or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung files patent case against Apple in Australia over iPhone, iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung files patent case against Apple in Australia over iPhone, iPad

post #1 of 112
Thread Starter 
After having been temporarily blocked from selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1 Android tablet in Australia, Samsung has filed a countersuit in the country, alleging the iPhone and iPad are violating its own intellectual property.

In the latest episode of the tense legal battle between the two companies, currently being fought in at least 20 cases across four continents, Samsung claimed in a lawsuit filed with the Federal Court of Australia that Apples smartphone and tablet offerings are infringing seven patents related to wireless communications standards.

The electronics giant also intends to see Apples patents that have been asserted against its Galaxy phones and tablets invalidated and revoked, Bloomberg BusinessWeek reported on Friday.

Samsung has a proud history of innovation in the mobile industry, the company said. It has invested continuously in R&D, design and technology to produce our innovative and cutting-edge mobile devices.

Apple fired the first shot in the complex patent-related confrontation between the two rivals in April, firmly accusing Samsung of copying well-known design elements of its iconic iPhone and iPad products.

The company has obtained victories in cases in
Germany and Australia, where courts have issued injunctions against Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales, as well as in the Netherlands where three Galaxy-branded handsets, including the flagship Galaxy S II, are temporarily barred from being sold.



Samsung quickly returned fire alleging that Apple is violating various patents related to power consumption and 3G data transmission. Earlier this week, reports indicated the company has filed two new lawsuits(1, 2) against the iPhone maker in France and the U.K. At the same time, Samsung is currently engaged in appealing previous unfavorable verdicts.

The South Korean electronics maker had originally claimed it would launch the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia in the "near future," but then agreed not to release the device until at least Sept. 30 after formal hearings on the matter had taken place.

As of late August, U.S. court filings listed 19 Samsung-Apple litigations, all yet to be decided despite some of them already showing preliminary verdicts favorable to Apple:

15/4/2011: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Case No. 5:11-cv-1846) (North District of California)

21/4/2011: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Japan, Inc. (Tokyo District Court, Japan JP Pat. No. 4642898 - 2011 (Yo) No. 22027)

21/4/2011: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Japan, Inc. (Tokyo District Court, Japan JP Pat. No. 4299270 - 2011 (Yo) No. 22028)

21/4/2011: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Korea Ltd (Seoul Central District Court, Korea - 2011 Kahap 39552)

21/4/2011: Samsung Electronics GmbH v. Apple, Inc. and Apple GmbH (Mannheim Regional Court, Germany) (7 O 247/11)

17/6/2011: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Japan Corp. (Tokyo District Court, Japan JP Pat. No. 4204977 - 2011 (Yo) No. 22048)

17/6/2011: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Japan Corp. (Tokyo District Court, Japan JP Pat. No. 4743919 - 2011 (Yo) No. 22049)

17/6/2011: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics GmbH (Mannheim Regional Court, Germany) (7 O 166/11)

17/6/2011: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Seoul Central District Court, Korea - No. 2011 Gahap 63647)

27/6/2011: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Court of Justice, the Hague, Netherlands) (KG 11-730)

27/6/2011: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Court of Justice, the Hague, Netherlands) (KG 11-731)

28/6/2011: In the Matter of Certain Mobile Electronic Devices (ITC Case Samsung v. Apple 337-TA-794)

29/6/2011: Samsung Elec. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Apple Inc. (District of Delaware, 11-cv-573-LPS)

29/6/2011: Samsung Electronics Italia s.p.a. v. la Apple Inc. (Tribunale Di Milano, Italy)

29/6/2011: Samsung Elec. Co. Ltd. v. Apple Retail UK et al. (UK High Court of Justice Chancery Div. Patents Court HC 11 CO 2180)

5/7/2011: In the Matter of Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components Thereof (ITC Case Apple v. Samsung 337-TA-796)

8/7/2011: Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd and Samsung Electronics France v. Apple France et al. (Tribunal De Grande Instance De Paris 11/10464)

28/7/2011: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Ltd. Co. (Federal Court of Australia, New South Wales District Registry, General Division) (NSD1243/2011)

4/8/2011: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics GmbH (Düsseldorf Regional Court)
post #2 of 112
Patent reform can't get here soon enough!

