Apple wins permanent ban on Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany

2456713

Comments

  • charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,068member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    If Apple lost it would have been foolish, but the fact that they won only helps the consumer in that it'll help spur wholly original innovation. Despite the fact that I think a 7" is a stupid size I admire Amazon for talking a stand and doing their own thing. That takes balls. Amazon aren't simply 'copying' Apple.



    Amazon???



    This is about Samsung





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    Personally, I think Apple would be smarter to take a Microsoft approach by forcing a license out of companies like Samsung. Instead, I think it is trying to shut them down. The benefits of the license are 1) money on every device sold, which in turn makes Android less desirable, and 2) it would allow Apple to resolve outstanding patent issues in its favor.



    Not Apple's style. Licensing patents sure. In fact depending on the patent they could be sued if they didn't license it. But their trade dress, nope. To license it would basically be to endorse a form of cloning of their products and we've seen how well that worked for them in the past. They won't make that mistake again. Plus to cover the whole trade dress they would probably have to license iOS and they really aren't going to do that





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jj.yuan View Post


    Samsung and Apple can still make a deal. I don't think Apple would refuse a reasonable deal.



    The only deal that Apple will go for is that Samsung pulls all their stuff that suddenly had the same (according to Samsung) ''generic" design right after Apple released their latest thing, stops pulling the same stunt in the future and changes up the UI elements that look like Apple's UI and Apple will stop suing them over trade dress (i.e. dress right in the EU)







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tawilson View Post


    The whole point Apple is making is that by copying the design it muddies Apple's reputation with people falsely believing that it may be an Apple product when it isn't. Licensing the design is NOT going to resolve that issue, is it?



    It would in fact make it worse because it would come off that Apple endorses this 'clone' implying that it is even more similar to the iPad.
  • tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,433member
    Samsung: A multibillion dollar company with no imagination. The few products I've seen with "Samsung" on it that are not a blatant copies of somebody else's successful product are all horribly over-designed deformities. Have you seen their appliances? You'd think for a company that big they can afford to hire a competent design chief AND not overrule his or her design decisions.
  • apple ][apple ][ Posts: 7,909member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post


    Samsung: A multibillion dollar company with no imagination. The few products I've seen with "Samsung" on it that are not a blatant copies of somebody else's successful product are all horribly over-designed deformities. Have you seen their appliances? You'd think for a company that big they can afford to hire a competent design chief AND not overrule his or her design decisions.



    In Samsung's defense, I remember that they had some decent looking monitors a year or two ago, and later I noticed that some other monitor companies came out with their own monitors that closely resembled Samsung's design. I am not talking about the technical aspects or the performance of the monitor, solely the design.



    For all I know, maybe Samsung ripped off that monitor design (I think it was the Touch of Color series) from somebody else also, but AFAIK, that is not the case.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 14,553member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Despite the fact that I think a 7" is a stupid size I admire Amazon for talking a stand and doing their own thing. That takes balls. Amazon aren't simply 'copying' Apple.



    The ban will likely be extended to 7" devices too. Nothing to do with how the device works or what OS it uses. It could be a Windows8 device for that matter. If it's a rectangle with rounded corners it may be swept up in the same trap and banned in Germany.



    This is not at all about icons, the OS, touchscreen or anything of that sort as the article plainly says. Apple wasn't suing about any of those. It's simply based on line drawings of a possible shape of a future device that Apple originally filed years before the iPad. This ruling could effectively ban any other rectangular, rounded corner slate or tablet offered by anyone else with any OS.
  • mennomenno Posts: 854member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    The ban will likely be extended to 7" devices too. Nothing to do with how the device works or what OS it uses. It could be a Windows8 device for that matter. If it's a rectangle with rounded corners it may be swept up in the same trap and banned in Germany.



    It's worth noting that the judge did NOT compare this product to the ipad2 for this ruling, but ONLY the drawings in the filed community design.



    The drawings in the filed community design show a rectangle



    Buttons, bezel, and thickness are all NOT part of the community design. JUST that rectangle



    So unless a company goes the route of sony (making odd looking tablets that limit use-cases) , or they make a tablet with something other than four sides, EVERY tablet developed will infringe.
  • boriscletoboriscleto Posts: 155member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Looks like McDonalds beat McDowells this time around,,,
    Cleo McDowell: Look... me and the McDonald's people got this little misunderstanding. See, they're McDonald's... I'm McDowell's. They got the Golden Arches, mine is the Golden Arcs. They got the Big Mac, I got the Big Mick. We both got two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles and onions, but their buns have sesame seeds. My buns have no seeds.



