Galaxy Tab Banned in Europe

[JD Gumby]

Originally Posted by Graham

Interesting. In the image I saw of the Tab box the other day the Samsung device was more tilted, much more similar to the angle of the iPad on the Apple box.

I wonder if I was victim to some Photoshopping, or just suffering from poor memory?

Graham

Well, a Google image search for the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 box/package only brings up that one style of box, so you were either mistaken or found a hoax somewhere.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by JD Gumby

Well, a Google image search for the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 box/package only brings up that one style of box, so you were either mistaken or found a hoax somewhere.

My Google search actually returned two different box designs, presumably for different markets, but see my later post where I figured out what I was remembering.

Graham

[Graham]

Originally Posted by kjk

Isn't the iPad just a big iPod Touch though?

OK, trying to push the look and feel research further back in response to this, here's a Samsung device from 2006, before either the iPod Touch or iPhone was released.

http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/s...-movies-music/

Admittedly this picture frame isn't touchscreen, but it does share some content consumption functionality, and shows that the black bezel, flat screen, rounded corners design has some history with Samsung as well.

Graham

[RockdaMan]

I would posit that the date it was presented to the public is immaterial. Of greater significance would be the date that the patents, processes and trademarks were presented for registration to the government.

It would be interesting to see Joo Joo go after the Android tablet makers.

Originally Posted by Graham

There's no need for the quote marks. We all understand that we're mumbling on the sidelines.

However, can you explain to me why, when Apple's injunction revolves around Samsung having 'stolen' the iPad's trade dress, the JooJoo should not be used as an indication that the features highlighted by Apple (flat screen, black bezel, rounded corners, side ports), all of which appeared earlier in the JooJoo, were obvious choices in tablet design and should be available to all manufacturers.

Please don't say 'it's for the judges to decide'; that's taken as read. This is a forum discussion. What's your opinion?

Graham

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Graham

Admittedly this picture frame isn't touchscreen, but it does share some content consumption functionality, and shows that the black bezel, flat screen, rounded corners design has some history with Samsung as well.

I think that I've seen digital picture frames with those characteristics long before.

[Graham]

The more I dig into this the further back the Samsung look and feel of black bevel with rounded corners and metallic rim goes.

Here's their 4" video player from early 2006:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/05/s...for-pre-order/

EDIT: updated link as earlier one wasn't working. The device was shown in late 2005/early 2006, though this article is from later in the year.

Graham

[Graham]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

I would posit that the date it was presented to the public is immaterial. Of greater significance would be the date that the patents, processes and trademarks were presented for registration to the government.

It would be interesting to see Joo Joo go after the Android tablet makers.

My point is that nobody should need to go after anybody. These are obvious design choices which should not be patentable. I don't believe Apple has a proven patent for them either; isn't this the start of a proceeding where they are claiming such a patent?

Graham

[kjk]

Love that Samsung digital frame-it's more like an iPad than the iPad!

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by Graham

My point is that nobody should need to go after anybody. These are obvious design choices which should not be patentable. I don't believe Apple has a proven patent for them either; isn't this the start of a proceeding where they are claiming such a patent?

Graham

This. If the entire evolution of the market has been leading to "black shiny rectangle with glass on the front", then Apple doesn't get to claim that only they get to do it and everyone else can suck it. So to speak.

[osnova]

First, suing Amazon for "Appstore" now this. Apple has crossed the line of absurdity. Apple in the Wonderland. Are they trying to imitate Monster Cable?

Such absurd claims undermine people's buy-in into the legal system.

[RockdaMan]

Doesn't look like it's over yet.

New details about Apple's lawsuit against Samsung in the Netherlands reveal that the company wants an EU-wide ban against importation or sales of practically every Galaxy device. The lawsuit is an important one, as an injunction from The Hague district court could stop Samsung's smartphones and tablets at their point of European entry.

Apple also insists that Samsung be forced to recall all infringing products from retailers within 14 days of an injunction. Unlike the situation in Germany, Samsung would not be able to skirt around the order by letting resellers sell existing stock or by funneling them from another country.

If successful, the ban would put an enormous damper on Samsung's European business. "This is a very big threat to Samsung, because basically their whole European supply chain will be broken," Canalys analyst Alastair Edwards told IDG. "This could mean it's almost game over for Samsung in Europe."

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...-smackdown.ars

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

Doesn't look like it's over yet.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...-smackdown.ars

Yes, they want a monopoly on phones and tablets. Any competitor that is doing well, must be banned. In the end, everybody will be happy in the Apple Collective.

[Sil_liS]

Who will pay the retailers for their losses?

[Thierry.C]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

Doesn't look like it's over yet.
[...]
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...-smackdown.ars

In the other side, that could be a good opportunity for retailers in European countries that do not belong to EU (like, e.g., Switzerland). If Apple win the case, Samsung would be forbidden to sell in EU, but that doesn't prevent Europeans from buying from Samsung..., right? There is a market for import/export.

Let's laught at them.
Ah ah.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Graham

My point is that nobody should need to go after anybody. These are obvious design choices which should not be patentable. I don't believe Apple has a proven patent for them either; isn't this the start of a proceeding where they are claiming such a patent?

Graham

Most obvious things are only obvious after the fact when someone has implemented them... that's one reason for patents and copyright... stops the "well that's obvious so you can't patent it etc..." arguments. At some point anything has to be put into practice and the implementer gets and advantage for that... trouble is that now patent law has gone terminally stupid...