(let's hope other countries follow suit)
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #3 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Samsung has a proud history of innovation in the mobile industry, the company said. It has invested continuously in R&D, design and technology to produce our innovative and cutting-edge mobile devices.

See - the doubters have been wrong all along. Samsung really are innovative after all.
post #4 of 112
From this article, one could get the impression that despite being sued multiple times for slavishly copying the iPhone and iPad, Samsung's executives remain hell bent on finding a legal way to copycat Apple's devices. Clearly on display here is Samsung's thuggish belief they have a right "unless prevented" to steal Apple's IP and copy it. Obviously, Samsung refuses to, or is incapable of, innovating a better product than Apple's.

The counter-suits prove that Samsung's overall strategy is to force a settlement that allows them to sell knockoff phones and tablets that look, feel and act like Apple's iPhone & iPad in order to trick unsuspecting non-tech savvy shoppers who want an Apple device into buying a Samsung imitation, which is of lower quality and is minus the iOS & iTunes experience that the customer is shopping for in the first place. This is a scam, a rip-off, plain and simple.

Clearly then, trickery, thievery and greed have triumphed over innovation at Samsung. Shame on Samsung's executives who are the leaders of this criminal scam, shame on you.

Apple innovates. Samsung steals, copies and rips-off customers. Is that the message you want the world to hear, Samsung?

You're doing a good job Brownie.
post #5 of 112
No matter how many lawsuits they file, Samsung cannot hide the fact that they have committed wholesale intellectual property theft.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #6 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

See - the doubters have been wrong all along. Samsung really are innovative after all.

They were talking about photocopiers I assume?
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #7 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of Beige View Post

From this article, one could get the impression that despite being sued multiple times for slavishly copying the iPhone and iPad, Samsung's thuggish executives remain hell bent on finding a legal way to copycat Apple's devices. Clearly on display here is Samsung's belief they have a right "unless prevented" to steal Apple's IP and copy it. Obviously, Samsung refuses to, or is incapable of, innovating a better product than Apple's.

Therefore, the evidence mounts that Samsung's overall strategy is to force a settlement that allows them to sell knockoff phones and tablets that look, feel and act like Apple's iPhone & iPad, and furthermore, tricking unsuspecting non-tech savvy shoppers who want an Apple device. into buying their imitation, which is of lower quality and is minus the iOS & iTunes experience that the customer is shopping for in the first place. This is a rip-off, plain and simple.

If this is true, then clearly trickery, thievery and greed have triumphed over innovation at Samsung and shame on Samsung's executives who are the participants in this criminal enterprise, and indeed, shame on the Korean culture itself for condoning such gangsterism by their business leaders.

Apple innovates. Samsung steals, copies and rips-off it's customers. Is that the message you want the world to hear, Samsung?

Maybe time for the US consumers to boycott Korean cars (off topic but boy do they look like Lexus cars these days)... oh wait, I'm sure Android users are lining up for those Kias too!
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #8 of 112
Even in litigation matters they have to copy Apple. Can't they come up with some original grounds for legal action that Apple hasn't thought of yet? Forget patent infringement. What about a constitutional claim, that the iPad violates the separation between church and state. Or better yet, accuse an iPod of murder. That would be original.

Btw, was there actually a court-issued injunction in Australia? Last I heard the injunction was voluntary (not really an injunction, just a forbearance agreement entered into by Samsung, agreeing not to sell their hardware pending an ultimate decision by the courts).
post #9 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by scurran23 View Post

Even in litigation matters they have to copy Apple. Can't they come up with some original grounds for legal action that Apple hasn't thought of yet?


Other legal actions are possible.
post #10 of 112
Another face-saving move by Ol' Sammy.
post #11 of 112
Samsung needs to recognize that Apple bribed, stole, extorted, forced, hostile takeover, and sometimes innovated - those patents... fair and square - from their own crooked government employees looking for a handout and other nefarious means.

