Does this mean Apple is now liable for damages for the loss of two months of Galaxy sales? Not that I imagine the number would be particularly high.
If they lose the final case, probably. But at this point, no.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lfmorrison
Nope. The Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 was physically redesigned in Germany (producing the Galaxy Tab 10.1N) in an attempt to bypass the community design in Germany. It has nothing to do with the case in Australia.
The amusing part being that they tried to get around an injunction against a Tab that looked like the iPad 2 but making a TabN that looks like the iPad 1.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Apple should probably move on.
If Apple just moves on at this stage then they clearly don't give a crap that they were being copied. So a year from now when someone blatantly knocks off the iPad (other than the detail of putting a bunch of grapes for the logo instead of an Apple), they can use "well Apple didn't care about Samsung doing it so they don't really care about folks copying their IP" as part of their defense and perhaps the Judge agrees and Apple loses.
IP law suits are like dancing the tango. There are certain steps you have to follow or you aren't dancing the dance. Apple knows this and they will keep up the dance until they actually get to a final court case. If they lose at that point they still get points for trying but Samsung was the better dancer.
People hate this bullshit. It may delay or even kill the competition, but the ill-will with the public remains.
I didn't realize "the public" knows or cares that Samsung makes a tablet, let alone hold ill will against Apple for protecting its intellectual property rights.
I didn't realize "the public" knows or cares that Samsung makes a tablet, let alone hold ill will against Apple for protecting its intellectual property rights.
I didn't realize "the public" knows or cares that Samsung makes a tablet, let alone hold ill will against Apple for protecting its intellectual property rights.
Agreed. I'd go so far as to wager that some percentage of potential buyers don't even know that iPads are only produced by Apple.
I still really don't get this fight on Samsung's part. Their Galaxy Tab just gets lost in the sea of loser pads sitting not he shelf at Best Buy. Bar the iPad, none of the others are any better than the next, and at the end of the day, the Android OS is a loser on a pad device, and is simply sub-par in operation.
How many of these things does Samsung think they will sell? Certainly not enough to recover the financial loss through lawsuits with Apple. They should have just thrown in the towel from the start and saved a few million to the bottom line.
I still really don't get this fight on Samsung's part. Their Galaxy Tab just gets lost in the sea of loser pads sitting not he shelf at Best Buy. Bar the iPad, none of the others are any better than the next, and at the end of the day, the Android OS is a loser on a pad device, and is simply sub-par in operation.
How many of these things does Samsung think they will sell? Certainly not enough to recover the financial loss through lawsuits with Apple. They should have just thrown in the towel from the start and saved a few million to the bottom line.
It could now be just a matter of pride, just as Apple may have been driven by it when these lawsuits started. We already know that Steve Jobs took it personally. Yoon-Woo Lee, Yangkyu Kim and/or other's in Samsung leadership may now feel the same way.
It could now be just a matter of pride, just as Apple may have been driven by it when these lawsuits started. We already know that Steve Jobs took it personally. Yoon-Woo Lee, Yangkyu Kim and/or other's in Samsung leadership may now feel the same way.
Agreed. But it may cost Samsung much more in the future than they could possibly imagine. Not only is Apple becoming more diverse in iPad parts production, cutting some of the legs out from under Samsung, but if this Apple TV gains traction, it will be Sharp, not Samsung, that benefits from the panel production.
This of course does not account for any new innovations that Apple has down the road. Samsung should have cut their losses a long time ago. Sacrificing a boat load of business down the road from Apple just to uphold a prideful but loser of a product like the Galaxy Tab was not a good business move. We shall see.
It could now be just a matter of pride, just as Apple may have been driven by it when these lawsuits started. We already know that Steve Jobs took it personally. Yoon-Woo Lee, Yangkyu Kim and/or other's in Samsung leadership may now feel the same way.
Well, we will never know if the Samsung leadership took it personally from the very start, once Apple started telling them it wasn't cool, before all the litigation started. That is a possibility.