    And Samsung are diseased rhinoceros pizzle.
  • mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 1,544member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    Personally, I think Apple would be smarter to take a Microsoft approach by forcing a license out of companies like Samsung. Instead, I think it is trying to shut them down. The benefits of the license are 1) money on every device sold, which in turn makes Android less desirable, and 2) it would allow Apple to resolve outstanding patent issues in its favor.



    Apple doesn't want or need the licensing money... What they want is for other companies to design their own products... This is what will truly benefit consumers. This isn't barring Samsung from entering these markets, it's barring Samsung from entering the market without doing their own design work... Samsung is great at manufacturing, but they obviously lack any kind of design department. Apple doesn't want Samsung out of the market, they Samsung's devices to be Samsung's devices, not blatant clones.



    It's funny that Samsung likes to claim this will stall innovation and lessen consumer choice, when in fact, it is going to force Samsung to redesign their products and actually give consumers something else/different to choose from. By not being to copy other's designs, it will spur innovation.



    I'd also like to say... There are some people who say that Apple is only doing this because they don't like competition. Obviously they don't realize that Apple has been competing with the mother of all cmetitors for the last 20 years, Microsoft. A company that tried its damnedest during the 90's to buy up and squash all competition. Apple is not afraid to compete... Except against it's own products via blatant copying from other companies. Apple spends a lot of time and money researching, designing and testing their products, that's what all their patents clearly show.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 14,553member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post


    It's funny that Samsung likes to claim this will stall innovation and lessen consumer choice, when in fact, it is going to force Samsung to redesign their products and actually give consumers something else/different to choose from. By not being to copy other's designs, it will spur innovation.



    Actually you have a point. All Samsung would need to do is leave the corners close to square and the German judge wouldn't have any other problem with Samsung's Tab. All the other elements don't concern him.
  • mennomenno Posts: 854member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post


    Apple doesn't want or need the licensing money... What they want is for other companies to design their own products... This is what will truly benefit consumers. This isn't barring Samsung from entering these markets, it's barring Samsung from entering the market without doing their own design work... Samsung is great at manufacturing, but they obviously lack any kind of design department. Apple doesn't want Samsung out of the market, they Samsung's devices to be Samsung's devices, not blatant clones.



    It's funny that Samsung likes to claim this will stall innovation and lessen consumer choice, when in fact, it is going to force Samsung to redesign their products and actually give consumers something else/different to choose from. By not being to copy other's designs, it will spur innovation.



    Look at the community design.



    Then tell me how Samsung can design a product that doesn't violate the community design in a way that adds something USEFUL to the product.



    Companies being forced to find a new design to avoid getting banned isn't "forcing them to innovate"
  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Samsung, unsurprisingly, has vowed to appeal the court's decision, according to IDG News. A company spokesman said the decision "severely limits consumer choice in Germany."



    Well, no. Samsung severely limited consumer choice when they failed to provide a differentiated product. If Samsung had created a product that was different than the iPad, consumers would have had a choice.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    Personally, I think Apple would be smarter to take a Microsoft approach by forcing a license out of companies like Samsung. Instead, I think it is trying to shut them down. The benefits of the license are 1) money on every device sold, which in turn makes Android less desirable, and 2) it would allow Apple to resolve outstanding patent issues in its favor.



    That would be foolhardy. First, Apple would lose hardware revenue if people could buy the same thing elsewhere. Second, cheap imitations only tarnish the brand.
  • sennensennen Posts: 1,405member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Menno View Post


    So unless a company goes the route of sony (making odd looking tablets that limit use-cases) , or they make a tablet with something other than four sides, EVERY tablet developed will infringe.



    You do industrial designers around the world a disservice, who for the most part are more creative than those employed by Samsung.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 14,553member
    Jragosta, weren't you the one that felt it would be ridiculous for an injunction to be granted based simply on a rounded rectangle, going on to claim it was no such thing?
  • mennomenno Posts: 854member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sennen View Post


    You do industrial designers around the world a disservice, who for the most part are more creative than those employed by Samsung.



    Apple has the community design on a RECTANGLE.