Samsung can't expect to just waltz in with their sleazy lawyers and splash enough cash to buy off what Apple's sleazy lawyers have already bought off.

What kind of sick world does Samsung live in?
post #12 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mode View Post

Samsung needs to recognize that Apple bribed, stole, extorted, forced, hostile takeover, and sometimes innovated - those patents... fair and square - from their own crooked government employees looking for a handout and other nefarious means.

Samsung can't expect to just waltz in with their sleazy lawyers and splash enough cash to buy off what Apple's sleazy lawyers have already bought off.

What kind of sick world does Samsung live in?

Feeling alright?
post #13 of 112
It's time both sides came to an agreement!

First, both sides copied (a unique patent is so hard to find nowadays everything is mostly modifications).
Second, Apple needs Samsung and Android because they will dominate the market and increase the chance of being broken up due to anti-trust laws.
Third, patent reform (wanting energy efficiency and giving the rights for a basic design outline is not patent worthy).
Fourth, settle outside of court, both sides are wrong, although Samsung is probably the one that is more wrong.
post #14 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbydek View Post

Second, Apple needs Samsung and Android because they will dominate the market and increase the chance of being broken up due to anti-trust laws.

Ha! Hardly. Apple needs hardware that is competitive and software that wasn't stolen from the iPhone OS 1.0 alpha.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #15 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Ha! Hardly. Apple needs hardware that is competitive and software that wasn't stolen from the iPhone OS 1.0 alpha.

I hope you mean the god-awful touchwhiz and not Android itself...

And Samsung hardware is competitive...it may not be Aluminum and glass but they still make solid hardware.

Though I do prefer Aluminum devices myself, depending on the quality of the plastics, plastic does just fine and Aluminum seems to be more of an unnecessary luxury at times.

I would like a hardwood phone though...could be interesting if done right.
post #16 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

I hope you mean the god-awful touchwhiz and not Android itself...

To clarify, I don't mean Android now. They've done their fair share of adding to it. I only meant to say that the current UI foundation was theft from Apple.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #17 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

To clarify, I don't mean Android now. They've done their fair share of adding to it. I only meant to say that the current UI foundation was theft from Apple.

Yea TouchWiz is lame. Granted it's earlier iterations were much more direct (though a properly spruced up homescreen would diminish that similarity) it is still a bit TOO inspired by iOS for my liking. I mean shit, Sense was technically inspired by iOS...Sense did a great job being unique...even MotoBlur's ugly ass was inspired.

Like I said in a previous post, there are many many ways to differentiate a 4x4+ grid. (plus being the app drawer button or the dock of icons)
post #18 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Ha! Hardly. Apple needs hardware that is competitive and software that wasn't stolen from the iPhone OS 1.0 alpha.

Maybe so, but it tablets are so suppose to dominate the PC market and Apple dominates the tablet market as well as the phone market (both projected) then it just shows they need Samsung and Android for competition.

Besides, consider the features that were added because of Android, so in a sense Android made iOS better.
post #19 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbydek View Post

Besides, consider the features that were added because of Android, so in a sense Android made iOS better.

Stet. However, I'd consider the features added to iOS proper by the jailbreakers to be a much larger contribution.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #20 of 112
They, patented images in 2004, do not look like Galaxy tab nor Ipad. It is more like 'tablet newspaper (1994)' see below link. I can not provide links(as I can not remember), but this patented design more resembled some tablets before 2004. Yes, in my opinion, Apple copied the design and patented and disgracefully claim as original.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtPQDQNcI


Samsung has their own design developed overtime. See below images. Yes, it is a digital photo frame, not a tablet. But, my Ipad2 does a little more that this product. In this sence, I feel Apple copied this product in Ipad, I mean acctual Ipad.

