or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › German court partly lifts ban on sales of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

German court partly lifts ban on sales of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1

post #1 of 39
Thread Starter 
A German court has reversed its decision from last week and partly lifted the ban on sales of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe, because it is unclear whether the court has the authority to impose the injunction outside of Germany.

The Dusseldorf regional court made the announcement that the ban would be lifted for countries outside of Germany on Tuesday, but sales of the tablet are still barred in the court's home country, according to The Wall Street Journal. A court spokesman reportedly said it's unclear whether the court can ban Samsung, a South Korean company, from selling goods outside of Germany.

However, Samsung's German-based operations are still barred from selling the device throughout the entire European Union, including the Netherlands. Samsung, in a statement, said it welcomed the court's decision.

The reversal comes just one week after the German court blocked the sale of Samsung's new Galaxy Tab 10.1 across the European Union for alleged patent violations. A judge in the Regional Court of Dusseldorf found that the touchscreen tablet infringed on the patented design of the iPad 2.

Prior to the ban, the device had gone on sale in the U.K., but the initial decision meant Samsung would have to remove it from store shelves and cease marketing it in Britain. But Tuesday's reversal would suggest that Samsung can once again begin selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the U.K. and other countries outside of Germany in Europe.

The Galaxy Tab 10.1 remains banned in Australia, where a local court also found that the device could be in violation of Apple's patented design for the iPad 2. As a result, Samsung was forced to delay the launch of its new tablet in Australia until the legal dispute can be resolved.



The legal spat between Apple and Samsung began in April, when Apple sued Samsung in the U.S. and accused the company of violating patents relating to the iPhone and iPad. Samsung has responded in kind with its own patent infringement suits against Apple.

Separate lawsuits filed by each company with the U.S. International Trade Commission have asked that each others' products be banned from importation because of alleged patent infringement. But the ITC has not taken to such drastic measures in America.
post #2 of 39
Banning this might even create some desire to possess one.
post #3 of 39
Given that the EU has a free flow of goods and services, I wonder if the legal problem isn't just with the temporary ban until the case has been decided in full. The EU has complex rules about what happens between countries in cases like this, e.g. it could for instance be that the court ruling in Germany has some sort of semi-automatic working on other countries and that a case there does not need to be tried on the merits of the arguments, but only technically in a legal sense if there has been another case somewhere in the EU.

Can someone explain what the situation is?
post #4 of 39
The idea that a product could be banned without a full hearing is absolutely stupid in the first place....

These look and feel suits with be the death of consumer electronics IMHO..... Sooner or later there will be more legal cost attached to a device that the manufacturing costs...

The world courts are going to have to stop this crap now!!!!
post #5 of 39
Important takeaway:


A German court has reversed its decision from last week and partly lifted the ban on sales of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe, because it is unclear whether the court has the authority to impose the injunction outside of Germany.


Fair enough. Time to put it before a court that *can* rule on it.

http://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/16/...lly-suspended/

The injunction was issued against both the Korean parent company and its German subsidiary, and there is some legal ambiguity as to whether the parent company should be considered to have an "establishment" in Germany and thus be subject to such international injunctions. If Samsung Korea is determined to not have an establishment in Germany, Apple's case for an international injunction against the company would be required to go through specific courts in Alicante, Spain.

Sounds like a plan.

Keep pushing, Apple.
post #6 of 39
So what is it? Barred or not. I just woke up but the second and third paragraph seem contradictory.
post #7 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by sranger View Post

The idea that a product could be banned without a full hearing is absolutely stupid in the first place....

These look and feel suits with be the death of consumer electronics IMHO..... Sooner or later there will be more legal cost attached to a device that the manufacturing costs...

The world courts are going to have to stop this crap now!!!!

Agreed. This is ridiculous.

"Look" = It is a slate. Big deal. All slates are flat (mostly black) and have a touch screen. Some have buttons, some don't. Who cares. This should NOT be a reason to sue or stop the sales of a product.

"Feel" = WTF? All are touch at this point. They have icons you touch to open a program (sorry....app). None of them are exactly the same, nor are they that different. Big deal.

If we are to believe that this look and feel crap has merit then what about the Mac laptops? The look like PC laptops...which existed before Mac laptops. They all have keyboards and screens. They LOOK the same. Stop the presses!!! Block Apple from selling laptops.
post #8 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Important takeaway:


A German court has reversed its decision from last week and partly lifted the ban on sales of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe, because it is unclear whether the court has the authority to impose the injunction outside of Germany.


