or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Australian retailer ignores injunction, sells Galaxy Tab
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Australian retailer ignores injunction, sells Galaxy Tab

post #1 of 57
Thread Starter 
An Australian retailer continues to sell Samsung's Galaxy Tab despite a temporary country-wide injunction, ignoring threats of legal action from Apple.

Online electronics purveyor dMavo has sold and continues to sell the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia under a temporary injunction, and is attempting a risky business restructuring to thwart legal action from Apple, reports The Sydney Morning Herald.

dMavo managing director Wojtek Czarnocki said that his company created "a new entity" to handle requests specifically for Samsung's tablet, hoping to sidestep legal issues related to the injunction by taking orders through a European server outside of Australian court jurisdiction and shipping the tablets from Asia.

Several Australian retailers have ignored Apple's threats and continue to profit from demand for the barred Samsung tablet. Apple has yet to seek any official legal action against the resellers, however the company is reportedly threatening to sue.

"Was Apple just bluffing or do they really want to play the cat and mouse game," Czarnocki asked. "We're up for it."

It would be relatively simple to extend Apple's injunction to individual online resellers because it already applies to device maker Samsung, said Melbourne law firm Watermark's senior associate and patent specialist Mark Summerfield. The iPad maker could apply to the Australian Federal Court for further injunctions even if a seller was based overseas, however it would be difficult to enforce without Apple asking international courts to cooperate.

"Moving the business unit, and the servers, offshore does not absolve them of liability for patent infringement in Australia," Summerfield said. "The acts of selling to Australian purchasers, and importing infringing products into the country, remain actionable as infringements."

The patent lawyer explains that independent Australian companies could be held liable for infringement, costs and damages in this particular case, adding that there is a precedent for such patent disputes.

"In June last year three people were jailed (one of them for three years) for contempt, after ignoring Federal Court injunctions relating to copyright and trademark infringement," Summerfield said. He goes on to allude that Czarnocki could be charged individually as "company directors are not immune from personal liability for decisions made on behalf of a company."

Czarnocki is expecting to sell the Galaxy Tab at least until Samsung's appeal which is set for Nov. 25. According to the dMova manager, Apple would have to bring the retailer to court before that date, which he claims is unlikely to happen.

"We'd be amazed, though not unprepared, should that occur," Czarnocki said.
post #2 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

...
Several Australian retailers have ignored Apple's threats, profiting from demand for the barred Samsung tablet. Currently Apple has not taken sought any official legal action against the resellers.

"Was Apple just bluffing or do they really want to play the cat and mouse game," Czarnocki asked. "We're up for it."
...

Why don't these people just get iPads?
post #3 of 57
So it is clear to me that dMavo is run by criminals. I wouldn't buy from them knowing how they feel about breaking laws. They probably don't treat their employees well either.
post #4 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

...They probably don't treat their employees well either.

They probably beat their wives, too.
post #5 of 57
Hoping for 2 squares a day in prison?
post #6 of 57
Funny that the article posted a picture of him and his wife at their wedding. Looks like a vegas-style wedding and he looks like a total player.

On the story at hand, Apple has billions of dollars in the bank and most likely a nuclear arsenal of lawyers.

They're not bluffing and dMavo is about to get it right up his backside.
post #7 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

So it is clear to me that dMavo is run by criminals. I wouldn't buy from them knowing how they feel about breaking laws. They probably don't treat their employees well either.

Got it in one. This guy already has a criminal record... looks like he's touting for more. Add to that the fact that this story is being given the treatment by Google shill and Apple-hater Asher Moses (aka a Fairfax "journalist"), and you have one grubby little story.
post #8 of 57
If they stop this firm, they wont be able to do anythin against any of the SEA owned and operated companies sending the products across to Australia. Then again, the Australians could travel into SEA, NZ, well prettty much anywhere and purchase the product to their hearts content.
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #9 of 57
Lol...high tech equivalent of bootleggers and run runners! Outlaws with Internet servers.

"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 #10 of 57
Lot's of snarky irrelevant comments on this tempest in a teapot.
I don't think it will do much for anybody (the feisty retailers, Samsung, Apple, or Australians.)
Nobody will go to jail, but might cost them more than the publicity they're clearly seeking.
post #11 of 57
deleted
post #12 of 57
This is just a small time individual trying to leverage the media attention. Other Australian-owned sites operating out of Asia have been doing this media shtick for a while.

You can predict the length of these matters by the wittiness of the hashtag.
post #13 of 57
Someone in Macrumors said

"Things to note:

- The injunction against Samsung stands on one product and one product only. Samsung is free to sell any of its upcoming tablets.

