Galaxy Tab Banned in Europe

[rhari79]

Originally Posted by kacir

From now on, every tablet with rectangular screen in rectangular case is in danger

Is this really the only reason for all this ruckus?

To quote from wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_...ccessor_models

It was set for a US release in March 2011 and a European release in April. However, after the iPad 2 release, some specifications were described as "inadequate" by Lee Don-Joo,[50] executive vice president of Samsung's mobile division, pointing to a possible model review or rethink of their market strategy.

After this rethink, the once fat boy went on diet and come out as a slim boy too.
If I was Apple I would be very suspicious.

[Dulin's Books]

they looked at where they were in their product cycle compared to their direct competition and moved the next iteration forward. its called responding to market trends. what the court said was following market trends in this consumer electronic segment is not allowed. if one company sells something that the consumers like to look at then others companies cant build their own devices like that

[DMB]

Originally Posted by rhari79

Is this really the only reason for all this ruckus?

To quote from wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_...ccessor_models

It was set for a US release in March 2011 and a European release in April. However, after the iPad 2 release, some specifications were described as "inadequate" by Lee Don-Joo,[50] executive vice president of Samsung's mobile division, pointing to a possible model review or rethink of their market strategy.

After this rethink, the once fat boy went on diet and come out as a slim boy too.
If I was Apple I would be very suspicious.

Surely the trend in all electronics is for lighter or slimmer. Think TVs; think laptops.

[kartu]

Originally Posted by rhari79

After this rethink, the once fat boy went on diet and come out as a slim boy too.
If I was Apple I would be very suspicious.

They should register "thin design" on top of "minimalistic". It won't work in normal courts like those in Netherlands, but there is always Johanna Bruckner-Hoffman (Dusseldorf), to help out with that..

[kacir]

Originally Posted by rhari79

Is this really the only reason for all this ruckus?

Do you think it would be reasonable for Sony to sue Amazon (and have the Kindles banned) because they resemble Sony Librié - THE first e-ink reader ever?






What exactly did Apple introduced in iPad hardware design that we haven't seen before? Total lack of standard connectors, or total lack of external memory media? There have been many tablets before. So what if shiny surface from edge to edge is the newest fad?

[rhari79]

Many of the news posts mention the phrase "Apple’s minimalistic design". In fact a Bloomberg news post goes on to talk about Apple's design patents in Europe.

These do connote something significant in-lieu of the fact that samsung was involved in a large way in manufacturing components for Apple;
Meaning it had lot more internal information about Apple

If it was just about a rectangle, Apple could have easily gone after Motorola/Archos/Dell etc.,
Or even most of the pocketpc tablet makers could have buried Apple.

And if it was just about weight reduction, then motorola could have released a less heavier Xoom. That it didnt could be because it doesnt have the knowledge that samsung "possibly" used.

Personally, I would like to see the Tab released, maybe after some sort of out of court settlement.
But who can really talk sense to rabid dogs?

[rhari79]

Originally Posted by kacir

Do you think it would be reasonable for Sony to sue Amazon (and have the Kindles banned) because they resemble Sony Librié -

Definitely possible if Sony has a patent.
But did Sony patent that in US etc., or have Amazon already licensed this from Sony?

Also on similar grounds, NotionInk can try to sue Sony for Tablet S, as they seem to look similar with tapered design.
Its also possible for Xerox to sue both Apple and Microsoft for copying(or is it stealing?) its GUI concepts.

But all seems to depend on granted patents, not hearsay like this looks like mine.
I suppose in many places, having a patent means you can sue your Dad or even your closest friend. Lawyers are the biggest gainers.

Its amazing how intricately difficult it is to be original these days as there always seems to be someone more originally original.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by rhari79

Is this really the only reason for all this ruckus?

No, it isn't. A lot of commenters have neither read Apple's complaint nor the judge's rulings, and simply assert that the Tab was banned because it had a rectangular design.