Fair enough. Time to put it before a court that *can* rule on it.

http://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/16/...lly-suspended/

The injunction was issued against both the Korean parent company and its German subsidiary, and there is some legal ambiguity as to whether the parent company should be considered to have an "establishment" in Germany and thus be subject to such international injunctions. If Samsung Korea is determined to not have an establishment in Germany, Apple's case for an international injunction against the company would be required to go through specific courts in Alicante, Spain.

Sounds like a plan.

Keep pushing, Apple.

I'd like to see peoples faces here once Samsung wins. Apple doesn't have a strong case. Its been widely known amongst analysts and even fellow IP lawyers. There were prior art before Apple's lawsuit. What this case shows is Apple's tendency to over exaggerate.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #9 of 39
Stuff that Apple stole / bought

- the mouse (stole)
- the GUI (stole)
- touch (stole)
- multitouch (bought)
- iTunes (bought)
- iPad (bought)
- laptop (stole)
- OS X (most parts stolen)
- antenna (stole)
- ...
post #10 of 39
The Germans apologized for telling the rest of Europe what to do. Old habit.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #11 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

Stuff that Apple stole / bought

- the mouse (stole)
- the GUI (stole)
- touch (stole)
- multitouch (bought)
- iTunes (bought)
- iPad (bought)
- laptop (stole)
- OS X (most parts stolen)
- antenna (stole)
- ...

stuff that "invoice" stole

5 secs of everyones life reading that list.
post #12 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by suddenly newton View Post

the germans apologized for telling the rest of europe what to do. Old habit. :d

rofl!
post #13 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

Stuff that Apple stole / bought

- the mouse (stole)
- the GUI (stole)
- touch (stole)
- multitouch (bought)
- iTunes (bought)
- iPad (bought)
- laptop (stole)
- OS X (most parts stolen)
- antenna (stole)
- ...

Somebody keeps leaving that damn door open...
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #14 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Agreed. This is ridiculous.

"Look" = It is a slate. Big deal. All slates are flat (mostly black) and have a touch screen.

Which none of them had until Apple did .... ergo .... copying.
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
post #15 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

Which none of them had until Apple did .... ergo .... copying.

All innovations origins from copying, doesn't it? (to realize this you of course have to widen your view of the past, not just look at the recent past )
post #16 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

Which none of them had until Apple did .... ergo .... copying.

I'm sorry, I quite vividly remember Steve Balmer presenting slates a few months BEFORE the iPad was even presented. They came from various manufacturers and had all a rectangular shape and had all touchscreens.
post #17 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

I'm sorry, I quite vividly remember Steve Balmer presenting slates a few months BEFORE the iPad was even presented. They came from various manufacturers and had all a rectangular shape and had all touchscreens.

And they all ran Windows. Which was entirely useless and doomed them to failure.
post #18 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

Stuff that Apple stole / bought

Stuff that companies other than Apple stole/bought:

invoice's time, soul, sentience, self-respect, credibility, and (soon to be) place on this forum.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #19 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by bartfat View Post

And they all ran Windows. Which was entirely useless and doomed them to failure.

that's not the point

The point is that Apple copied the rectangular form factor
post #20 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

that's not the point

The point is that Apple copied the rectangular form factor

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #21 of 39
Someone should ask the forum moderator to move this thread to PCworld.com because only the anti-Apple folks lurk on this topic. They love when Apple loses at anything.
post #22 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

that's not the point

The point is that Apple copied the rectangular form factor

In 2010 apple invented the tablet. For over a decade people have been copying their design.
post #23 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljocampo View Post

Someone should ask the forum moderator to move this thread to PCworld.com because only the anti-Apple folks lurk on this topic. They love when Apple loses at anything.

... So everyone has to worship apple even if they do something negative to the industry even when they are getting out of hand with the legal battle. Some people are thinking and even speaking their opinions.
post #24 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

... So everyone has to worship apple even if they do something negative to the industry even when they are getting out of hand with the legal battle. Some people are thinking and even speaking their opinions.

You don't have to worship anyone. You have a right to your opinions. IMO, Apple has not done anything negative to the industry; the reverse is more true. They are being sued much more than they sue. My point is that the anti-Apple crowd, like yourself, would enjoy the company of their own kind over at PC World. Unless you just enjoy sticking your crap in our face here
post #25 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

In 2010 apple invented the tablet. For over a decade people have been copying their design.

