Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Handhelds Patents Apple

German Appeals Court Confirms Galaxy Tab 10.1 Ban 161

Posted by Soulskill
from the can't-win-for-losing dept.
New submitter Killer Panda sends word that a German Appeals Court has upheld the injunction prohibiting sales of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany. Apple convinced lower courts to issue and uphold the injunction last year by making the case that Samsung's devices "slavishly" copied the iPhone and iPad. "Samsung, which is Apple's supplier as well as a competitor, has been trying to have the German decision overturned while also seeking other means to fight Apple. It redesigned the Galaxy Tab 10.1 for the German market only and named it Galaxy Tab 10.1N to get around the sales ban. Apple challenged the reworked version but a German court last month rejected Apple's claims in a preliminary judgment." The European Union announced some more bad news for Samsung: they'll be investigating the company to see whether its use of patent lawsuits is illegally hindering other companies' use of standardized 3G technology. "Under EU patent rules, a company that holds patents for standardized products is required to license them out indiscriminately at a fair price."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

German Appeals Court Confirms Galaxy Tab 10.1 Ban

Comments Filter:
  • Princess Syndrome (Score:5, Insightful)

    by killfixx (148785) * on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @01:50PM (#38880089) Journal

    Why is it that the most popular girl at the dance is usually the biggest douchebag?

    I've seen this behaviour time and again, if it's pretty or popular, it's easier to let all manner of misdeeds slide.

    Apple begins a very anti-competitive, design infringement lawsuit against everyone. Samsung fights back to try and protect it's market share. Samsung gets investigated for anti-competitive behaviour.

    Popular kid abuses geek, geek fights back, geek gets sent to the principals office. WTF!?

    I expected (not accepted) this sort of blatant ignorance then, but when it comes to an entire governing body (excuse my ignorance of EU policy) this sort of nonsense should not be tolerated.

    Isn't there some manner of oversight for something like this.

    If my son were to insult another student repeatedly, without offending the teacher, that later resulted in said student having a violent outburst, not only would my son be brought up on bullying charges (legit in my state), but so would the teacher for ignoring the bullying.

    But corporations are fully allowed to do this without repercussion.

    That upsets me.

    Shame on them.

  • by Theaetetus (590071) <theaetetus...slashdot@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @01:55PM (#38880159) Homepage Journal
    ... you still have to be reasonable.

    Apple begins a very anti-competitive, design infringement lawsuit against everyone. Samsung fights back to try and protect it's market share. Samsung gets investigated for anti-competitive behaviour.

    Popular kid abuses geek, geek fights back, geek gets sent to the principals office. WTF!?

    I expected (not accepted) this sort of blatant ignorance then, but when it comes to an entire governing body (excuse my ignorance of EU policy) this sort of nonsense should not be tolerated.

    If the popular kid abuses the geek, and the geek comes to school with a pipe bomb, you better believe the geek is going to the principal's office... Or worse.
    In this case, regardless of the merits of Apple's design patent infringement suit, Samsung fought back in a way they aren't allowed to: they helped establish the 3G standard, apparently withheld certain key patents from the licensing pool for the standard, and are now asserting those patents against a pool member. That's an almost textbook antitrust violation in this country, and Europe apparently has a similar law.

  • I thought the EU was moving away from copyright trolls ruining everything through the court system? Seriously, this is a big step in the wrong direction!

    This has nothing to do with copyright. On the Apple hand, it's a design patent infringement suit. On the Samsung hand, it's an antitrust violation investigation.

  • aplle sux (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SuperDre (982372) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @01:59PM (#38880203) Homepage

    Under EU patent rules, a company that hold patents for standardized products are required to license them out indiscriminately at a fair price.

    but the problem with Apple is, they think they are special and want to pay less as all the other companies, as Samsung is having them pay exactly the same as the rest..

  • by Lunix Nutcase (1092239) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @02:02PM (#38880235)

    You do realize that Samsung has a far longer history of offensive patent suits than Apple, right? They aren't some "innocent geek" being beaten down by Apple. And in this particular case the EU is absolutely correct in going after them over their attempted abuse of their 3g patents. Sorry, but just because Samsung is an Android manufacturer does not mean their actions are correct or legal regardless of how you feel about Apple's lawsuits against them.

