The ruling is in: Samsung is prohibited from selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany. Minutes ago a Dusseldorf judge upheld the temporary ban, rejecting Samsung's attempts to overturn it. In making the ruling, judge Johanna Brueckner-Hofmann said that to an informed consumer, the Galaxy Tab looks like Apple's protected design. She added that, "The court is of the opinion that Apple’s minimalistic design isn’t the only technical solution to make a tablet computer, other designs are possible."
As you'll recall, the court issued a preliminary injunction in early August that temporarily prevented Samsung from selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the EU -- a ruling that was later scaled back to just Germany. At the heart of the ruling is an EU design registration for a tablet PC that Apple received in 2004. In other words, the decision says nothing about the validity of Apple's patent portfolio, it's only a judgement of trademarked design.
Naturally, the decision could foreshadow the future of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 7.7 and, honestly, any number of rectangular-shaped tablets in Germany as well. Apple was granted a preliminary injunction against the 7.7 on September 2nd forcing Samsung to pull its demonstration models and ads from the show floor of IFA.
Source: Bloomberg
Comments
Importers, get in on the action!
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:07 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
yeah i bet lol .. someone will def make the money :)
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:11 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
make money on a product noone wanted in the first place? ok.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:28 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Outsch … !
Let the Apple hatin’ begin :(
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:07 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You are several years too late. Haters be hatin’. :D
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:43 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Apple Shit storm in 3…2..1…
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:13 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
If a judge in Netherlands rules that the Community Design is invalid and a judge in Germany rules that is valid, what happens?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:13 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Different Judges, different oppinions, different laws. The EU isn’t one big country.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:26 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“The EU isn’t one big country.”
Really? I didn’t knew that
The Community Design is granted for all EU so how can be valid in one country and invalid in other?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:48 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The code of law is separate in each country. Of course Samsung can bring this all the way up to the European high courts.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:40 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Every electronics store near the bother of the NL is very happy right now.. If people actually want to buy the Tab…
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:39 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Funny. But, really, why does this matter so much?
Life continues unabated. And it’s not like Germans who really want this tablet can’t get it from one of the many many European retailers selling it still
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:16 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Or any German retailer, most of which still have stock they received one month ago. Every Media Markt or Saturn I’ve been to still has the Galaxy Tab on display. Needless to say, Samsung will ship a redesign within less than 6 months. It won’t look like an iPad at all and will sell like crap.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:44 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
They could just dust off the Tab 10.1v tooling. :)
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 4:26 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
"The court is of the opinion that Apple’s minimalistic design isn’t the
only technical solution to make a tablet computer, other designs are
possible."
So everyone else has to add a qwerz keyboard to sell in Germany then. Solved.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:17 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
There are other ways to differentiate your product. The simple matter is that the physical design of the Galaxy Tab is eerily similar to the iPad.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:39 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Which ones? Apple has also sued Motorola for their XOOM
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 8:22 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
@twitter-16739950:disqus
Please, different case different law suite.
Besides, in the case of Apple vs Motorola, I believe Motorola sued first, then Apple counter sued.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:32 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
No, Apple has filed a “community design” case against Motorola and the Xoom with the same court, on the same “grounds” as the case they filed against Samsung (rectangular glass slab with black bezel, rounded corners).
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 4:24 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Sued Motorola and HTC in a patent war. Sued Samsung over trade dress violations.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:17 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Eerily similar”? Similar, in the sense that they are designed for the same purpose and are made to be aesthetically pleasing and easy to handle. Not eerily so. There really are only so many ways to skin a cat. Why should the device be asymmetrical or oddly shaped?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:42 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The physical design of the iPad is eerily similar to a Samsung digital picture frame from five years ago. Ban the iPad.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:22 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The problem with the court opinion is that Apple uses a minimalistic design, they do not own minimalistic design. Why can’t other companies use the same principles? Does she expect that other companies will throw in weird-ass jarring features for no good reason?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:37 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Waiting for all the experts from Engadget to arrive and tell everyone that Germany is wrong, Apple paid them off, and that the Galaxy Tab looks nothing like the iPad2. It’s likely that they’ll include some pictures of older tablets and say that Apple copied of off [insert company name] and that [insert company name] should sue them.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:19 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Why bother? You already summarized everything quite nicely, not really sure what would need to be added. Thanks mate.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:25 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
So you honestly believe Apple has paid the courts off to keep a competitor who isn’t seeing anything near their sales off the market?