That's untrue. The Tablets were presented by Steve Balmar a few months before the iPad was. To my account that makes these tablets as the primers. But then of course, you may live in a time warp distortion field.
post #26 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash-reverse View Post

So what is it? Barred or not. I just woke up but the second and third paragraph seem contradictory.

Not only that. First they write that the The Netherlands was excluded from the bar, now AI writes that the bar is lifted from Europe, except for The Netherlands. So what is it? Not that I want 1 mind you.

By AppleInsider Staff
Published: 12:25 PM EST


Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The decision means that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 has been barred from sale and marketing across all of Europe, except for the Netherlands.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #27 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

That's untrue. The Tablets were presented by Steve Balmar a few months before the iPad was. To my account that makes these tablets as the primers. But then of course, you may live in a time warp distortion field.

I think you missed that joke...if they invented the tablet a year ago the design could've have been copied for a decade...

LOL @ life...levity is your king.
post #28 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Somebody keeps leaving that damn door open...

I agree! My ignore list just seems to keep growing. 2 already from this small thread.
post #29 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

Stuff that Apple stole / bought

- the mouse (stole)
- the GUI (stole)
- touch (stole)
- multitouch (bought)
- iTunes (bought)
- iPad (bought)
- laptop (stole)
- OS X (most parts stolen)
- antenna (stole)
- ...

At least some of this is urban myth. At least some of it is nonsense.

Mouse/GUI was a business deal (look it up). Then, the GUI & mouse @ PARC was quite something else than what Apple in the end invented. OS X comes from NeXTSTEP, technically it was bought (Apple bought NeXT). NeXTSTEP itself was developed by NeXT.

Big claims require decent proof. Otherwise, it is just noise.
post #30 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by gctwnl View Post

At least some of this is urban myth. At least some of it is nonsense.

Mouse/GUI was a business deal (look it up). Then, the GUI & mouse @ PARC was quite something else than what Apple in the end invented. OS X comes from NeXTSTEP, technically it was bought (Apple bought NeXT). NeXTSTEP itself was developed by NeXT.

Big claims require decent proof. Otherwise, it is just noise.

Apple stole the IDEA and FORMAT of the Mouse / GUI / ...
Denying this makes you the fool of the village.

On what technology is NextStep based? Starts with U and rhymes with Nix.

Numbers. Mmmm Isn't the idea/format based on Visicalc/1-2-3/Multiplan/Excel? Stolen
Keynote. Looks like Harvard Graphics, PPT, ... were the forerunners too. Stolen
Pages. A wordprocessor, well, they got theirs in the Apple II ages. That's invented.
post #31 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

Apple stole the IDEA and FORMAT of the Mouse / GUI / ...
Denying this makes you the fool of the village.

It was a business deal. Nothing was stolen. Xerox granted Apple engineers three days of access to the PARC facilities in return for the option to buy 100,000 shares (800,000 split-adjusted shares) of Apple at the pre-IPO price of $10 a share. It was even a deal that was initiated by the VC part of Xerox if I remember correctly. The mouse/GUI Apple created (with the help of the Xerox engineer they hired) differed hugely from what they saw (which was if I recall correctly not at all that practical).
Quote:
On what technology is NextStep based? Starts with U and rhymes with Nix.

Nothing was stolen. Apple licensed Mach and BSD (may even have been free at the time). They hired Avie Tevanian who had worked on Mach at CMU (I think Microsoft tried to hire him as well). Nothing was stolen.

If you want to use a big word like `stolen' you must provide decent proof of actually stealing anything.

Btw, Unix does not rhyme with nix even if it ends with those letters. Without the u (which has the stress) there is no rhyme. Unix doesn't rhyme with 'pics' either, for instance.

Do you like to make an even larger spectacle of your stupidity? I guess you will (because you'll probably reply \)
post #32 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by gctwnl View Post


Do you like to make an even larger spectacle of your stupidity? I guess you will (because you'll probably reply \)

Don't hold back now.

I can understand that some believe Apple is stretching things by getting the Galaxy Tab barred, but why can't Samsung and the others take a page from Microsoft on touch UI design and differentiate themselves as much from the competition, esp. the market leader? Do they want to trick the customer into thinking "it looks like the iphone/ipad, so it must be as good"? Can't they explore other ways of doing things, or can we all conclude that Apple has done it the only way it will ever work well?
post #33 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

In 2010 apple invented the tablet. For over a decade people have been copying their design.