- The judge that granted an injunction is married to one of the senior counsel members of Wentworth 5- the barrister firm representing Apple in the court case. Conflict of interest? "

If what he said true about the Judge, of course there has been conflict of interest. Now I my curiousity why the Australian Judge awarded the injunction would be solved, if this is confirmed.
post #14 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post

Why don't these people just get iPads?

It's Pepsi vs Coke.

Some people like the taste of android better.
post #15 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadPeanut View Post

It's Pepsi vs Coke.

Some people like the taste of android better.

More like iPods vs PlaysForSure players made by second-rate manufacturers.

Some people like the taste of pre-chewed bubble gum stuck to the bottom of your shoe.

"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 #16 of 57
These guys will soon stop selling these Tabs as soon as they found out there really is not a lot of people buying.
post #17 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjaosx View Post

These guys will soon stop selling these Tabs as soon as they found out there really is not a lot of people buying.

If people aren't buying it, then apple wouldn't need an injunction.

I've played around with android phones from HTC and Samsung. IMHO they're as good as my girlfriends iPhone.
post #18 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

So it is clear to me that dMavo is run by criminals. I wouldn't buy from them knowing how they feel about breaking laws. They probably don't treat their employees well either.

Impersonating an officer isn't breaking the law?
Ask an employee at Apple's Elk Grove operations or Cupertino area if they are treated well.

No matter what type of media...movies, music, books, photos and web pages

look better and sound better on the Kindle Fire HD than any iPad

Reply

No matter what type of media...movies, music, books, photos and web pages

look better and sound better on the Kindle Fire HD than any iPad

Reply
post #19 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell View Post

Impersonating an officer isn't breaking the law?
Ask an employee at Apple's Elk Grove operations or Cupertino area if they are treated well.

How about some evidence that an Apple employee impersonated a police officer?

Even the guy who made the complaint never said that. He said that the alleged Apple employee didn't say that he WASN'T a police officer - which isn't required by law.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #20 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

Someone in Macrumors said

"Things to note:

- The injunction against Samsung stands on one product and one product only. Samsung is free to sell any of its upcoming tablets.

- The judge that granted an injunction is married to one of the senior counsel members of Wentworth 5- the barrister firm representing Apple in the court case. Conflict of interest? "

If what he said true about the Judge, of course there has been conflict of interest. Now I my curiousity why the Australian Judge awarded the injunction would be solved, if this is confirmed.

So you are a legal expert? This is nonsense - there is no conflict of interest as law firms make sure to isolate cases such as this from anyone in the firm that might have a conflict. She is a judge, he's a lawyer. So you think one of them needs to give up their job? Total BS.
post #21 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

How about some evidence that an Apple employee impersonated a police officer?

Even the guy who made the complaint never said that. He said that the alleged Apple employee didn't say that he WASN'T a police officer - which isn't required by law.

No, the didn't say they were police, but it was implied when the two officers introduced themselves.
The guy who made the complaint said that he never would of let them in if he knew they weren't cops.
post #22 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadPeanut View Post

If people aren't buying it, then apple wouldn't need an injunction.

I've played around with android phones from HTC and Samsung. IMHO they're as good as my girlfriends iPhone.

Really? Based on what? Does it have the full Apple ecosystem? Of course not. So your statement is total BS as it is not a "phone" but a sophisticated computer that is an integral part of a total ecosystem. Not a platform for taking your user information without compensation and serving you up a world of ads.
post #23 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRange View Post

Really? Based on what? Does it have the full Apple ecosystem? Of course not. So your statement is total BS as it is not a "phone" but a sophisticated computer that is an integral part of a total ecosystem. Not a platform for taking your user information without compensation and serving you up a world of ads.

Based on my humble opinion. (It's what IMHO means)

I'm sorry i offended you by comparing the iPhone to a phone.

Would smart phone be a better term?

And while android doesn't have a complete ecosystem like Apples iOS, you can still use an android device as a phone, media player. Take and view photos. Run various apps including games, banking apps, eReader apps, calenders and the like.
post #24 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRange View Post

So you are a legal expert? This is nonsense - there is no conflict of interest as law firms make sure to isolate cases such as this from anyone in the firm that might have a conflict. She is a judge, he's a lawyer. So you think one of them needs to give up their job? Total BS.

Sure the judge should have declared it and made herself unavailable, if the allegation is true. No that does not mean she would give up her job, but the job. If you not understand this, then surely you are a diehard Apple fan who supports whatever Apple does or whoever sided with Apple. I can not beleive this.
post #25 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

So it is clear to me that dMavo is run by criminals. I wouldn't buy from them knowing how they feel about breaking laws. They probably don't treat their employees well either.

Are they breaking the law? It sounds like they found a clever loophole to have a company in China, with servers in China ship directly to customers from China.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #26 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadPeanut View Post

If people aren't buying it, then apple wouldn't need an injunction.

