German Injunction Against Sale of Galaxy Tab 10.1 Upheld

I know many here is hating on this "minimalistic design" wording in the ruling, but I feel that it's the whole reason the iPhone/iPad have been so dominating. Look, every tablet that was marketed before the iPad was complex, some had swiveling screens to convert from laptop to tablet, they all used styluses, most had tons of buttons, some had handles, etc.

I think what's more interesting about the "prior art" from Kubrick and even star trek is these movies/shows were intending to make futuristic devices that seemed desirable but were straight forward. Somehow, in the months leading up to the release of the iPad, every competitor stood around, some even openly admitted they were purposefully delaying production because everyone wanted to see what apple would bring to the table.

When apple released it, many if not most people in the tech-sphere bemoaned that it was too simple, just an oversized iPod touch with comically sized bezels. People said it would fail because it was too simple, and some joked that it wasn't actually really bigger than an iPhone cuz it was all bezel.

Now, a couple years later, everyone is trying to say that this simple design is obvious and that everyone had obviously thought of it before. Well, that may be true, we can't read minds in the past, but apple was the only one with the balls to release such a simple device, I think it's fair to say they deserve to reap the benefits of their bold move.

Just read that on Engadget. Yep, Apple now owns minimalistic design in Germany for tablets.

No, they own a specific minimalistic design in Germany. The lack of imagination in these threads about alternative designs for a tablet is amazing. Especially, considering the dozen of alternative designs that have been posted.

Dutch court says No, Germany says Yes. Score is now 1 : 1.

Dutch court says no in a preliminary hearing. German court says yes for permanent injunction. And Samsung doesn't like its case too much in Australia considering that they have voluntarily delayed launching the Tab there.

Maybe Kubrick's tablet and a Samsung picture frame don't prove as much as some people thought it did.

I still think Apple's claims are too generic. I bet Samsung's idea is just to drag this out as long as they can, before introducing a slightly modified version that avoids direct infringement. Make sure Apple has put all its cards on the table.

Ipad is square, Galaxy tab is rectangle. Galaxy tab has ZERO home buttons, Ipad has one. Minimalistic? Galazy tab is minimalist than the iPad.

No offense, but my 4 year old daughter wants to tell you about the definition of a square. :)

There are many posters here who clearly do not understand what a 'patent troll' is. I believe you'll find the definition does not fit what Apple is doing, which is protecting their IP!

Yeah you're right I had hoped that their failures in the 90's would have humbled them but low and behold as soon as they were able to make a comeback they became even worse than Intel, Google and MSFT.

There's one difference.

Consumers keep going nuts over their products. Apple keeps redefining and revolutionizing entire markets. Apple's figured out what makes tech desirable and just keeps doing it.

All the promo blurb I saw for the phone had the app selection screen looking like the iPhones. So your your saying that samsung put a screen on the front of their boxes that doesn't look anything like the app selection screen that you actually get as default? Pretty weird thing for a company to..

The App selection screen is something called the App drawer and yes it is not the default desktop UI at all. It is something you pull up.

And the "promo" blurbs you probably saw is the Apple cherry picked evidence, I'm sorry to say. Don't worry, most people that are not into Android never bothered to look up how Android/TouchWiz work and don't know any details beyond the FUD spread on MacRumors and AppleInsider.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1212805

Oh dear Apple, liar liar pants on fire! And Karmas a bitch!

And good luck with trying to explain to the court just how the evidence you presented was NOT based on the final Galaxy Tab product, and also lets not forget the European courts take a VERY, VERY dim view on monopolies and companies that abuse their positions for competition.....

Are all Apple fans that blind? Do you always believe everything Apple tells you? They are a company just like any other, they will do anything to win, and yes, lie too.

If this turns out to be true, Apple is screwed. Manipulating legal documents is not just illegal, it will turn the whole thing around 180 degrees.

Are you kidding?
Apple brings in more negative press than most tech companies lately, particularly related to iOS and iOS development, it's just people like you dominate the tech press, and give Apple a pass on pretty much anything.

They filed a doctored image as evidence to a European Judge, in order to stop the immediate sale of a competitor's product.
The Judge will tear them a new one, if not throw the case straight out.

The evidence is clear as day, go look at the images in the orginal court filing. They are doctored, Apple will lose even if they have a valid case.

This is pretty f'ed up...they purposely photoshop'd it to look more like the ipad than it actually does...wow.
I gotta say I don't see why Apple is so bent on killing the new galaxy tab -- they didn't seem to mind when the original came out...just cause this one has a larger screen? What about all the other android tablets out there with 10"+ screens? Pissing off samsung = not a good idea...especially when other divisions of samsung supply displays \ components \ NAND \ SSDs to apples products.

After the judge is forced to overturn the verdict and allow the Tab to be sold, the CEO of Samsung should say ..

"and another thing...Steve Jobs : Go F'k yourself and find some other place to provide 75% of the parts for your products"

I will tell you exactly what will happen if Apple is found guilty of providing/falsifying evidence.

LTD, and others like him will look a little like this

Image

All this makes me feel so uneasy about buying an iPad. I haven't bought one yet, but I plan to. I probably still will.

Apple makes great products... it's just their business ethics are rather questionable when it comes to competition.

Some legal assistant just lost their job.

There's going to be hell to pay for this.

No matter how you cut it Apple screwed up big time.

They should of made damn sure that the photo they used looked like the product Samsung was selling. Using photos of a prototype was bad. Apple has a good chances of its entire case being lost and then some extra punishment for this screw up.