I don't think Apple was driven only by pride. Android and Samsung ripped Apple off big time. Apple was stabbed in the back by their very closest partners (Google and Samsung) as well as one of their own Directors (Schmidt)!
In the old days Steve would have banished everything Google+Samsung from Apple completely. It is a testament to his growth and maturity that he still kept a working relationship with Google+Samsung and to this date, Apple has not publicly bashed Google and Samsung... Or at least not to the extent of Apple criticising Adobe, AFAIK.
Whether Samsung is taking things personally is moot at this point. They've been doing nonsense like seeking to ban Apple products, when they are the ones being accused of infringing. Never mind if Samsung is found in the clear by the courts, I'm okay with that legal decision despite what I believe to be unauthorised copying of Apple... Standing on the shoulders of giants and all that. But what personally pisses me off is their childish behaviour like seeking to counter-ban Apple products - just immaturity and idiocy on their part.
Agreed. I'd go so far as to wager that some percentage of potential buyers don't even know that iPads are only produced by Apple.
That's the power of the iPad. Just like initially a lot of people thought that most smartphones are "iPhones". And it is this phenomenon that Google and Android blatantly exploited by making their hardware and software so closely resembling the iPhone and iPad.
Fresh off the banned list in Australia, Samsung is now advertising the Tab as "The tablet Apple tried to stop"
Whether it results in sales is less than guaranteed but Sammy is correct in noting their Galaxy Tab is better known now thanks to the high profile lawsuit, getting attention and press coverage it may never have received on it's own.
Now the German injunction is also nearly certainly dismissed.
Termed a possible "wake-up call for Apple" by 9to5Mac, the German Judge is quoted as saying:
"Consumers are well aware that there is an original and that competitors try to use similar designs, so buyers are vigilant when looking at products. We don’t think that someone buys a Samsung to make his table neighbor at the coffee house believe he owns an iPad."
Judge Brueckner-Hofmann went on to say "According to the court’s assessment, the defendant has moved away sufficiently from the legally protected design."
Comments
Okay, so Apple can sell the iPhone in France and Samsung can sell the Galaxy in Australia. Can we all just get along now?
Not at all. Because the final court cases in these and many other areas haven't happened yet.
Does this mean Apple is now liable for damages for the loss of two months of Galaxy sales? Not that I imagine the number would be particularly high.
If they lose the final case, probably. But at this point, no.
Nope. The Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 was physically redesigned in Germany (producing the Galaxy Tab 10.1N) in an attempt to bypass the community design in Germany. It has nothing to do with the case in Australia.
The amusing part being that they tried to get around an injunction against a Tab that looked like the iPad 2 but making a TabN that looks like the iPad 1.
Apple should probably move on.
If Apple just moves on at this stage then they clearly don't give a crap that they were being copied. So a year from now when someone blatantly knocks off the iPad (other than the detail of putting a bunch of grapes for the logo instead of an Apple), they can use "well Apple didn't care about Samsung doing it so they don't really care about folks copying their IP" as part of their defense and perhaps the Judge agrees and Apple loses.
IP law suits are like dancing the tango. There are certain steps you have to follow or you aren't dancing the dance. Apple knows this and they will keep up the dance until they actually get to a final court case. If they lose at that point they still get points for trying but Samsung was the better dancer.
People hate this bullshit. It may delay or even kill the competition, but the ill-will with the public remains.
I didn't realize "the public" knows or cares that Samsung makes a tablet, let alone hold ill will against Apple for protecting its intellectual property rights.
I didn't realize "the public" knows or cares that Samsung makes a tablet, let alone hold ill will against Apple for protecting its intellectual property rights.
Live and learn.
I didn't realize "the public" knows or cares that Samsung makes a tablet, let alone hold ill will against Apple for protecting its intellectual property rights.
Agreed. I'd go so far as to wager that some percentage of potential buyers don't even know that iPads are only produced by Apple.
How many of these things does Samsung think they will sell? Certainly not enough to recover the financial loss through lawsuits with Apple. They should have just thrown in the towel from the start and saved a few million to the bottom line.