That's a fallacious argument. Check out the Spanish tablet startup —*who I think has yet to ship a product — that Apple sued (and lost against).

Quote:
I've played around with android phones from HTC and Samsung. IMHO they're as good as my girlfriends iPhone.

Which iPhone? If it's the original iPhone there is a lot that has changed on this front in performance, something the iPhone excels in. And by performance I don't mean the clockspeed listed on a spec sheet, I mean how the device performs when doing similar tasks.

Which version of the OS? This is also important and something harder to pin down than with Android-based devices which don't get 3 years of updates from the vendor.

And define "as good." Surely you have plenty of criteria to determine is something is overall better or worse than another product and scenarios where the bar changes depending on each one. I can surely name dozens of areas the iPhone isn't the best yet I think the iPhone is the best overall device.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #27 of 57
France has its Polish plumber, Australia has a Polish tablet bootlegger.

I gotta say shipping from asia is a smart idea, but they should have kept it on the DL, and not challenged apple in such direct way.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #28 of 57
deleted
post #29 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

That's a fallacious argument. Check out the Spanish tablet startup *who I think has yet to ship a product that Apple sued (and lost against).


Which iPhone? If it's the original iPhone there is a lot that has changed on this front in performance, something the iPhone excels in. And by performance I don't mean the clockspeed listed on a spec sheet, I mean how the device performs when doing similar tasks.

Which version of the OS? This is also important and something harder to pin down than with Android-based devices which don't get 3 years of updates from the vendor.

And define "as good." Surely you have plenty of criteria to determine is something is overall better or worse than another product and scenarios where the bar changes depending on each one. I can surely name dozens of areas the iPhone isn't the best yet I think the iPhone is the best overall device.

I'll admit I was being snarky with the first comment.
But from the SMH article linked in the above story, Wojtek Czarnocki claims that the Galaxy Tab is selling well. Seems that there's a market for it.



I'm comparing the iPhone 3Gs to a HTC Desire HD (don't know which OS, but I doubt she'd have upgraded). Yes, the iPhone is a year older, but the standard telcos contract lasts two years.

As good is a subjective term and is based on my personal experience.
After using both phones for several months, I don't feel that the iPhone is any better in terms of ease of use, browsing the internet or availability of apps.
post #30 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadPeanut View Post

I'll admit I was being snarky with the first comment.
But from the SMH article linked in the above story, Wojtek Czarnocki claims that the Galaxy Tab is selling well. Seems that there's a market for it.

I'm comparing the iPhone 3Gs to a HTC Desire HD (don't know which OS, but I doubt she'd have upgraded). Yes, the iPhone is a year older, but the standard telcos contract lasts two years.

As good is a subjective term and is based on my personal experience.
After using both phones for several months, I don't feel that the iPhone is any better in terms of ease of use, browsing the internet or availability of apps.

For overall battery life, for reliability, ease of use, refinement, and peace-of-mind if I do have a HW issue I find the iPhone much better than the competition, but you are entitled to your opinion and there are certainly cases where different devices will suit different needs better.

As for the Galaxy Tab, I think it's doing well for a tablet that isn't compared to the iPad in sales. Remember that Apple sells more tablets per quarter than all the tablets ever sold for the decade before it. Part of that is the high price of entry for the Windows-based tablets, but you can't deny the iPad is a runaway success. I think within a few years the iPad could seriously hinder PC sales -and- best the iPhone in revenue and profit per quarter.

But I don't think the Galaxy Tab is selling very well in comparison to the iPad. I'm certain Samsung phones sell better in comparison to the iPhone and not a single model seems to come close. This quarter Apple is likely to sell about 1.5-2x as many iPhone 4Ses than all the Samsung handsets combined.

On top of that, Apple is selling as many iPads as they can make. This makes the real threat from Samsung one that is anticipated which is mainly why they are going so hard after Samsung. Clearly Samsung did a lot of blatant copying of Apple's HW and SW, but I'm not sure how much look and feel can hold up in court, I just don't think they would be going after them so hard if they weren't getting an ill-gotten hold from Apple's efforts.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #31 of 57
They are making out like it's them vs Apple, but it's really them vs the courts. And I don't think the courts will be amused at attempts to "get around" a ruling.
post #32 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Juicy stuff.

URLs to the criminal record, and records of Moses receiving payments from Google?

Drug use, parking in handicapped zones, driving without license plates, speeding, ...

I bet he doesn't believe in paying child support either.
post #33 of 57
MacRulez,

Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

Someone in Macrumors said

"Things to note:

- The injunction against Samsung stands on one product and one product only. Samsung is free to sell any of its upcoming tablets.