    Again, the community design does NOT cover buttons, thickness, or how big it is. And the german court used JUST the community design (not comparing it to the ipad)



    I know industrial designers are creative, but I fail to see how making a tablet with 5 sides instead of 4 is "encouraging innovation."
  • tjwaltjwal Posts: 404member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by boriscleto View Post


    And Samsung are diseased rhinoceros pizzle.



    Wow is that ever an intelligent comment.
  • island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    All Samsung had to do is offset the actual working area of the glass... thin bezel on top with a thicker bezel on the bottom... and then put a row of buttons at the bottom... maybe a slight trapezoid shape... easy peezy... instead...



    Personally, I'm leaning towards a limited amount of time that something like this can be upheld... say 3 to 5 years... but that's jmho.
  • sennensennen Posts: 1,405member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Menno View Post


    Apple has the community design on a RECTANGLE.



    Again, the community design does NOT cover buttons, thickness, or how big it is. And the german court used JUST the community design (not comparing it to the ipad)



    I know industrial designers are creative, but I fail to see how making a tablet with 5 sides instead of 4 is "encouraging innovation."



    You over-simplify things to suit your simplistic argument. Is Apple suing all tablet manufacturers over this same issue? No.
  • bigdaddyguidobigdaddyguido Posts: 93member
    I know many here is hating on this "minimalistic design" wording in the ruling, but I feel that it's the whole reason the iPhone/iPad have been so dominating. Look, every tablet that was marketed before the iPad was complex, some had swiveling screens to convert from laptop to tablet, they all used styluses, most had tons of buttons, some had handles, etc.



    I think what's more interesting about the "prior art" from Kubrick and even star trek is these movies/shows were intending to make futuristic devices that seemed desirable but were straight forward. Somehow, in the months leading up to the release of the iPad, every competitor stood around, some even openly admitted they were purposefully delaying production because everyone wanted to see what apple would bring to the table.



    When apple released it, many if not most people in the tech-sphere bemoaned that it was too simple, just an oversized iPod touch with comically sized bezels. People said it would fail because it was too simple, and some joked that it wasn't actually really bigger than an iPhone cuz it was all bezel.



    Now, a couple years later, everyone is trying to say that this simple design is obvious and that everyone had obviously thought of it before. Well, that may be true, we can't read minds in the past, but apple was the only one with the balls to release such a simple device, I think it's fair to say they deserve to reap the benefits of their bold move.
  • physguyphysguy Posts: 904member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    Personally, I think Apple would be smarter to take a Microsoft approach by forcing a license out of companies like Samsung. Instead, I think it is trying to shut them down. The benefits of the license are 1) money on every device sold, which in turn makes Android less desirable, and 2) it would allow Apple to resolve outstanding patent issues in its favor.



    How do you know that's not what their doing? If Samsung is refusing this is the next logical step. We have no idea what the private negotiations are about.
  • absolutedesignzabsolutedesignz Posts: 1,930member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    All Samsung had to do is offset the actual working area of the glass... thin bezel on top with a thicker bezel on the bottom... and then put a row of buttons at the bottom... maybe a slight trapezoid shape... easy peezy... instead...



    Personally, I'm leaning towards a limited amount of time that something like this can be upheld... say 3 to 5 years... but that's jmho.



    oddly enough Android is moving towards requiring no buttons on phones or tablets.



    all tech seems to be going buttonless.



    honestly, for Samsung, I don't care. they are a little blatant.



    if they win against the Xoom then I'd be concerned.
  • mennomenno Posts: 854member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sennen View Post


    You over-simplify things to suit your simplistic argument. Is Apple suing all tablet manufacturers over this same issue? No.



    Because typically what you do in cases like this is win a case and then use that win against others.



    How am I over simplifying it? The judge did NOT compare the tab to the ipad2, but to the community design drawing (which doesn't look like an ipad2 either, it's a lot thicker)



    So you're right, Apple's not going after others. But apple has this win in Germany that they CAN use against any others if they want to.



    So say next year Asus comes out with a windows8 tablet that docks with their transformer dock and it's a runaway success (tablet/laptop transforming has that chance) Apple can use this lawsuit to strengthen the case against them, and this judge will most likely grant it there as well.



    So again, how do you make a tablet in another way and still have it be USEFUL (as in, the additions are done for some other reason than to JUST avoid this design) Sure, Sony did it. But read the reviews. They ALL say that while it's drastically improved in one orientation, the design severely limits other use cases.
Sign In or Register to comment.