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


Hey Apple fan readers, read following article and say what you think. Dont forget to click print icon at the end of the article to see images as well as articles.

http://www.osnews.com/story/25056/Th..._USPTO_Was_Bad

This is what Apple has been doing. And I dont know who can defend Apple anymore.
post #21 of 112
@hjb - wake up yourself! You have no idea what you are talking about.
post #22 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mode View Post

Samsung needs to recognize that Apple bribed, stole, extorted, forced, hostile takeover, and sometimes innovated - those patents... fair and square - from their own crooked government employees looking for a handout and other nefarious means.

Samsung can't expect to just waltz in with their sleazy lawyers and splash enough cash to buy off what Apple's sleazy lawyers have already bought off.

What kind of sick world does Samsung live in?

You really need to get back on your meds! Maybe then they'll let you out of your patent's basement.
post #23 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRange View Post

@hjb - wake up yourself! You have no idea what you are talking about.

Gush you were so quick. Obviously you have not viewed, listened nor read the links I posted. Relax and take your time, if you are not a die hard fanboy.
post #24 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

Gush you were so quick. Obviously you have not viewed, listened nor read the links I posted. Relax and take your time, if you are not a die hard fanboy.

Perhaps you'd care to explain how drawings done before 2004 were copies of a device released in 2006?

Was time travel involved?

Was it quantum physics?
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #25 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRange View Post

You really need to get back on your meds! Maybe then they'll let you out of your patent's basement.


Agree. iMac and iPod were stolen from Samsung's visionary designers back in the 90s. There was a Samsung back then, wasn't there? Oh yes, there was. I think they were making light sockets.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #26 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Maybe time for the US consumers to boycott Korean cars (off topic but boy do they look like Lexus cars these days)... oh wait, I'm sure Android users are lining up for those Kias too!

You are aware that Lexus is a Toyota brand, right?
post #27 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

Gush you were so quick. Obviously you have not viewed, listened nor read the links I posted. Relax and take your time, if you are not a die hard fanboy.

Though you came off a bit aggressive (and on an Apple centric site that's cause for immediate ignore...some sort of defense mechanism) your points are solid.

The Tab wasn't banned for looking like an iPad...

Again.

THE TAB WAS NOT BANNED FOR LOOKING LIKE AN IPAD

It was banned for looking like a drawing of an item that doesn't exist, and was never to be created.

It was literally banned for looking like a drawing. Nothing more or less.

This Drawing:



hmmm...that's not an iPad...is it? Does that product even exist? No? Well then...how exactly could Samsung copy it?


And the OS News article was very informative, but I may have confirmation bias so if anyone can debunk it or cast doubt, feel free.
post #28 of 112
So I wonder if any of the parts Samsung sold Apple are involved in these patent infringements?

If so it may provide legal grounds for Apple to seek an immediate refund of all monies paid for parts Samsung sold them knowing that they were patent encumbered and without giving permission to use them.

Could Samsung have acted fraudulently if this is the case?
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #29 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So I wonder if any of the parts Samsung sold Apple are involved in these patent infringements?

If so it may provide legal grounds for Apple to seek an immediate refund of all monies paid for parts Samsung sold them knowing that they were patent encumbered and without giving permission to use them.

Could Samsung have acted fraudulently if this is the case?

Did you just invent your own speculative sensational situation????

Do you work for Fox News???
post #30 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

Though I do prefer Aluminum devices myself, depending on the quality of the plastics, plastic does just fine and Aluminum seems to be more of an unnecessary luxury at times.

That's what she said.

Quote:
I would like a hardwood phone though...could be interesting if done right.

I seem to remember having a skin for an iPod or iPhone once that was printed with exotic wood grain. I would like to have one made from the real stuff, though.
post #31 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBillyGoatGruff View Post

That's what she said.



I seem to remember having a skin for an iPod or iPhone once that was printed with exotic wood grain. I would like to have one made from the real stuff, though.

lol.