I still really don't get this fight on Samsung's part. Their Galaxy Tab just gets lost in the sea of loser pads sitting not he shelf at Best Buy. Bar the iPad, none of the others are any better than the next, and at the end of the day, the Android OS is a loser on a pad device, and is simply sub-par in operation.
How many of these things does Samsung think they will sell? Certainly not enough to recover the financial loss through lawsuits with Apple. They should have just thrown in the towel from the start and saved a few million to the bottom line.
It could now be just a matter of pride, just as Apple may have been driven by it when these lawsuits started. We already know that Steve Jobs took it personally. Yoon-Woo Lee, Yangkyu Kim and/or other's in Samsung leadership may now feel the same way.
It could now be just a matter of pride, just as Apple may have been driven by it when these lawsuits started. We already know that Steve Jobs took it personally. Yoon-Woo Lee, Yangkyu Kim and/or other's in Samsung leadership may now feel the same way.
Agreed. But it may cost Samsung much more in the future than they could possibly imagine. Not only is Apple becoming more diverse in iPad parts production, cutting some of the legs out from under Samsung, but if this Apple TV gains traction, it will be Sharp, not Samsung, that benefits from the panel production.
This of course does not account for any new innovations that Apple has down the road. Samsung should have cut their losses a long time ago. Sacrificing a boat load of business down the road from Apple just to uphold a prideful but loser of a product like the Galaxy Tab was not a good business move. We shall see.
It could now be just a matter of pride, just as Apple may have been driven by it when these lawsuits started. We already know that Steve Jobs took it personally. Yoon-Woo Lee, Yangkyu Kim and/or other's in Samsung leadership may now feel the same way.
Well, we will never know if the Samsung leadership took it personally from the very start, once Apple started telling them it wasn't cool, before all the litigation started. That is a possibility.
I don't think Apple was driven only by pride. Android and Samsung ripped Apple off big time. Apple was stabbed in the back by their very closest partners (Google and Samsung) as well as one of their own Directors (Schmidt)!
In the old days Steve would have banished everything Google+Samsung from Apple completely. It is a testament to his growth and maturity that he still kept a working relationship with Google+Samsung and to this date, Apple has not publicly bashed Google and Samsung... Or at least not to the extent of Apple criticising Adobe, AFAIK.
Whether Samsung is taking things personally is moot at this point. They've been doing nonsense like seeking to ban Apple products, when they are the ones being accused of infringing. Never mind if Samsung is found in the clear by the courts, I'm okay with that legal decision despite what I believe to be unauthorised copying of Apple... Standing on the shoulders of giants and all that. But what personally pisses me off is their childish behaviour like seeking to counter-ban Apple products - just immaturity and idiocy on their part.
Agreed. I'd go so far as to wager that some percentage of potential buyers don't even know that iPads are only produced by Apple.
That's the power of the iPad. Just like initially a lot of people thought that most smartphones are "iPhones". And it is this phenomenon that Google and Android blatantly exploited by making their hardware and software so closely resembling the iPhone and iPad.
Fresh off the banned list in Australia, Samsung is now advertising the Tab as "The tablet Apple tried to stop"
Whether it results in sales is less than guaranteed but Sammy is correct in noting their Galaxy Tab is better known now thanks to the high profile lawsuit, getting attention and press coverage it may never have received on it's own.
http://9to5mac.com/2011/12/15/samsun...tried-to-stop/
Termed a possible "wake-up call for Apple" by 9to5Mac, the German Judge is quoted as saying:
"Consumers are well aware that there is an original and that competitors try to use similar designs, so buyers are vigilant when looking at products. We don’t think that someone buys a Samsung to make his table neighbor at the coffee house believe he owns an iPad."
Judge Brueckner-Hofmann went on to say "According to the court’s assessment, the defendant has moved away sufficiently from the legally protected design."
We don’t think that someone buys a Samsung to make his table neighbor at the coffee house believe he owns an iPad.
No, the customer buys a Samsung because he thinks it IS an iPad. The judge is a fool.