or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple wins U.S. injunction against Samsung's Galaxy Tab
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple wins U.S. injunction against Samsung's Galaxy Tab - Page 2

post #41 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciwiz View Post

Heh, this is like winning an injunction against iPad 1, as the 10.1 is almost 1 year old. Samsung is selling the new version with the same modifications they did in Germany to thwart that injunction.

That's not the point. First, Apple can easily file to extend the injunction to cover products that did not exist at the time of the original filing.

More importantly, it sends a message to Samsung and others that slavish copying will not be tolerated.

In fact, Samsung appears to have already gotten that message. After years of making such close copies of Apple products that even their attorneys couldn't tell the difference, Samsung appears to have changed their tune - and the Galaxy SIII is not such a close copy of Apple's products. And that is Apple's ultimate goal in this litigation. Stopping Samsung from selling a few thousand Tabs is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Stopping Samsung from making slavish copies is a massive win.
"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 #42 of 103

i really liked Samsung's explanation...

 

well, it doesn't infringe, but even if it did, you shouldn't stop the sales because it doesn't even compete with Apple's iPad because they are using 3G and we are using 4G

 

lol...

 

That like a car company copying a car 75% of the way, then saying... well it doesn't really compete with the product we copied because we put in a 300 hp engine and not a 200 hp engine.

post #43 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by BwhAgain View Post

The Galaxy tab(original version).

The model in this article was NOT the original, the Galaxy Tab 10.1V was, as soon as the iPad 2 was announced and shown, Samsung cancelled the US launch and came out with this model.

The real original was dumped in places like Australia.
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 #44 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


The model in this article was NOT the original, the Galaxy Tab 10.1V was, as soon as the iPad 2 was announced and shown, Samsung cancelled the US launch and came out with this model.
The real original was dumped in places like Australia.

They tried to ban the original model in Australia too but failed.

post #45 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

 

Being that Samsung have moved onto the Galaxy Tab 2, its a little bit of a pointless victory.

Agreed.  Good on them both sharing pointless victories.  A great marketing strategy and way to block competition, by the way.

post #46 of 103

Funny how we don't get all the bigoted comments now that Apple won this round...

post #47 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

Funny how we don't get all the bigoted comments now that Apple won this round...

 

 

Well, much as I disagree with everything you say (you have to admit you are an Apple-hater), I was going to make a similar comment.

 

I hope all those guys who had a problem with Koh being Korean have a sufficient helping of crow.

post #48 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

Funny how we don't get all the bigoted comments now that Apple won this round...

I have more Apple products in my house than most people, currently at a dozen, but I quite frankly don't give a crap. You guys sound like you work at Apple HQ and your jobs are on the line because of Samsung or you have personally been effected by the sales of Samsung products. It's kind of sad, really.
post #49 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by BestKeptSecret View Post

 

 

Well, much as I disagree with everything you say (you have to admit you are an Apple-hater), I was going to make a similar comment.

 

I hope all those guys who had a problem with Koh being Korean have a sufficient helping of crow.

Well if I am a Apple hater then they sure have made a hell of a lot of money from me then for someone who hates them i.e. I wrote this on my 27" iMac with a iPad 3 next to it on my desk and a Macbook Air and Mac Mini in the other room.

 

I dont hate Apple at all but I do dislike some of the rabid Apple supporters who are so blind by their hatred of anything non-Apple that they make the most stupid comments.


Edited by fredaroony - 6/26/12 at 11:38pm
post #50 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World View Post


I have more Apple products in my house than most people, currently at a dozen, but I quite frankly don't give a crap. You guys sound like you work at Apple HQ and your jobs are on the line because of Samsung or you have personally been effected by the sales of Samsung products. It's kind of sad, really.

Not sure why you directed that at me but anyway...

post #51 of 103

to be a voice of reason...

 

 

eh.

post #52 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony View Post

Funny how we don't get all the bigoted comments now that Apple won this round...

 

the Tab 10.1...

 

I heard Ford got a ban on the Delorean....

post #53 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Your boyfriend has some serious quality concern issues then, and I'm not just talking about the tablet... (>_<)

I would have thought you'd go for the comment about loving his girlfriend's slot.


589

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #54 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Go suck it Fandroids. Go eat a Richard.