- The judge that granted an injunction is married to one of the senior counsel members of Wentworth 5- the barrister firm representing Apple in the court case. Conflict of interest? "

If what he said true about the Judge, of course there has been conflict of interest. Now I my curiousity why the Australian Judge awarded the injunction would be solved, if this is confirmed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Got a better source than "someone in an Internet forum said it?"

You'd think something like this woud be both easily documented and of wide interest, yet I can't turn up anything in Google beyond your words.


I understand what you are saying. That person, as you could read, were not expressing an opinion, it was like stating a fact. Sure, I should have reseached it myself before I post that here.

Now I have done that research and I beleive what that person in MacRumours site said.

First, I googled 'Wentworth 5'. Click the first result that leads to Wentworth 5 website, and click 'People'. Among the first 6 senior council members, you could see Stephen Burley SC and David Bennett AC QC

Stephen Burley SC was the barrister representing Apple in the Annabelle Bennett's court. See, bellow link.
http://news.yahoo.com/apple-may-reve...060010455.html

David Bennett AC QC is the husband of Australia Federal judge Annabelle Bennett. See bellow link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bennett_(barrister)


What do you think?
post #34 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb View Post

MacRulez,


I understand what you are saying. That person, as you could read, were not expressing an opinion, it was like stating a fact. Sure, I should have reseached it myself before I post that here.

Now I have done that research and I beleive what that person in MacRumours site said.

First, I googled 'Wentworth 5'. Click the first result that leads to Wentworth 5 website, and click 'People'. Among the first 6 senior council members, you could see Stephen Burley SC and David Bennett AC QC

Stephen Burley SC was the barrister representing Apple in the Annabelle Bennett's court. See, bellow link.
http://news.yahoo.com/apple-may-reve...060010455.html

David Bennett AC QC is the husband of Australia Federal judge Annabelle Bennett. See bellow link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bennett_(barrister)

What do you think?



So you can say that if Apple wanted to bribe the judge, there is a legal channel for it. Brilliant!

post #35 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arasu View Post

Drug use, parking in handicapped zones, driving without license plates, speeding, ...

I bet he doesn't believe in paying child support either.

You are obviously talking about Steve Jobs there.
post #36 of 57
Hi there,

We respect everyone's views even if we don't agree with them.

However, before stating that:
1. we are breaking the law
2. we sell an illegal/banned product
3. we will kneel down to Apple etc etc

try to take some time out and read the facts surrounding the current Court proceedings in Australia.

The below link should help:
https://www.comcourts.gov.au/file/Fe...3/2011/actions

Apple, as big as their pockets may be, cannot, as of right now, stop us, or anyone else not associated with Samsung Australia, from selling the Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets to the Australian consumers.

So as much as some of you Apple fanboys think otherwise, we need to disappoint you.

Here's the crux of the matter:
1. The Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablets are not banned in OZ
2. Apple, whilst trying to use its intimidation tactics, has no legal right to make the demands they had made

So take a chill pill and stay tuned. We pick our battles well

Cheers,
dMavo
post #37 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arasu View Post



So you can say that if Apple wanted to bribe the judge, there is a legal channel for it. Brilliant!


No, what I am saying is that conflict of interest existed in the injunction decision, as someone questioned. So, you are saying there is no issue there?

I think Apple maybe ok, although the connection may have played in Apple heading to Wentworth 5. But the judge should have declared it and made herself unavailable, IMHO.
post #38 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

They are making out like it's them vs Apple, but it's really them vs the courts. And I don't think the courts will be amused at attempts to "get around" a ruling.

The ruling does not stop an individual or a company from buying the device, but stops Australian based retailers from selling the Galaxy tab. If the sub company is set up properly, then it is totally legal to ship devices from overseas to Australian customers.

One of the big gripes of Australian retailers is precisely this fact. Australians are going on line and legally buying a product from overseas which is costing the local retailers turnover.
post #39 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

But I don't think the Galaxy Tab is selling very well in comparison to the iPad. I'm certain Samsung phones sell better in comparison to the iPhone and not a single model seems to come close. This quarter Apple is likely to sell about 1.5-2x as many iPhone 4Ses than all the Samsung handsets combined.

All the Samsung handsets, or all the Samsung smartphones? To sell 2x as many iPhone 4Ses as all Samsung handsets - that's a lot. Samsung sold (or shipped?) 80M handsets a year ago. Can Apple sell 160M iPhones in total, never mind iP4S alone?
post #40 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post

Why don't these people just get iPads?

Oh, come on, be logical. The iPad is so much better, less expensive etc etc. Why would Apple want to bar an unworthy competitor from competing, nobody will buy an Android anyway... Oh, wait.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Australian retailer ignores injunction, sells Galaxy Tab