Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
The Federal Court in Australia has agreed to Apple's request to a preliminary ban on sales of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet in the country, providing the iPad maker with yet another victory in its tense legal battle against its rival.



Justice Annabelle Bennett ruled on Thursday that Apple had presented sufficient evidence of alleged infringement by Samsung on two of its touchscreen- and multitouch-related patents to issue a preliminary injunction, according to The Sydney Morning Herald. The suit will proceed to a full hearing, but, even if Samsung prevails, it will have lost valuable time in the tablet market.



The South Korean electronics maker had previously agreed to delay the launch of its tablet in Australia while awaiting the decision. The company told the court last week that missing the Christmas season due to a preliminary injunction would cause it to give up on releasing the Galaxy 10.1 in the country because the device would be "dead" by the time it launched.



Late last month, Samsung offered Apple a compromise deal that would allow the Galaxy Tab 10.1 to launch with minor concessions. But, Apple rejected the offer, opting instead to take its chances with its preliminary injunction request.







Apple's win in Australia follows a victory with a German court in September that permanently banned sales of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 there.



The legal dispute between the two companies has grown increasingly fierce since it began in April of this year. Apple struck first, accusing Samsung of "slavishly" copying the look and feel of the iPhone and iPad. According to the Cupertino, Calif., company's attorneys, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs personally attempted to resolve its issues with its rival in 2010, but negotiations proved unsuccessful.



Samsung has said it initially held back in its legal action against Apple because it also doubles as a supplier for its rival, but the company vowed last month to be "more aggressive" in its disagreement with iPhone maker. The electronics maker has said it is attempting to block sales of the as-yet-unreleased iPhone 4S in France and Italy.
«13456789

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 170
    tylerk36tylerk36 Posts: 1,037member
    Can you say monopoly? Nice try. Can you say samsung? I knew you could. Any one care for a macintosh apple? The world loves apples. One a day keeps the teacher away.
  • Reply 2 of 170
    An prime example of what would happen if you attempt to cross Apple. Almost a year ago Steve Job's tried to talk to Samsung about its design issues, but nooooo. Several banned devices later Samsung is thinking at least we supply Apple ram 8 billion dollars in the ban... What? They did what. Awww dammit!
  • Reply 3 of 170
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    The only ones who refuse to acknowledge the blatancy of Samsung's copying are probably shills paid for by Samsung.
  • Reply 4 of 170
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,360member
    Boom! Slam dunk!



    Right now at this very moment, there are at least a few Fandroids somewhere down under, sitting and eating their vegemite sandwiches and crying their eyes out.
  • Reply 5 of 170
    eluardeluard Posts: 319member
    A great win for Apple. Now I hope for an end to this Apple-invents-we-copy mentality. Samsung will not be able to sell me a box of matches until they cut this crap out.
  • Reply 6 of 170
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Eluard View Post


    A great win for Apple. Now I hope for an end to this Apple-invents-we-copy mentality. Samsung will not be able to sell me a box of matches until they cut this crap out.



    and a great loss for consumers. and thinking again what Apple did with iOS5's notification system, oh and think again what invention means in dictionary.
  • Reply 7 of 170
    Sorry to the android fans and also apple fans who think Apple should just have let this go... But I'm actually happy for Apple.
  • Reply 8 of 170
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Loptimist View Post


    and a great loss for consumers. and thinking again what Apple did with iOS5's notification system, oh and think again what invention means in dictionary.



    The only commonality is that they both feature "drawers" that pull down.



    You wouldn't mistake an LG, HTC, or Moto phone for an iPhone. You easily can with Samsung.
  • Reply 9 of 170
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post


    The only commonality is that they both feature "drawers" that pull down.



    You wouldn't mistake an LG, HTC, or Moto phone for an iPhone. You easily can with Samsung.



    if you really can't distinguish and make mistake between Galaxy Series and iPhone/iPad, I am sorry.
  • Reply 10 of 170
    I've actually had a woman come up to me look at my iPhone 3GS and ask if it was "the new Samsung phone" ><
  • Reply 11 of 170
    jd_in_sbjd_in_sb Posts: 1,481member
    Maybe Samsung will now be "more aggressive" about coming up with their own ideas and start to steal less.



    P.S. I miss Steve Jobs
  • Reply 12 of 170
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Loptimist View Post


    and a great loss for consumers. and thinking again what Apple did with iOS5's notification system, oh and think again what invention means in dictionary.



