroring that of the first to the market (as has now also been established in court), your product is not a new idea. You are not innovating!!

The problem is that you are using the word innovation like the word invention.

And the second problem is that Samsung has brought more to the industry then Apple ever will.

 

[Judas1]

Apple should pay me and many of you royalties because their ipad design is exactly we thought of when we envisioned a tablet. They not only used touchscreens, but even dared to put the screen right in the middle too, which is a blatant copy of our intellectual properties. And they dared use black...thats was our color since before the 80's.

Their design is generic and non-unique (labeled as minimalist), and shouldn't be patentable or trademarked.

 

[sciwizam]

Of course she did. Because the design in the design patent is what is protected. Even if Apple wasn't building and selling iPads at all, the design patent would be protected (although Apple would have problems claiming unfair competition by Samsung). And if Apple didn't have a design patent, then it would be very difficult to stop Samsung from copying. So the judge definitely had to compare Samsung's device and Apple's design patent.

 

[vitzr]

Apple is the 800 lb Gorilla in the room. They've got all the success, money, power and influence.

If it was different and they were getting their butt kicked by Samsung, then it would be different. But with Samsung selling a paltry amount of phones as compared to Apple, this is nothing more than Apple playing the bully.

They act like trade secrets have never been taken by individuals as they move from company to company.

This is having a negative effect on the entire industry. Just because that's not become public knowledge just yet, is no reason to pull a stunt like this.

Crushing the competition is a cheap shot on Apples part. They have already competed and won in the free market, why muck up their reputation?

What goes around, comes around.

 

[apolloa]

That's how a preliminary injunction in Germany works. What you may be missing is the tiny little detail that after the preliminary injunction you actually need to get a real injunction, and if you don't manage to do that, you are liable for all damages. And you won't get the injunction unless you can demonstrate that you can pay for the damages. Samsung is a big company, they can easily make some claims that would get them a preliminary injunction against iPad sales in Germany. The problem is that this might be very, very expensive for them.

So I've learnt.. I don't agree with it, it's a stupid law, but so is the US patent system at present. I don't think Samsung will be too worried though and will come up with counter attack plan.

changed the face of handheld gaming (poor Nintendo)

Just stop? Seriously? I bet your the only person here who is going to state Apple has changed the world of handheld gaming. Seriously. You have absolutely no idea what you are stating here. All Apple has done is helped the invention of shovel ware. Tons of it.

Yeah, Mario and Unchartered have literally nothing on Infinity Blade and Angry Birds.

 

[divinox]

They would risk contempt of court fines if they advertised or promoted the product. And if Samsung Tabs were selling like hotcakes (hot pretzels?) in Germany, maybe they'd risk it. But they aren't.

Apple's IP fight with Samsung isn't going to be decided with a single "knockout blow" that settles the issue once and for ever. But in an industry where product life cycles are measured in months, an injunction like this is a killer.

Its also worth noting that Samsung isn't stupid. They know the IP litigation they, and other handset and tablet makers, are facing from a host of companies OTHER THAN Apple: Oracle, Microsoft, Nokia. And my guess is that at some point they are going to cut their losses on the illusion of "free" Android tablet software - and throw in their lot with Microsoft. There are rumors floating around that a Samsung Tablet running a version of Windows 8 will be revealed next week at MS Build Developer's Conference.

What does Samsung risk by abandoning Android for its Tablet offerings? Answer: Not much. Google is becoming more of a liability with every passing day. They haven't built a decent App market. Consumers seem underwhelmed. Hitching onto Microsoft would make their (software) IP problems go away, plus they'd find a massive overnight audience for people who still want to run their Microsoft Office and other Windows legacy apps on a Tablet. All that Samsung would need to do is focus their design efforts on making something sufficiently distinctive to the iPad to a) not infringe and b) stake out their own image in the market.

not really, as injunction is vs. a specific organization. Apple could of course, quite easily get a new injunction vs. the company in question.

Anyway, anyone in germany who wants a tab can just order it online. plain and simple.

 

[ct2k7]

Super Mario land (original Game Boy) + Pokemon FTW apparently.

Interestingly, Super Mario Land worked on the GameBoy Colour, in that the game had colours in it

 

[*LTD*]

Apple is the 800 lb Gorilla in the room. They've got all the success, money, power and influence.

If it was different and they were getting their butt kicked by Samsung, then it would be different. But with Samsung selling a paltry amount of phones as compared to Apple, this is nothing more than Apple playing the bully.