----

that would just be awesome. but I'm sure there would be structural problems.
post #32 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

They, patented images in 2004, do not look like Galaxy tab nor Ipad. It is more like 'tablet newspaper (1994)' see below link. I can not provide links(as I can not remember), but this patented design more resembled some tablets before 2004. Yes, in my opinion, Apple copied the design and patented and disgracefully claim as original.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtPQDQNcI


Samsung has their own design developed overtime. See below images. Yes, it is a digital photo frame, not a tablet. But, my Ipad2 does a little more that this product. In this sence, I feel Apple copied this product in Ipad, I mean acctual Ipad.

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


Hey Apple fan readers, read following article and say what you think. Dont forget to click print icon at the end of the article to see images as well as articles.

http://www.osnews.com/story/25056/Th..._USPTO_Was_Bad

This is what Apple has been doing. And I dont know who can defend Apple anymore.

You insult Knight Ridder and their own technical knowledge by claiming that is the iPad, never mind insulting Apple.
post #33 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

You insult Knight Ridder[sic] and their own technical knowledge by claiming that is the iPad, never mind insulting Apple.

a) no one is claiming that is an iPad

b) even Apple isn't claiming (with the design patent) that the Tab is an iPad

c) the judge isn't even saying that the Tab is an iPad

the Tab wasn't banned for looking like an iPad

no one seems to accept that fact.
post #34 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

a) no one is claiming that is an iPad

b) even Apple isn't claiming (with the design patent) that the Tab is an iPad

c) the judge isn't even saying that the Tab is an iPad

the Tab wasn't banned for looking like an iPad

no one seems to accept that fact.

So what does your babbling, whining over a European Design patent have to do with the cases in Australia?

Where Samsung's blatant copying was the deciding factor.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #35 of 112
March 7th, 2011 SAMSUNG sees the ipad2 for the first time.

The ipad2 is one-third the thickness of its predecessor at 8.8mm and also thinner than Samsung's 10.9mm Galaxy gadget announced the month prior.

"We will have to improve the parts that are inadequate," Lee Don-Joo, executive vice president of the Korean firm's mobile division, told Yonhap news agency.

Call me crazy, but Samsung had nothing like the ipad2 in production, UNTIL the ipad2 came out and they saw it. Makes it kind of hard to say Apple copied anything from Samsung, but quite easy to say the opposite. Apple innovates, Samsung imitates, while both litigate.
post #36 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Perhaps you'd care to explain how drawings done before 2004 were copies of a device released in 2006?

Was time travel involved?

Was it quantum physics?

Can you read my post again? I was talking about Ipad not the drawings.
post #37 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World View Post

March 7th, 2011 SAMSUNG sees the ipad2 for the first time.

The ipad2 is one-third the thickness of its predecessor at 8.8mm and also thinner than Samsung's 10.9mm Galaxy gadget announced the month prior.

"We will have to improve the parts that are inadequate," Lee Don-Joo, executive vice president of the Korean firm's mobile division, told Yonhap news agency.

Call me crazy, but Samsung had nothing like the ipad2 in production, UNTIL the ipad2 came out and they saw it. Makes it kind of hard to say Apple copied anything from Samsung, but quite easy to say the opposite. Apple innovates, Samsung imitates, while both litigate.

I like the way they "innovated" a 30 pin dock connector for their tablets.

Nothing like the one Apple has used on iPods, iPhones and iPads for around ten years, nothing like it at all, nosiree bob.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #38 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So what does your babbling, whining over a European Design patent have to do with the cases in Australia?

Where Samsung's blatant copying was the deciding factor.

Nothing's been decided in Australia. So I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

This thread is a bullshitathon. And I can't tell who's winning.
post #39 of 112
Samsung should rethink the whole tablet market and sort out their android skin. Its quite surprising that they haven't done this already. Its not like they don't have the talent to turn out some cracking consumer electronic devices like ultra thin TV's etc.
post #40 of 112
Im not a samsung fan at all ... but i think apple is going way to far and is going to pee people off from buying there products. The galaxy looks nothing like the iphone 4 and yes the galaxy is thinner than the iphone 4 overall. Competition is good but apple does not seem to like this .... We have a lot of apple products in my family but i just dont like the way apple are doing the business...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung files patent case against Apple in Australia over iPhone, iPad