    It would have been a great loss for consumers if the pirates ripping off legitimate i.p. weren't punished for their thievery. It would have put a chill on innovation. Good on you, Australia!
  • Reply 13 of 170
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sacto Joe View Post


    It would have been a great loss for consumers if the pirates ripping off legitimate i.p. weren't punished for their thievery. It would have put a chill on innovation. Good on you, Australia!



    Yeah, they take IP pretty seriously here. Koalas, for example, are patented. This move is partly to prevent South Korea cloning Australian wildlife to create their own cute and cuddly mascots.
  • Reply 14 of 170
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sacto Joe View Post


    It would have been a great loss for consumers if the pirates ripping off legitimate i.p. weren't punished for their thievery. It would have put a chill on innovation. Good on you, Australia!



    I tend to agree with the ruling in this case. It was actually touch-screen related patents at issue, not stupid look-and-feel crap arguments, and it seems to me that Samsung actually infringed.



    I think the rationale behind your assertion for protecting "legitimate IP" is fairness.

    And for that, I want you to think about this.



    Apple just "copied" the other OS's notification system, and implemented a less versatile one at best.

    And, I don't think Android's open sourced functions are protected under the law, unless Apple literally takes the code and copies the logic.

    Then who is legally entitled to sue Apple?



    The patents/copyrights systems have flaws and Apple is taking those flaws at their own advantages.

    They argue that their copyrights and patents should be protected, yet they are free to copy whatever that is good on the market that has not / or cannot be patented (as in the above example). Maybe it is a clever move, but doing so is threatening the whole notion of fair and open market competition.



    I just hate Apple abusing the legal system, and FFS, a tablet design should have been held as a generic design that would not be easily protected under Community Design.



    Community Design would protect Coke's unique glass bottle design, but would probably not protect SONY's TV design.

    Which side do iPad and GTab fall into? To me, they are more like TV designs that are similar but have distinct features. (e.g., form factor, aspect ratio, default orientation, OS, choice of materials, back case design, and placement of cameras)
  • Reply 15 of 170
    Note that this injunction wasn't granted based on some "rounded rectangle" and "look and feel" crap Apple successfully pulled off in the German Court. But rather on some two touch screen gesture-related patents Apple hold which is probably similar to the one upheld by the Dutch Court.



    From the article:

    Quote:

    Justice Annabelle Bennett today said Apple had a prima facie case that Samsung had infringed two of its patents relating to touch screens and the gestures that control them.



    But do continue this circlejerk about how the big bad Samsung is making a rounded rectangular tablet similar to Apple's ipad instead of a triangular one.
  • Reply 16 of 170
    What are the patents it violates?



    Glad this isn't some bullshit look and feel thing though.
  • Reply 17 of 170
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,248member
    [QUOTE=Loptimist;1964894]and a great loss for consumers.../QUOTE]



    Oh please... only in your little bubble is this a loss for consumers.



    In a place I like to call "reality", this is great for consumers because it's sending a message to Samsung to get off it's cloning a$$ and actually start developing and innovating their own stuff instead of shamelessly copying others.



    You may not believe it, but I've come across countless of clueless joe-consumers that think iPads and their counterfeit companions are one and the same. Sad but true. Companies ripping-off Apple not only tarnishes Apple's brand-image, but it tarnishes the tablet market in general when consumers get ticked-off that their "Just as good as an iPad, if not better" tablet doesn't live up to their expectations.



    Techtards/Fandroids with feelings of inadequacy need not reply.
  • Reply 18 of 170
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tylerk36 View Post


    Can you say monopoly? Nice try. Can you say samsung? I knew you could. Any one care for a macintosh apple? The world loves apples. One a day keeps the teacher away.



    Your post is by far the best example of what uninformed whining looks like. You can say monopoly, but can you provide evidence that you know what the definition of the word is, in the legal sense?
  • Reply 19 of 170
    asciiascii Posts: 5,850member
    I think it's important to have strong IP protection. I was grateful to see Australia included in the first round of iPhone 4S rollout, even though we are a relatively small economy.



    On the other hand, it's not realistic to simply abandon a country with lax laws, such as Google did with China, if that country also has a large market.



    I think the balance is: when a device is new, roll it out only in protected areas. But after some time it will lose it's newness and mostly have been copied anyway, at that point you have nothing to lose by rolling it out in unprotected areas.
  • Reply 20 of 170
    As it should be. The next injunction will be the ban in the US. That case will be heard in a week or so.
Sign In or Register to comment.