Apple wins injunction against Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia
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.
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.
Comments
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.
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.
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.
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.
P.S. I miss Steve Jobs
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!
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.
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)
From the article:
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.
Glad this isn't some bullshit look and feel thing though.
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.
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?
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.
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)
Take a look at tablets designs BEFORE the Ipad and you will see how your little reasoning there makes NO sense.
Hello earth? Before the Ipad there was no tablet market to speak off, nothing looked remotely close to the Ipad. And now? Samsung did a 360 on their own old designs to clone a successful product. Who is "abusing" the patent system ? How is that "innovation" ? Which company should be protected and encouraged to continue bringing NEW products out?