They should of checked but Apple screwed up big time.

Well, too bad for Apple.
The Samsung tab was hardly affecting Apple, and now Apple has dug itself into the ground with this one.

Apple you don't own the rights to make a device a shape !!

get over it already and enjoy the fair competition.

Or, sue every TV maker for obviously copying the iMac design

Oh LTD - the day I take advice from you on what I should and should not believe as it pertains to Apple will be the coldest day in hell. Believe me.

Wha' happen guys?

Well my head didn't explode after all. And it might just be the coldest day in hell (if you're smart, that is.)

I'll tell you what happened. Absolutely nothing happened. This is nothing new. This is Apple being Apple from DAY 1. Apple patents as many facets of their creation as they can, and seeks to enforce them from every angle using available legal, and perfectly accessible (to any other company) judicial mechanisms. They did here exactly what they've been doing since Day 1. Exactly what you and I would be doing in their position.

Apple is nothing like Microsoft in this regard. Apple has not acted illegally by donig any of this. Apple has not placed their partners or anyone else under any form of duress. Apple is simply riding the wave (which is now a self-feeding ocean) of consistent (and rising) consumer demand for all things Apple.

They are no more litigious today than before. They do, however, have more products in the market. So there is more to protect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31021_3-20003807-260.html

They have always been aggressive in this regard, IP litigation. This goes back to the 80s. So getting upset about all this is a little late. Further, some of you need to see things from a corporate perspective, not just a consumer one.

This is nothing new. Nor is there anything wrong with it. These mechanisms are available to everyone.

Some companies pursue their IP rights and their enforcement through the courts on a regular basis, some don't. Apple happens to take it very seriously (and so they should), though, and they always have, especially when it comes to "look and feel" and trade dress suits.

This time, Apple got the competition on a Community Design registration.

To license or not to license

If Apple seems unique in this regard, they probably are. Apple doesn't look for many licensing deals. Licensing to everyone would of course, make them money, but it's also a recipe for stagnation, derivative products, and loss of control.

Apple isn't looking to make a quick buck through pushing sheer volume. That's the money game. Yes, they're in that, but they're much more in the great products game. That's why you see customer satisfaction ratings consistently throughout the roof for Apple gear year after year. Good luck achieving that under a multitude of licensing deals. This should already be apparent to most people. From their perspective (and it's a ballsy one), why not protect the uniqueness and desirability of their product? Why disrespect it by allowing others to take a cavalier attitude with it? So Apple usually chooses instead to protect their products by patenting as many facets of them as they can, and then they go about enforcing it wherever they can (and often when the time is right.)

It's smart. And it's the reason (though not the only one) they are not only alive and kicking today but leading the industry in unprecedented ways.

This is all about new market realities in the Post-PC era. And it's time for Apple's rivals like Samsung to step up their game, and oh I don't know, maybe pull off an Apple-like June 2007 or January 2010. Or is only Apple capable of such things? Maybe.

Except that Apple actually invented the tech that they accused HTC (and Google) of stealing. HTC and Google, however, have accused Apple of violating patents they purchased way after the fact.

It's probably a bad idea to hang an argument on such, since the basis could change.

Apple has accused HTC of violating a patent Apple got from their NeXT purchase.

Apple also just spent a lot of money buying Nortel patents. They could easily start using those offensively, as they almost certainly will in order to get some return on their investment.

The only joke here are Apple's flat-footed competitors who were either too dumb, stupid, or downright uninterested in innovating a June 2007 or January 2010 like Apple did.

Those competitors sold billions of phones and millions of tablets over the past two decades, creating the base market, hardware and infrastructure that many of Apple's devices need.

Changing the visual style of something is far easier than creating the base that a device totally relies upon to exist or work at all.

So is the injunction is based on that community design? A quick sketch (no actual device, at the time) of a generic, minimalistic design: a rectangular screen with rounded bezel? Or is the injunction based on more than the physical form factor & community design?

In Germany, Apple's injunction request had several parts:

[LIST]
[*]The community design from 2004.
[*]Packaging trade dress (white box, picture, product inside on top).
[*]Product dress (rounded glass rectangle with even screen borders).
[/LIST]
Note that we haven't seen such a simple injunction request in the US or the rest of the EU. In the US, design patents are more strictly regulated and the iPad patent is a detailed drawing of the actual product with Home button and connectors, not just a generic image. In the Netherlands, the court disallowed the generic design, the rather generic trade dress claims, _and_ most of the utility patents.

Yeah, guys. Keep posting photos of tablet-like designs, photo frames and other objects, as if it makes a difference. There's about 50 of em in the other thread, and probably another 30 in the related thread before that.

Friggin priceless.

Ok, I like this one.

Apple went from being the cute fruity underdog to a completely fascist corporation that competes by patent trolling and using local law enforcement to do its muscle work. Congrats Apple you did the impossible by out douch bagging Microsoft.

Patent trolling my foot. These products are blatant rip-offs of great design by Apple. On the one hand it's quite a compliment to have ALL of your products replicated. On the other hand it's infringement, plain and simple. The exactness to which Samsung copied Apple on this, not only in their hardware, but in examples I've seen of their software as well, made me sick to my stomach when I watched some of their keynotes. Heck, even the presentations are similar!



STAGE looks like Apple.
PRODUCT looks like Apple.
PEOPLE look and sound like Apple.

Samsung should be ashamed of their lack of effort and originality.