 

Apple pioneered the modern phone and the modern tablet as we know it. While everybody else was stuck in the previous century, making crap products, hideous looking devices, and not very user friendly phones, Apple was busy innovating and developing revolutionary multi touch screen devices which would eventually disrupt and change the entire industry. Apple spent years on research and development that went into these products.

 

As soon as these amazing and revolutionary new Apple devices came out, some other companies said, holy fucking shit, we're going to have to come out with our own versions of those, otherwise we're so doomed! And one after another, most of the other companies started to ape Apple's breakthrough devices, and it wasn't long until virtually all phones and tablets on the market were based on Apple's initial breakthrough design and technology. Those companies that foolishly ignored how significant Apple's innovations were are in deep shit today. Just ask Nokia or RIM about that, or even better, ask one of the many thousands who have gotten laid off.

 

When you come out with a new product or a new idea that is unlike anything that came before, you patent those ideas, so that all of the time, money and research that went into it is not lost. People should be rewarded for their hard work and their willingness to take bold risks and to go where no other tech company has gone before. And Apple has done just that.

 

So in conclusion, go suck it Fandroids. I wouldn't even buy an Android tablet for my dog, if I had a dog. 

 

You seriously need to get a life.  These are just gadgets. 

post #55 of 103
Someone said android winning over apple? Hey moron, who is making more money, apple or all the android manufacturers combined?
Face reality. For your info, apple net profit>google revenue. LoL
post #56 of 103

WAIT WAIT WAIT

 

Isn't this the same forum that said all kinds of TERRIBLE RACIST things about this Judge?

 

Wow, hope there are some apologies in store. 

post #57 of 103

That's right, the design of a successful tablet computer is so obvious, even caveman could do it. 

 

Here is clear evidence of prior art:

 gallery_low_tech_1a.jpg

 

 

 
 
post #58 of 103

...


Edited by gwjvan - 6/27/12 at 5:25am
post #59 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by specter2009 View Post

Rejoice Apple Fans, you are still losing to Android. Well I hope Google does win and iphones are banned due to the Motorola 3G patent, or they get sued for copying Android on the various features and the developer community created cause you guy are sucking apples ass instead of innovating.

Oh yeah and  Jobs is gone arrogant SOB.

Just like the lot of you.

Uh huh. Android is winning? Then why is Google making more money on iPhones than on Android? Why do usage statistics show that iOS usage on the web is 3 times Android usage? Why does Apple have something like 60% of the smartphone profits? Why does Apple win virtually every customer satisfaction and customer retention survey? Why is Android stuck with a version several years old even on phones that are shipping today?

Go ahead and try to answer those.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post

That's right, the design of a successful tablet computer is so obvious, even caveman could do it. 

Here is clear evidence of prior art:
 LL




 


 


Nice. That's not much different than some of the other 'prior art' that the Android shills used to pretend that the iPad was a copy.
"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 #60 of 103

Absolutely the right decision. US design patents such as this one are fairly easy to avoid. Granted, some claims might be just a tad broad in some cases, but still not much of a problem as far as I understand it.  Product imitation has gone on forever. If someone has an idea that makes a lot of money of course there will be imitators. I'm sure that some of those imitators are even better than the originals. Apple is very aggressive at protecting their turf, much more so than some other companies. Samsung obviously got the memo a while back, but this is an older Tab design that's much too close to the look of the iPad.

 

Going forward I don't think design patent infringement is going to be a continuing problem for Samsung. . .

unless Apple starts suing over sample designs that were never used in the first place, but simply made it onto a piece of paper at some point. I don't think Apple would go that far in the US. The PR would be pretty negative IMO.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #61 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizSandford View Post

  • My bf loves his Tab.
  •  
  •  

Hmm,

 

obviously some people are satisfied with the least.

post #62 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach View Post

Hmm,

 

obviously some people are satisfied with the least.

Wow...that seems like a personal attack there. Why not keep it restricted to the gadgets?

 

Well done. Hope you feel good about yourself for telling someone that. You must be one of those who said the judge is a korean american therefore not fit to try a case that involves white americans. Sounds like something you would say after reading that. 

post #63 of 103

Good result, the less competition Apple has the worse their product line becomes keep on trucking US judges.