Apple's size and power is irrelevant. Whether they're the "underdog" or not, Samsung's device didn't pass legal tests in this case. That fact doesn't magically change or take on new meaning based on Apple's size and influence.

 

[divinox]

The fact that Apple invented a design that defined how "modern tablet" looks like, does not grant everyone else right to use that design.

What do you _really_ mean by that? edge-to-edge glass? what else is there to it? a metal rim at best?

----------

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple did invent minimalstic. Go back to 2007 with the existing market and th introduction of the iPhone , and then again to 2010 with the ipad...

How did samsung 'smart' phone looked in 2007? Yup, like a berry phone. How did samsung pad looked like in 2010? Yup, like nothing because that is what they had...

Apple invented minimalism? Oh my... are you like, twelve?

----------

TVs DO NOT look the same.

Sure, but good luck finding a non-glossy TV these days...

 

[*LTD*]

Just stop? Seriously? I bet your the only person here who is going to state Apple has changed the world of handheld gaming.

They most certainly have.

It's been in the news since 2008.

You can use whatever pejoratives you like. That, of course, doesn't make it any less of a reality.

 

[divinox]

So what? Apple isn't suing over the functionality of the device, they're suing over the design, hence, the purpose of the device is irrelevant. Only the design matters, and as you can clearly see, the iPad looks strikingly similar to that photo frame



Have you looked at the Galaxy Tab from all angles? It could only be mistaken for an iPad to a blind person

That statement is very unfair to the blind. they would easily tell the difference. i think the word you may be looking for is something like "moron".

----------

Ok, I like this one.

Image

its a great picture, showing how ridiculous apples claim truly is.

 

[apolloa]

They most certainly have.

It's been in the news since 2008.

You can use whatever pejoratives you like. That, of course, doesn't make it any less of a reality.

I'm glad you agree Apple have just helped the invention of shovel ware and nothing more. You have seen sense in something.

I bet you can't even explain how Apple have changed mobile gaming? You do realise Apple have in fact done NOTHING about gaming right? It's the developers? Apple hate games, alway have. But I'm sure you know more then even the great Gabe Newell when it comes to Apples gaming attitude right?

 

[divinox]

Yes, it was. But that has nothing to do with the iPad really.

are you sure that the judge considered more than just the infringement (i.e. gave a **** about validity?). from what i've read, which may ofc. be complete bull, infringement and validity are to separate cases.

----------

There is no actual abuse going on. This is what these courts are here for. Different countries have different laws when it comes to intellectual property. Neither one is more right or wrong than the other.

If a party thinks (Apple, in this case) that they have a legitimate claim, they're going to pursue it in as many jurisdictions as possible. That is no guarantee of success. Also, the defendant has to defend each claim in each of the markets in which they operate.

The same mechanisms that are open to Apple are open to every other party in the industry, including Samsung.

Why has no one successfully blocked Apple products? I don't see any injunctions against Apple. Seems at this time Apple's claims are certainly valid to whatever degree in certain key markets.

Next time the competition should work a little harder on becoming an innovative and successful first-mover in key markets and patent accordingly.

What's going on now in the courts is very good. Everyone's position is becoming clarified. We're seeing who has what and who needs to make some changes. The wheat is getting separated from the chaff, so in due course we'll see where everyone stands.

except that this is regarding a community design, which is supra-national by definition (i.e. not a matter of national law).

 

[KnightWRX]

But with Samsung selling a paltry amount of phones as compared to Apple, this is nothing more than Apple playing the bully.

Uh ? What are you talking about ?



Samsung is 2nd to Apple and really close behind. And that's just for Smartphones. If you add in feature phones/dumb phones, Samsung ships quite a few more units than Apple.

IDC has this to say :

Samsung realized the largest year-over-year growth of any vendor among the top five, and key to its continued success was the global popularity of its flagship Galaxy S smartphones. What originally began as a series of high-end smartphones has proliferated well into the mass-market, but has not strayed too far from its high-end roots. Moreover, its steady cadence of device releases and updates has kept Samsung's smartphones well out in front of the competition. Samsung's bada-powered smartphones likewise grew, while demand for its Windows Phone smartphones has cooled off.

 

[divinox]

Some courts have decided the Apple has just cause in doing so.

Again, products have to stand up to legal scrutiny. Apple made the challenge, and not everyone is able to answer it effectively.