This is not the case; the Tab was banned because it incorporated *numerous* protected design elements at the same time, including edge-to-edge glass, a rectangular design with rounded corners, a centered display surrounded by an evenly spaced bevel, a metal rim, the use of square icons on a grid in the display...and several other elements.

The problem, again, isn't that the Tab used a couple of these elements; the problem is that Samsung used *all* of them...and that the use of all of these elements was not required to make a tablet. The Nook Color, for example, manages to be a perfectly functional tablet without using edge-to-edge glass, a metal rim, or the use of iPad-type icons...and the little cut out in the lower left of the NC also distinguishes it from the iPad.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

The problem, again, isn't that the Tab used a couple of these elements; the problem is that Samsung used *all* of them...

... and made it a different aspect ratio, and run a different operating system with a different home screen layout, hiding away those icons in an app drawer, and put a big SAMSUNG on the front just in case anyone was still in any doubt.

And gave it a look and feel which, yes, was reminiscent of the iPad but which also looks a lot like Samsung's earlier products.

If I'd never seen an iPad I would be perfectly happy with the Tab being a natural evolution of the Samsung design from its televisions, photo frames and video players, with form following function in the long established drive to make consumer devices thinner and lighter.

And that is why the German court's decision is so disappointing.

Graham

[leebase]

Samsung makes copycat products. It's about time they got their hand slapped.

Lee

[afv011]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

... including edge-to-edge glass, a rectangular design with rounded corners, a centered display surrounded by an evenly spaced bevel, a metal rim, the use of square icons on a grid in the display...and several other elements.

Totally agree. Samsung should make an hexagonal tablet, with a triangular screen, off-center of course, with star-shaped icons. And it should not be flat, God forbid! Make it wavy!



That was sarcasm, by the way.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by Graham

... and made it a different aspect ratio, and run a different operating system with a different home screen layout, hiding away those icons in an app drawer, and put a big SAMSUNG on the front just in case anyone was still in any doubt.

Those issues don't matter. The issue is not that Samsung made a *counterfeit* iPad. The issue is that Samsung appropriated too many distinctive design elements from the iPad.

Analogies are always imperfect, but I'll use one anyway. Volvo station wagons have a distinctive look. If Ford wants to make a station wagon, they can't copy the Volvo's design. They can't copy Volvo's design even if they have a different engine under the hood. And they are still copying Volvo's design even if they make minor changes to the design - like using 16" wheels instead of 17" wheels, or if they have slightly different door handles. And it doesn't matter if the car says "Ford" and not "Volvo" on the grille.

So a different OS, slightly different aspect ratio, and different location for the icons do not really distinguish the Samsung's design from the iPad's design. Or at least make it much more difficult to do so than people seem to think.

(And, honestly, some of the Samsung's choices are just blatant rip-offs - even if we grant them the shape and edge-to-edge glass, they really didn't need to include the same type of metal rim or the grid of icons (even if you get to them by doing X instead of Y...particularly when Samsung used them in their promotional copy)

There are a lot of ways of designing a station wagon other than the Volvo way - other companies just have to choose a different design. (And while they can't be penalized for elements that are inherent in all station wagons (4 wheels, 4 doors and a hatch, etc., there are many, many ways to incorporate these elements without looking like a volvo.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by leebase

Samsung makes copycat products. It's about time they got their hand slapped.

Lee

Of course, Apple never copied anyone before, right? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

[afv011]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

So a different OS, slightly different aspect ratio, and different location for the icons do not really distinguish the Samsung's design from the iPad's design. Or at least make it much more difficult to do so than people seem to think.

With all honestly, do you really think that somebody, seeing an iPad next to a Galaxy Tab would think they are one and the same?

[kjk]

Originally Posted by afv011

With all honestly, do you really think that somebody, seeing an iPad next to a Galaxy Tab would think they are one and the same?

I don't think that "one and the same" was the burden of proof in this case.

“The court is of the opinion that Apple’s minimalistic design isn’t the only technical solution to make a tablet computer, other designs are possible,” Brueckner-Hofmann said. “For the informed customer there remains the predominant overall impression that the device looks” like the design Apple has protected in Europe.