So, the shadiness factor of the German EU-wide injunction against the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 seems to continue. Not only has Apple been caught supplying the court with tampered evidence, it now seems the court in Duesseldorf didn’t have the authority to ban the Galaxy Tab EU-wide – at least, according to a German court which has just lifted the EU-wide ban on the Galaxy Tab 10.1.
It’s a bit of a clusterfrick over there in D~A 1/4 sseldorf. The court there applied the injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the entire European Union, but as it turns out, the court now doubts whether it had that authority to begin with. It gets a bit weird, but the confusion seems to arise from the distinction between Samsung Korea and Samsung Germany.
Samsung had filed an emergency opposition to the injunction, stating that a German court does not have the authority to prohibit Samsung Korea from doing business in, say, Italy or Belgium. The court accepted this line of reasoning, and lifted the injunction on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the EU – except for Germany. Samsung Germany is still not allowed to sell the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in either Germany or the rest of the EU.
This is strictly a procedural thing, the German court told WebWereld.nl, as no evidence was considered, and no arguments from either party – other than Samsung’s emergency opposition – was heard. Still, it’s a slap in Apple’s face, since all this does is further keep the Galaxy Tab in the news, with Apple being perceived as the whiny child who can’t handle competition.
The final say in Germany will come August 25, while The Netherlands will come September 15.
When this story first broke, I actually praised Thom for reporting on a patent story for once that actually had a direct and tangible impact on consumers, as opposed to feeling the need to tell us about every f**king finger gesture patent lawsuit that comes down the pike.
But, guess I was wrong, since the Galaxy Tab is going to be released anyway.
Sorry for reading between the lines*, but… Why aren’t German consumers – consumers?
* Nasty habit of having a family full of diplomats
Edited 2011-08-16 21:39 UTC
n/m, the article summary does not make it clear that the ban still exists in Germany.
Edited 2011-08-16 22:00 UTC
EU-wide Ban on Galaxy Tab 10.1 [temporary] Lifted [except in Germany]
I think it’s syntactically correct. The ban is not EU-wide anymore, and the court did not mention any intention to bring an EU-wide ban back, stating to the contrary that it was a mistake.
Well, the ban wasn’t European wide anyway, The Netherlands were not included. As sales are still banned in Germany I don’t think you can state the ban has been lifted from the entire EU.
It’s like telling your dad you cleaned his car and he notices a dirty spot. Germany may not be dirty, but it’s a pretty big spot on the European map.
Engaged reports it like this:
“German court lifts ban on some European Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales”
Does seem a rather different situation than Thom reported.
And for what it’s worth I don’t think Apple should try to ban the Galaxy tab sales.
I see your point, though in my opinion Engadget’s title does not reflect well enough how much has changed (“some” is typically less than the majority in English, isn’t it ?).
Maybe “German court lifts ban on Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales outside of Germany” ?
To be honest, I don’t agree with Engadget’s line either, since the ban lifting is done in all but two EU countries, one which didn’t even have the ban. “Almost all but two” and “some” do differ somewhat.
Your version does get my approval!
But in that example you would have cleaned his car. You just wouldn’t have completely cleaned it. However it was still cleaner than it was before and thus you had cleaned it.
However I do agree with your point, just not the car analogy
It’s compulsory to use cars as examples for some strange reason.
But as Neil the Hippy noted: Okay, so most metaphors don’t bear close examination
Edit, part of the script:
NEIL: Okay, guys. What do we need?
RICK: [putting on jacket] Neil, you know exactly what I need. Cause all my stuff is marked with sticky labels!
VYVYAN: Wait a minute! Is yours the stuff with the sticky labels with ‘Rick’ written on it?
RICK: Yes!
VYVYAN: [false compassion] Oh, sod it! I’m very sorry, Rick! I didn’t know! I thought it was mine, and I’ve eaten it! Every last bit!
NEIL: Look, guys, I know exactly whose food is whose, right. Cause I do all the shopping around here. And I do all the cleaning. My function around here, I might as well be your mothers!
RICK: But Neil, we don’t hate our mothers!
NEIL: Alright, so most metaphors don’t bear close examination! Anyway, for example, [places a plate on the table] This glob of green mould on a saucer is Rick’s.
Edited 2011-08-16 18:59 UTC
hehehe does seem so
Very true and kudos for The Young Ones reference – classic show
I have seen every episode a few times (well, there aren’t that many). A shame none feature a computer. Ehm, it wouldn’t survive long anyway.
If you like this series you may also like “Bottom”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_(TV_series)
I’m British so I’ve seen these shows anyway
Not a fan of Bottom though.
I like it, but The Young Ones was better. It’s a shame they didn’t make more episodes. It’s the same for Fawlty Towers, Blackadder, The Office, Yes (Prime) Minister. We needed more!
Now Red Dwarf ran for 142 seasons, but I thought it was less and less funny with each season.
