Galaxy Tab Banned in Europe

[anamardoll]

Hopefully this isn't a repeat thread.

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/08/...ned-in-europe/
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/a...-tablets/14175

A court in Germany released a preliminary injunction against Galaxy Tab sales based on the similar-to-iPad design. Apple released a statement that Samsung's design is a "blatant copy" of the iPad.

Given that these design line drawing also look like most smart phones, I reckon those will be next on the chopping block. I suppose we all now know why B&N Nook Color has that silly gash in the corner -- line drawing infringement avoidance!

[elcreative]

There is coverage in the Android forum at https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=145908 which deals with this legal ruling...

[Dulin's Books]

apple also is going after xoom and already got an injunction against someone else

it's "community design" trademark is going to have to be voided. its a rectangle with rounded corners and edge to edge glass. its ridiculous

this is the one in question

http://www.scribd.com/doc/61944044/C...000181607-0001

of course it looks to me like its a 4:3 rectangle. they should be able to argue a 16:9 rectangle is different

[anamardoll]

Dulin, I hope you're right about the voiding. I think the design is incredibly generic -- it would be the equivalent of someone patenting "fold over closed" computer devices and then going after every laptop manufacturer ever.

Heck, my smart phone has enough similarities to those line drawings to be banned under this German ruling, I think. (I rather suspect the Nook Touch would, too, based on the form factor alone!)

[RainingLemur]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Dulin, I hope you're right about the voiding. I think the design is incredibly generic -- it would be the equivalent of someone patenting "fold over closed" computer devices and then going after every laptop manufacturer ever.

Don't give anyone any iDeas...

[TheJohnNewton]

A court in Common Senselandia has decided the world needs a do over an has thus sentenced all lawyers to death.

[anamardoll]

I am terribly upset at the court money wasted on these cases, and the lost sales on taxes. With the economy the way it is, it is NOT a good idea to help companies build monopolies with overly broad patents and out-of-control litigation.

I don't consider myself an Apple hater, but I will never purchase another Apple device after these heavy-handed patent suits. I seriously think judges should have the option to say, "your suit is silly, I'm putting this patent in the public domain". That should discourage companies going to court unless it's open and shut. And the patent offices need to stop approving these overly broad patents.

[TimW]

Originally Posted by TheJohnNewton

A court in Common Senselandia has decided the world needs a do over an has thus sentenced all lawyers to death.

That reminds me of the joke:

"What do you call 2,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea?"

.
.
.

"A good start."

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

I am terribly upset at the court money wasted on these cases, and the lost sales on taxes. With the economy the way it is, it is NOT a good idea to help companies build monopolies with overly broad patents and out-of-control litigation.

I don't consider myself an Apple hater, but I will never purchase another Apple device after these heavy-handed patent suits. I seriously think judges should have the option to say, "your suit is silly, I'm putting this patent in the public domain". That should discourage companies going to court unless it's open and shut. And the patent offices need to stop approving these overly broad patents.

It's not the fault of the court. If a patent has been granted, and the patent holder can demonstrate that it has been used without permission, the court has no option other than to act.

If you make the decision not to buy any product whose manufacturer has sued someone for patent infringement, you're rapidly going to find yourself with no products to buy. It's a game that every manufacturer - yes, including Android device makers - plays. Samsung probably do it at least as often as Apple.

Eg, here is a story about Samsung suing Siemens for alleged infringement of patents relating to LED technology. Here they're suing a company called "AU Optonics" for display patent infringement. And here they're suing Apple.

Everyone plays the game. Samsung are no angels.

[anamardoll]

Harry, I realize it's not the fault of the court -- that's why I say they should have the option to review the patent at time of suit and say "no, this patent is ridiculous".

And I did not say that any company that ever sues for patent infringement is on my "no buy" list. There's a difference between occasionally making a decision I disagree with and pursuing a constant strategy of shutting down competition. This last year alone, I've seen Apple make multiple harmful decisions, including lawsuits against Galaxy Tab, threats against places that call themselves an app "Market", and demanding 30% on in-app purchases in an attempt to steer people to the iBook store.

To me, it's an overall pattern of behavior. I don't think that makes me an Apple hater, but rather cautiously wary of a company that I view as determined to shut down all competition.

[RainingLemur]

Originally Posted by TimW

That reminds me of the joke:

"What do you call 2,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea?"

An environmental hazard?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

To me, it's an overall pattern of behavior. I don't think that makes me an Apple hater, but rather cautiously wary of a company that I view as determined to shut down all competition.

Apple, like Microsoft, are in the public eye, but I really do wonder if they are any more guilty of "spurious" patent violation claims than any other large electronics company is. Do you have any reason to suppose that they are? Are Samsung any more likely to be an innocent party than Siemens and AU Optronics in the news stories I linked to above? I don't know the answer to that question - do you?

[HappyMartin]

Interesting that Samsung makes the A5 processor and some screens for Apple. Would that not compromise Apples supply chain? Then again why lose the work.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by HappyMartin

Interesting that Samsung makes the A5 processor and some screens for Apple. Would that not compromise Apples supply chain?

No. It's all a game, and all the big companies know how it's played. It's not about shutting anyone down; it's about licence revenues. A sues B. B countersues A. The result is that A pays B a certain licence fee, and B does the same to A. This is stuff that happens every day. That's why big companies buy up interesting-looking patents. It's all about licensing rights.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Apple, like Microsoft, are in the public eye, but I really do wonder if they are any more guilty of "spurious" patent violation claims than any other large electronics company is. Do you have any reason to suppose that they are? Are Samsung any more likely to be an innocent party than Siemens and AU Optronics in the news stories I linked to above? I don't know the answer to that question - do you?

No, I don't.

I don't mean that flippantly -- you make the very good point that it is possible that a company I support is doing something that I don't approve of and yet don't know about. A major problem with the "free market" is that we really can't spend the rest of our lives verifying that, say, Dell doesn't kill a puppy with each laptop model they produce. IF we find out about it, we can take our money elsewhere, but if we don't know about a company's abuses, then we can't effectively chose how to spend our money.

However. I am extremely interested in tech news and my husband has a particular interest in the patent wars. I have reason to believe that Apple really is behaving more badly than, say, Samsung and not that the media just has a major interest in Apple stories. I may, of course, be wrong -- but suppose it boils down to the fact that I'd rather spend my money on a company that might be bad than a company that I know is bad*.

(* By which I mean "engaging in a systematic behavioral pattern that I disapprove of". Shortened to "bad" to be easier to read.)