Judging by a brief read of some of the comments Apple need to fail. Go Google Go MS. 

post #64 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

Just wait till nightfall when the trolls, iHaters, Fandroids, and other vermin infesting this site to spew their own bile on how Scamsung is the innocent party...
About time! Hopefully Samesung will figure out how to use their ill-gotten gains to create their own R&D department instead of using Apple's shop.
Next in the crosshairs, Scamsung's phones.

 

 

:)

post #65 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

Just wait till nightfall when the trolls, iHaters, Fandroids, and other vermin infesting this site to spew their own bile on how Scamsung is the innocent party...
About time! Hopefully Samesung will figure out how to use their ill-gotten gains to create their own R&D department instead of using Apple's shop.
Next in the crosshairs, Scamsung's phones.

 

 

I believe you meant Scamdung?

 

:)

post #66 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


That's not the point. First, Apple can easily file to extend the injunction to cover products that did not exist at the time of the original filing.
 

 

 

I'm not sure that is true.  ISTM that they are at square one with respect to a different product.  

post #67 of 103

singletear.gif

post #68 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

LL

Because of all the Galaxy Tabs that litter the road… I see, I see…

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #69 of 103

Hmm, so when Apple introduces their 7" iPad mini, will Samsung not have the exact same arguments to block the sale of it too?

post #70 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roos24 View Post

Hmm, so since Apple won't be introducing their 7" iPad mini, will Samsung will not have the exact same arguments to block the sale of it too? .

Tablets are only gonna get bigger. In three years' time, you'll say 9.7" is "too small to use".

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #71 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizSandford View Post

  • My bf loves his Tab.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach View Post

Hmm,

obviously some people are satisfied with the least.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post

Wow...that seems like a personal attack there. Why not keep it restricted to the gadgets?

Well done. Hope you feel good about yourself for telling someone that. You must be one of those who said the judge is a korean american therefore not fit to try a case that involves white americans. Sounds like something you would say after reading that. 

"YOU" meaning sleepy3?, or "YOU" meaning Rabbit_coach?... because sleepy3, you typed those words(in your post) not rabbit_coach, thus you must think them?... hmmm?

YES, Rabbit_coach!... being satisfied with a Tab is to be Ok with the least, because the iPad can perform more things than the Tab, due to the Apple app store.
Thus rabbit_coach's comment is true, and not an attack.... but as an attack, it is genius.


Although, liz's comment contains characters not normally used in posts, and the tab is not qualified with the. brand name... thus is it an inside joke?... (bf likes tab, gf likes slot?)
Edited by haar - 6/27/12 at 10:02am
post #72 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26 View Post


I'm not sure that is true.  ISTM that they are at square one with respect to a different product.  

That's not true. All they have to do is show that the patented technologies are the same in the newer product. If they can't do that, then they have to start from scratch, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roos24 View Post

Hmm, so when Apple introduces their 7" iPad mini, will Samsung not have the exact same arguments to block the sale of it too?

Only if Apple makes a slavish copy of the Samsung device - and the samsung device is noticeably different than pre-existing products.

BTW, I called this one. All the Fandroids were bragging about how Koh refused to grant an injunction and I pointed out that she almost had to after the appeals court sent it back to her because of the way she structured her rejection. So much for the argument from all the Google shills that I couldn't possibly know anything because I'm not an attorney.
"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 #73 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


That's not true. All they have to do is show that the patented technologies are the same in the newer product. If they can't do that, then they have to start from scratch, though

You're mistaken. The injunction wasn't granted on any patented technology (utility patents). This was a design patent issue. 

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #74 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You're mistaken. The injunction wasn't granted on any patented technology (utility patents). This was a design patent issue. 

So? Are you claiming that something covered by a design patent isn't a patented device? The fact is that the device was patented - regardless of whether it was a design or utility patent. And, as I explained several weeks ago, the way Koh rejected the injunction the first time made it impossible for her to ignore the appeals court ruling and she had to allow the injunction this time.

You're really strange.
"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 #75 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post

That's right, the design of a successful tablet computer is so obvious, even caveman could do it. 

 

Here is clear evidence of prior art:

 gallery_low_tech_1a.jpg

 

 

 
 

Is Apple suing the maker of this too? ;)

post #76 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


So? Are you claiming that something covered by a design patent isn't a patented device? The fact is that the device was patented - regardless of whether it was a design or utility patent. And, as I explained several weeks ago, the way Koh rejected the injunction the first time made it impossible for her to ignore the appeals court ruling and she had to allow the injunction this time.
You're really strange.