I’m hoping there will be a 5th The IT Crowd series!
IT Crowd is a bit hit and miss in my opinion.
The last show that had me laughing out loud was ‘The Inbetweeners’, which I’d highly recommend if you haven’t already seen it.
Never heard of it, but I’m going to check it out!
If you want to be 100% precise, then:
“EU wide ban lifted off Samsung Korea, but still in place for Samsung Germany”
Reflects the fact that EU wide injunction is still in place for Samsung’s German subsidiary. However any other EU based subsidiary is free to sell Galaxy Tab.
Edited 2011-08-16 21:44 UTC
Next Apple demanding a Samsung kristal nacht or SAP and others gets it.
Congratulation, sir ! *hands a medal* Here’s your Godwin award !
Humble thanks I dedicate this to the memory of all (non Apple) square shape tablets in Germany..RIP
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/rma/lowres/rma…
Yeah I’m talking about this thread so far.
Galaxy Tabs sales will now resume and sales will be stronger than spected thanks to Apple free publicity.
Just what were they thinking? Apple accused of doctoring image to sink Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe?
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/apple-accused-of-doctoring-image…
Or perhaps I should say, were they even thinking? Did they really think nobody will notice?
Edited 2011-08-16 22:13 UTC
Guess I am the only dissenting opinion here.
Let’s get real all. Apple is doing exactly what it’s Board of Director’s are demanding it does, and what Google is prepared to do itself. Say what you will, but Samsung IS ripping off Apple’s designs and you are either blind or or too anti-Apple to admit it. Apple should sue, they should be paid for the fruits of their labor rather than having some also-rans in Asia, where IP theft is order of the day (I exclude the Japanese of course), clean their clocks. They attract the best talent in the industry to turn out the best products. Apple cannot be profitable if other bloodsuckers are eating their lunch.
It’s totally disingenuous to say Apple is being anti-competitive. Does that mean that patent laws do not need to be reformed, he’ll no.
There is no doubt Samsung copied Apple’s design, nor what Samsung motivated to build tablets (it wasn’t the 1994 Knight Rider).
The Google people on this site say it’s good for innovation if companies copy each other.
In part I agree.
Samsung saw Apple’s iPad took off and they wanted their share and made their own tablet. That’s fine with me and good for competition, customer choice.
Now Apple claims they copied the iPad, like its shape. I think it’s kinda hard to make a tablet that doesn’t look like a tablet. I don’t you should view it as a tablet, but as a screen, which there are a lot of. Touching it with your fingers, making gestures should be fine too, it’s the most logical way of interacting, like a pen also would be (but not as convenient when it comes to multi gestures).
Where I think Samsung went too far is when it made a number of icons look like iOS ones and even copied the packaging. There is no need for that, unless you want customers to think a Galaxy Tab is an iPad too.
IMO Apple should have asked the judge to force Samsung to change the icons and packaging. No need for an import ban or any fines.
If we just take into account that it has a screen that you can interact with, then every Palm Pilot and Windows Mobile device for the last decade are prior art that invalidate all the Apple’s designs.
I’d like to compare their design claims with Tenacious D’s “One note song” skit.
JB: Just play this note.
(Plays)
JB: Then we both, just keep both playing that note. Every once in a while bend it. And that’s it and just remember who wrote that song – ME, baby, ME.
You cannot be serious? You just described a category of devices, not the device itself. The whole is always greater than the sum of its parts, thats called value add. Apple adds value by their slick industrial design and tight SW/HW integration. It does not matter what Google and the Free Software guys want, theft it is theft. Samsumg did not merely borrow from the look and feel, they stole it, pure and simple. The Galaxy may not be an exact replica, but its close enough to mistake if for an iPad just a few feet away. That should be the criteria.
It’s wrong if consumers have a hard time to identify what it is, but it’s hard to make a tablet computer that hasn’t a rectangular screen. If it’s black and rectangular most stuff will look like an iPad to some people. But hey, most VCR’s were black flat boxes.
I think the UI and its icons are more an area where it shouldn’t be alright to copy stuff, like Samsung did. This would make a lot of people believe it’s an iPad.
That’s correct! Apple invented the touchscreen device with rounded corners and a shiny, black, flush bezel, and it has the exclusive right to make tablets!
Why just look at this early Ipad concept: http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/03/crunchpad-the-launch-prototype/
SEE! Apple had already invented the black shiny bezel long before they announced…, er, uh… Oh. Sorry, but it appears that the link actually shows a CrunchPad prototype from six months before the Ipad was first announced. My bad…
Alright, then consider this early Iphone prototype!: http://mobile.engadget.com/2006/12/15/the-lg-ke850-touchable-chocol…
There you go! Apple was showing the rounded, flush, black bezel long before they… Um… sorry again. It seems that the device shown in the link is actually an LG Prada phone, which was winning design awards four months before the Iphone was announced.