Actually God invented the tablet, and even wrote on them with his finger, no less .... problem was, they were so heavy, being made of stone and all, the shipping costs were horrendous .... hence their failure to become widespread until Apple solved the problem.
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
post #34 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by gctwnl View Post

It was a business deal. Nothing was stolen. Xerox granted Apple engineers three days of access to the PARC facilities in return for the option to buy 100,000 shares (800,000 split-adjusted shares) of Apple at the pre-IPO price of $10 a share. It was even a deal that was initiated by the VC part of Xerox if I remember correctly. The mouse/GUI Apple created (with the help of the Xerox engineer they hired) differed hugely from what they saw (which was if I recall correctly not at all that practical).
Nothing was stolen. Apple licensed Mach and BSD (may even have been free at the time). They hired Avie Tevanian who had worked on Mach at CMU (I think Microsoft tried to hire him as well). Nothing was stolen.

If you want to use a big word like `stolen' you must provide decent proof of actually stealing anything.

Btw, Unix does not rhyme with nix even if it ends with those letters. Without the u (which has the stress) there is no rhyme. Unix doesn't rhyme with 'pics' either, for instance.

Do you like to make an even larger spectacle of your stupidity? I guess you will (because you'll probably reply \)

Well, you definitely show how to be a clown.
You've just demonstrated how Apple copied, copied and copied again.

There's nothing quite original, is there?
post #35 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

There's nothing quite original, is there?

Not you, for sure .... there were lots of trolls here long before you started to copy their "style".
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
post #36 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

You've just demonstrated how Apple copied, copied and copied again

So you admit now that they did not steal? Because you have dropped the concept `stealing' here as well as in the comment section for the story "Apple exec says Google spent 'a lot of money' on Motorola" where you repeat a toned-down version of your original claims.

(I stand corrected, you must have some properly working neurons after all! )

Now you claim Apple `copied'. I would be curious to hear your definition of 'copy'. Must be broad enough for some comical 'equalities'.
post #37 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by gctwnl View Post

So you admit now that they did not steal? Because you have dropped the concept `stealing' here as well as in the comment section for the story "Apple exec says Google spent 'a lot of money' on Motorola" where you repeat a toned-down version of your original claims.

(I stand corrected, you must have some properly working neurons after all! )

Now you claim Apple `copied'. I would be curious to hear your definition of 'copy'. Must be broad enough for some comical 'equalities'.

Well, I've been told over and over again on this website that copying was stealing, no?

Ah no, that only concerns Google.
It is I who stand corrected.
post #38 of 39
Enter the predicted comical equalities...

Quote:
Originally Posted by invoice View Post

Well, I've been told over and over again on this website that copying was stealing, no?

Never mind what others say, you agree with that?

You know of course that when you use something under license it is not 'stealing'. If you use words like 'stealing' you need to show that it was not legally used. Apple bought NeXT and NeXT licensed Mach/BSD Unix. Xerox sold a look at their work and Apple used that bought information in a legal way. There was even a court case later that Xerox lost if I recall correctly.

You changed 'stole' to 'copy' only now to say that copying equals stealing. So, you're back to saying Apple 'stole'. You need to provide proof. "Legal use of" is not proof.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plato (sort of), quoting Protagoras

I cannot simply agree, Socrates, to the proposition that a copy is stealing and that a theft is copying, for there appears to me to be a difference between them.

[...]

I admit that copying bears a resemblance to stealing, for there is always some point of view in which everything is like every other thing; white is in a certain way like black, and hard is like soft, and the most extreme opposites have some qualities in common; even the parts of the face which, as we were saying before, are distinct and have different functions, are still in a certain point of view similar, and one of them is like another of them. And you may prove that they are like one another on the same principle that all things are like one another; and yet things which are like in some particular ought not to be called alike, nor things which are unlike in some particular, however slight, unlike.

post #39 of 39
Here's an interesting image. Very similar to what one can put together for the pre and post iPhone smartphone market.

Everyone is free to make their little "Apple never innovates LOL looks there were computers before the Mac" but anyone who isn't blinded by pointless hatred can see that Apple has completely changed the phone and tablet markets.

They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • German court partly lifts ban on sales of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › German court partly lifts ban on sales of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1