And your claim is still really wrong. Don't let it bother you so much. We all get things confused once in awhile, even you. :)

 

The injunction was granted for a specific design patent that Judge Koh ruled likely infringed by a specific device, the Galaxy Tab 10.1. It doesn't extend to any other devices, it cannot without a new action, nor does it involve any patented technology like you claimed. Feel free to offer citations if you don't agree with that.

 

Also FWIW, only one judge out of the three on the Appeals Court panel felt an immediate injunction was appropriate. The remand on the the Galaxy Tab (not the included smartphone claims) was for reconsideration of one specific point, that the Fiddler tablet served as prior art for Apple's design patent claim. It was not an order by the Appeals Court to grant an injunction, instead finding that using the Fiddler example as a reason to deny based on the likelihood of patent invalidity was incorrect. It was Judge Koh's decision alone to move so quickly granting the injunction that Apple requested.

 

But that now increases the opportunity for the injunction to be stayed on appeal (according to FOSSPatents) since she denied Samsung's request to present new evidence that had been offered in the interim before the quick decision was made. Way too many twists and turns for anyone to claim game over yet.

 

If you'd like to read the single basis for the remand on the Galaxy Tab (page 28 if you're impatient), as well as the affirmation of Judge Koh's reasons for denial of a preliminary injunction for any of the utility patent claims, the link is here.

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/12-1105.pdf


Edited by Gatorguy - 6/27/12 at 2:32pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #77 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

And your claim is still really wrong. Don't let it bother you so much. We all get things confused once in awhile, even you. 1smile.gif

The injunction was granted for a specific design patent that Judge Koh ruled likely infringed by a specific device, the Galaxy Tab 10.1. It doesn't extend to any other devices, it cannot without a new action, nor does it involve any patented technology like you claimed. Feel free to offer citations if you don't agree with that.

Are you this dense in real life?

How is it that something covered by a design patent is not a patented technology?

Furthermore, Apple won an injunction. If they show that new devices have the same design features covered by the design patent and the injunction, it is fairly easy to add a new device to the existing injunction - certainly easier than starting from scratch.

I realize that you're hurting because your incessant "Apple is evil and Google is great" crap is wearing thin, but please stop being so dense.
"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 #78 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Are you this dense in real life?
How is it that something covered by a design patent is not a patented technology?
Furthermore, Apple won an injunction. If they show that new devices have the same design features covered by the design patent and the injunction, it is fairly easy to add a new device to the existing injunction - certainly easier than starting from scratch.
I realize that you're hurting because your incessant "Apple is evil and Google is great" crap is wearing thin, but please stop being so dense.

You're still wrong. Calling names won't make you any more correct.

 

Unless you've got some citations to prove your claim that design patents are the same as technology patents and that Apple can just add a device to the existing injunction, just as I supply proof when I make claims, perhaps you should quit before the hole you're in gets deeper. No one, much less me, said design patents weren't patents. Of course they are, but they're not the same as patents on technology. Utility patents protect the technology used to make a thing work. Design patents are used to protect the way a thing looks, it's ornamental appearance. Don't muddy the waters for casual readers just to create a flawed argument attempting to show you were right all along. You weren't.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #79 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You're still wrong. Calling names won't make you any more correct.

Unless you've got some citations to prove your claim that design patents are the same as technology patents

Of course, since I never said that, your entire post is moot. Of course, the fact that there's no such legal thing as a 'technology patent' makes your question even more meaningless (I think the term you're looking for is 'utility patent'.

I said that they're both patents. They both cover technology. Leave it to you to be confused over such a simple matter.
"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 #80 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Of course, since I never said that, your entire post is moot. Of course, the fact that there's no such legal thing as a 'technology patent' makes your question even more meaningless (I think the term you're looking for is 'utility patent'.
I said that they're both patents. They both cover technology. Leave it to you to be confused over such a simple matter.

I tried to explain the difference to you, and I'm pretty certain you understood it even tho you don't want to. No matter really, since probably every other reader now understands what the two patent types are for if they didn't already. Since you have nothing to add apparently, and not a single citation to offer, why don't we just move along? You can't win this one by being honest and I don't feel like talking any further to someone who's not listening anyway. We're done.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple wins U.S. injunction against Samsung's Galaxy Tab