/article-new/2011/06/samsung_logo.jpg?lossy "samsung_logo"){kind=logo}
The Sydney Morning Herald reports that an Australian judge has agreed to fast-track Samsung's appeal of an injunction barring the company from selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in that country. Samsung had previously said that it would likely cancel the device's launch entirely in Australia if Apple was awarded an injunction, but the company is still pushing forward in an attempt to win the right to sell.
In court today Samsung sought and has been granted an expedited hearing by the Federal Court in Sydney, hoping to overturn the ban before the busy pre-Christmas shopping season.
"I'm quite firm of the view that the matter should proceed on the basis that the lead application be referred to a full court, that it be listed at the same time as any prospective appeal and that the matter be expedited," Justice Lindsay Foster said.
Meanwhile, Apple has also begun going after Internet resellers who have continued to sell the Galaxy Tab 10.1 to Australian customers despite the ban. Two sites, MobiCity.com.au and dMavo.com.au, have acknowledged receiving letters from Apple, but dMavo at least has reported that it will not be responding to Apple's demands. The report notes that while injunctions against individual sellers should be rather straightforward for Apple to obtain given the standing order against Samsung, a number of the resellers are headquartered in Hong Kong and it may take some time to determine whether Australian authorities have jurisdiction over their actions.
Top Rated Comments
You can repeat the times you want, it won't be more real than now. Android didn't changed, it was hardware agnostic from the start
I'm so bored of people taking that quote out of context.
Wasn't funny or relevant the first time it was used here and it still isn't today.
This. I too want to know what was copied from Apple.
A grid of icons you could click and launch an application from, on multiple pages?
Android didn't copy this from Apple. Palm was doing this for a decade before the iPhone was a twinkle in Steve Jobs' eye. Nobody making the uneducated "Android copied iOS hurrrr" argument is running to defend PalmOS from Apple in this regard.
And as an addition to the point above, the fact that Android has clickable icons as just one facet of the primary user interface differs sharply from the Palm/WinMo and indeed iOS competitors.
Third party software?
Again, Palm and Nokia had been doing this for the better part of a decade, and Windows Mobile, for as awful of a product as that was, for a couple years prior.
Sleek design?
Can you really patent that? Is it something that should be patented? What about the tablet manufacturers dating back as far as 2003 that had tablets with a remarkably similar design to the iPad? Where is the defense here?
WHAT was copied from Apple? I've yet to see a cohesive argument here beyond what boils down to "they just did!" I'm willing to bet that if the iPhone were a product with mediocre sales numbers, nobody would be making a big deal out of this.
I've owned plenty of iOS devices and given them fair shakes, and I currently use Android devices. I don't see how a reasonable observer of the two platforms and mobile technology in general could make a claim that "Android copied Apple" and be serious about it.
What about other features of Android that seem to trickle their way into iOS releases -- or the iOS jailbreak community, for example? Why are these being ignored by everyone who wants to say that Apple is completely original and doesn't copy ideas?
Same thing goes for apple fanboys 24/7 so what's the big deal here?
You didn't realize yet what fanboys are did you? That would explain. :)
Maybe this part didn't quite help :