Okay. Well, Apple certainly invented an array of icons on a touchscreen device. Here’s a very early Apple concept for such an icon array: http://mobile.osnews.com/img/6146/palmos1.png
Gotcha! Sorry Android fanboys! This icon array is an exclusive Apple concept! We are the superior… crap… Evidently, this image is a screenshot of Palm OS (from a touchscreen phone), which has been around for about a decade prior to the Iphone.
Nevermind.
/sarcasm
Apple fanboys! How can you think with a straight face that Apple has any exclusive rights to a touchscreen device with a rounded, shiny black, flush bezel? Such a device was demonstrated in a video in 1994. I’ll spell-out the date just in case the bolded number didn’t make it through the fog of the RDF — nineteen ninety-four!
And you think that adding an array of icons makes an Iphone/Ipad unique?
Really.
Samsung’s motivation is immaterial — Apple did not invent touchscreen devices with an icon array and a flush, shiny black bezel with rounded corners.
There’s no such thing as “Google people.” The only folks who invest their identity and emotion into a product to such a psycho degree are the Apple fanboys. The arguments here are often simply “Apple Fanboys vs. ‘those with common sense.'”
The “look” of icons is often very subjective. For the sake of this discussion, it’s not even worth comparing the two sets of icons. If push came to shove, Samsung could just use other icons and its product would function just as well.
The packaging? It’s okay for Samsung to use a box, right? Do they have the right to use a white box?
Really.
Edited 2011-08-17 18:01 UTC
Dude, chill out.
I find it disturbing that posts like that can get positive votes.
Got nothing against the content, pretty much agree with it in fact, but the form is extremely aggressive and flamewar-inducing, which is IIRC the exact definition of a troll.
How do you expect someone to react to that, exactly ? Through calm and civilized discussion ? Or do you think that your point of view is so superior that it will shut all mouths ?
Edited 2011-08-17 20:39 UTC
He was replying to me, I think, but he is indeed overly agressive and twisting my words. It’s so weird I don’t even bother putting it all straight.
Aww, poor diddums. Did someone rain on your parade and shoot your argument(s) down with some good old fashioned common sense and evidence? tsk tsk, how dare they!
The OP that you bitched about gets my vote because he pretty much says it as it is, with none of the mindless, inane, dronish babble that the current Apple fans present.
You are most welcome to call me a troll. I couldn’t care less. I’m more concerned with the truth, and real competition in the market, and stopping legal bullies like Apple from abusing the law and monopolising the market.
Dave
I’ll say one thing, I didn’t object at all to the Samsung’s shape, so why go on a rant against me about the shape?
Correct, but I don’t object to rectangular black shapes.
If Appel releases the iPad, after which several companies start their own tablet projects and one comes up with a design that looks a lot like the iPad, copies icons and even the design of the box how can you not state that they used the iPad as inspiration? They didn’t come with a tablet after the Knight Rider or after Microsoft’s tablets (well, perhaps they did, but I probably didn’t look like an iPad nor did it sell very well).
Now I don’t mind the shape that much. We can all agree it’s hard to design a tablet that hasn’t got a tablet shape en black isn’t a very unusual color either for an electronic device.
Mimicking the box is just an attempt to mislead customers. And copying icons is also not necessary as it’s easy to come up with your our icon set.
If you all add this up I can imagine Apple objects to it. I just don’t think stuff should be banned for this, unless Samsung also sticks an Apple logo on it.
Amen, you hit the nail right on the head.
The sad fact, and I’ve said it on osnews many years ago, is that Apple fanboys are the worst amongst the bunch. They will defend Apple to the death, and bad mouth anyone who dares criticise Apple or stand up to their legal bullying.
Go google! Go Samsung. Kick the shit out of Apple in the courts.
Dave
PS this sort of BS that Apple is doing is EXACTLY why I believe software patents, and indeed all patents, should be bloody well banned. They encourage monopolisation of the market, and are directly anti competitive in nature, and they stifle innovation and consumer markets. The sooner they are banned globally, the better for all consumders, for all businesses.
So rows of icons and shiny rounded tablets are Apple’s unique ideas? You sure they haven’t been done 10 years earlier, by, say, Palm or Microsoft?
And I don’t want to rant about how idiotic the notion of owning ideas is.
http://www.cultofmac.com/what-tablets-looked-like-before-the-ipad-p…
I’m not sure I understand. So the Samsung Galaxy 10.1 tablet I bought recently in England wasn’t a permitted purchase? Perhaps because the UK is not part of the EU we can do what we like rather than have the fourth reich tell us what to do?
It was just an import ban, devices that had already been imported could still be sold. (And the UK is a part of the EU btw.)
Apple has gone totally insane now:
http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/107630/apple–gehele-galaxy-lijn-moet-ui…
Yawn :-p
When you can’t compete, litigate!
That sounds like the normal modus operandi of these companies.