  • The 10.1 is banned while the 10.1N is allowed.

    http://www.mobile88.com/gen/news/articles/2011/11/21/_11212011125638.jpg [mobile88.com]

    Talk about marginal court decisions. If you put a protective case on it, no one could tell the difference. Lawyers for the win!

    That's more about how narrow design patents are. Which is kinda the point - Samsung really had to work hard (or, rather, not work at all) to infringe the iPad design patent.

  • by scot4875 (542869) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @02:22PM (#38880441) Homepage

    Except that Apple chose to ignore licensing the 3G F/RAND patents for the first several years of the existence of the iPhone, and is now complaining to the courts that they should just be able to pay the same fees that everyone else gets.

    So, if this plays out in Apple's favor, the logical end result is that it's the wiser thing for everybody to NEVER license F/RAND patents; worst case for them is that years down the road they might get sued and have to pay the same thing they would have paid anyway, best case is that nobody notices/bothers to take them to court and they get away with it without paying anything.

    --Jeremy

  • by Kartu (1490911) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @02:28PM (#38880501)
    Bullshit. Motorola Xoom, Asus Prime (from original Joaha Heffner Megajudge POV) look exactly the same, hence infridge. She agreed with the point that "plain design can be patented" when refering to a device with front end dominated by screen. I guess she has never walked into a TV store. Thing black bezels, slightly rounded rectangles all over the place. Oh, and without "innovative apple" this time, quite naturally.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @02:32PM (#38880561)

    Apple was fully prepared to pay FRAND licensing. Samsung was being the douchebag by trying to essentially extort a cross licensing agreement with Apple to use patents covered under FRAND. Apple rightfully refused to bend over. Samsung had ZERO right to change the rules. Apple let the case run its course through the court system until it was agreed that Samsung was in the wrong for pulling such a stunt.

    So don't try to spin this story in a way that makes it sound like Apple was trying to purposely avoid paying FRAND. They were fully prepared to pay since day one. Samsung was just being a whiny little bitch that thought it could get ahead by extortion.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @02:35PM (#38880609)

    (Posting AC because I'm at work and I just have to say something in response to this...)

    Samsung fights back to try and protect it's market share. Samsung gets investigated for anti-competitive behaviour.

    Uh, they're being investigated for anti-competitive behaviour because they abused FRAND patents. They're being investigated because they acted anti-competitively.

    You may not like Apple but, for the love of gawd, pull your head out of your nether-regions and admit the truth - Samsung is abusing FRAND patents which _IS_ anti-competitive behaviour. If Apple wasn't involved, would you honestly be siding with Samsung on this? No - you'd be raking them over the coals for abuse of the patent system.

    Wow. It hurts my brain how blind people insist on being simply because they like (or, in this case, dislike) one side or the other... People claim Apple fanboys can be fanatical...

  • by dryriver (1010635) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @02:42PM (#38880725)
    The Galaxy Tab 10.1 - being an Android, rather than iOS device - looks and feels nothing like the iPad 2 when its switched on. Completely different UI/graphic design look. In fact it doesn't look remotely similar. Samsung also doesn't call it the sPad or something. They call it Galaxy Tab, which bears no resemblance to "iPad" whatsoever. Try it out yourself. Go to a store that has both the Samsung tablet and the Apple tablet, try both, and come back and tell me that they look similar. They don't! As for whoever modded my original parent post "Troll" - you Apple freaks are the worst fanboys of all. Samsung's tablet is technically superior to iPad 2. Pointing that out - that Apple doesn't have the best device on the market - is stating the facts, not trolling.But go on. Keep living in your twisted little fanboy world where Apple is the greatest computer company on the planet, and its products are the only ones that are great or groundbreaking. You Apple fanboys will grow older and wiser someday, and look back and wonder precisely what it was that was so "amazing" about Apple's products.
  • by walterbyrd (182728) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @06:04PM (#38883543)

    What is a tablet supposed to look like? A tire iron? I can easilly tell the difference between a galaxy, and an ipad, with my eyes closed.

    Furthermore, Apple did not "invent" rectangles, icons, or rounded corners.

Bus error -- please leave by the rear door.

Working...