Whether Apple is "scared" is irrelevant. They're "scared" with the top products in the market? Maybe. But that's a little difficult to prove with all the tremendous success they've been having.

It's more likely they'd like to see how well their ideas (i.e., patents) stand up to everyone else's. From their perspective, those that *can* be penalized *should* be penalized.

Them's the breaks. It's a cutthroat industry.

Think of it this way. The wheat is getting separated from the chaff. We're about to see where everyone stands. Who knows, some of Apple's competitors might just be left standing strong.

some aka one, which happen to be the "texas of europe".

(since you know its one, why say some?)

 

[hot spare]

For all those people with knowledge in EU community designs: is there any such design already registered for larger rectangle (16:9 ratio) with minimal bezel? (Hint:TV) I might want to drop by and just pay the registration fees.

second thought: how about a smaller 8-10 inch rectangle with no bezel and no buttons?

 

[divinox]

Based on the tiny little affair the European courts had with Microsoft.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/microsoft-loses-appeal-over-monopoly-fine-402668.html

i truly suspect this will end up in the european court... will take a few years though.

 

[KnightWRX]

are you sure that the judge considered more than just the infringement (i.e. gave a **** about validity?). from what i've read, which may ofc. be complete bull, infringement and validity are to separate cases.

Nope, I'm not sure, but since all we have to go on is the comments by the judge, it seems her reference was the '607 registration only. The "minimalistic" design bit.

 

[divinox]

Actually they (or anyone) can to a point. Remember this is Europe not the US.

From my earlier post.

Normally (Based on readings from national court rulings) to be granted protection your design needs to be distinct though. Apples minimalist design hardly meets that criterium (a point the Dutch judge sympathizes with).

----------

The way it looks to me is that apple are creating appliances and consumer devices that are not based on a generic spec or concept. Anyone can make an IBM pc compatible device and load it windows, that cannot be copyrighted. If you pay enough you can be a licensee of blu ray, or make an amp with hdmi etc..

But you can't just copy the look and feel of a device from a another company. It's just not on, and if the company wants to sue there is nothing wrong with that. The design of the iPad includes the software and the interface to the design.

Tell me what company had a touch screen device (phone or tablet) that had a grid display as its main home screen with a separated bar of favourite apps as the bottom row? No one before Apple.

Nokias grid display was never the front screen of symbian, nor googles original g1. HTC sense had the huge calendar at centre and even the nexus one doesn't have the grid display as the main display.

So samsung have gone out of their way to make the grid display the main display of their devices and made that prominent on the box of their devices which are also plain White like apple. WTF?

And people don't think they were trying to piggy back off the success of the iPhone/iPad? How come the samsung series is the biggest selling android happens to look the most like apple's devices? You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure this out.

In the post pc generation you will no longer just get a generic set of parts and badge them together and stick a windows OS in it. Design is everything. Design costs. Design is intensive. Design is not invention, it is the organisation of existing ideas. Apple did not have to "invent" the tablet to protect their design. Companies should not be allowed to profit off of someone else's design. You wouldnt expect Armani to be allowed to create a rain coat with a similar Burberry checquered pattern as are in Burberry rain coats would you?

Finally, if other companies can create mobile devices that don't look anything like apples products then it's clear that the design is not "obvious" as many people believe. Apple have paid good money to design a unique UI and tablet why should anyone copy it for free?

1) Fill up any windows tablet with enough icons, right-click: arrange and there you go. Then again, the tab doesnt really have grid-based icons as its main-feat (and grid based icons have been the dominant paradigm in every single high-res phone since 1992 (IBM Simon, google it)).

2) The grid display is not the front screen of Sammys Android either, reducing your point to air, if even that.

3) As stated above, they havent.

Cant be bothered to read further on. Im sorry.

----------

Remember when tech sites used to show us the latest and greatest in neat gadgets? You know, before everyone decided to start suing everyone else over who owns exclusive rights to concepts such as "thin" and "minimalist"?

I do. Those days are sorely missed.

Indeed. Those were the days.

 

[SandynJosh]

So I've learnt.. I don't agree with it, it's a stupid law, but so is the US patent system at present. I don't think Samsung will be too worried though and will come up with counter attack plan.

Yeah, Samsung can counter attack with a uniquely designed product the second time around. They cheated, got caught, and it's expensive. Meanwhile the other copycat companies are re-thinking their ripoff plans.