Yeah, really nothing that needs to be added here.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:36 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Germany is wrong, Apple didn’t pay them off, and the Galaxy Tab (honeycomb) requires no buttons. That is an inherent characteristic of the OS, however flawed it may be.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:52 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You can also differentiate with the bezel, the metal frame, the glass front etc.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:46 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
No problem; let’s have a glass frame, no bezel and the front? Yeah, let’s go with metal.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:23 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Like this picture frame from 2006. It kinda looks like a Galaxy Tab 10.1 to me. http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/samsung-digital-picture-frame-stores-pics-movies-music/
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:32 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
that looks nothing like the galaxy tab. for one it has a kicstand in the back, but facts arent possible in your arguments, and it is like 5 inches wide. it isnt even multitouch nor is it a tablet comp, so your arugment is null and void.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:31 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The judgement did not take into consideration the back of the device (so the kickstand argument cannot stand), and the size apparently does not matter – since the judge equates the iPad’s 4:3 aspect ratio with the 16:10 Galaxy Tab. Whether or not it is multitouch or is a tablet is also not contested in the suits. So don’t really see your argument being valid either.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:19 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The fact is that it’s not just that the Tab ‘looks’ like the iPad, there is way more to it. As a dude explained very well on the dutch site Tweakers.net:
It’s a ‘trade dress’ case: http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analysis/
So it’s not only about the exterior looks. It’s about the packaging, interface, marketing materials etc. which in this case are all in place to imitate the iPad.
He refers to a case were a Dutch supermarket branch, used their own-products to look like a-products. So they selled their own Coke, in packaging that looked exactly like Coca Cola’s, except for the name. It’s not about the bottle, which is round and has a hole at the top, but about the whole package and marketing as well.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:23 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
All that is an alien language to an Apple hater. In fact, they probably see such intelligent and well-reasoned posts as a blank white space, their brains being unable to process the information. In some cases they may see it as following:
“blah blah blah Apple rocks blah blah blah Steve Jobs is God blah blah blah I am an iSheep blah blah blah”.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:55 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Score!
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:10 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Funny…. All I see above this post is:
blah blah blah Apple rocks blah blah blah Steve Jobs is God blah blah blah I am an iSheep blah blah blah
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:03 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Funny how those iSheep feel the need to leave a comment against what they think is an army of Apple haters and then not even one Apple hater shows up… tells us a lot about those iPeople.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:19 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The fact that you’re using terms like iSheep and iPeople means YOU’RE an Apple hater.
Oh the iRony.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:31 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Oh christ – iSheep? How original.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:50 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
No, you are talking about yourself – being brainwashed and all.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 5:57 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
XD
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 8:19 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
All that is an alien language to an Apple hater. In fact, they probably see such intelligent and well-reasoned posts as a blank white space, their brains being unable to process the information. In some cases they may see it as following:
“blah blah blah Apple rocks blah blah blah Steve Jobs is God blah blah blah I am an iSheep blah blah blah”.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:55 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“The fact is that it’s not just that the Tab ‘looks’ like the iPad, there
is way more to it. As a dude explained very well on the dutch site Tweakers.net:”
Let’s look at those “similarities” shall we.
Rectangular shape with rounded corners: This could potentially apply to a variety of displays out there, ranging from LED panels (Sharp QUATRRON) to refrigerator view screens. This couldn’t possibly be included in the injunction request.
Rear of device: iPad is made of aluminum I believe. The SGT is made of plastic and comes in either white or black. The Apple logo and camera are vertically mounted. Additionally the camera is off to the left side of the device. The SGT logo is horizontally mounted along with the camera. Its camera is centered on the device.
Aspect ratios:
iPad – 1.30
Galaxy Tab 10.1 – 1.46
Not even close despite Apple’s best efforts to present it otherwise (look up Apple and falsified or altered evidence).
OS’s: iOS4 vs. Honeycomb
Well anyone who argues that Honeycomb is even remotely close to iOS is obviously insane so I won’t even address that. Besides, Apple would have most likely gone after Google – seeing as stock Android has nothing to do with the manufacturer – if that was the case. So let’s look at Touchwiz. The only similarity that might exist between Touchwiz and iOS is the rows of icons. But even that’s ridiculous because Touchwiz also has those accompanied by desktop widgets. iOS – with its several shortcomings – obviously does not. Besides, couldn’t every version of Windows be cited as precedent as well? The “desktop full of icons” concept has been around for over 20 years in various OS’s. Anyway; I challenge any of you to pick out elements of the software that have been directly “ripped off” from Apple (and please don’t say icons or I’ll ignore you).
I don’t know about you but when it comes to the physical attributes of these devices, one is as different as the other. With regards to marketing or branding though, I know absolutely nothing in this case.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 11:25 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
There are icons in Android that violate Apple’s trademarks for said icons and there may also be some patent violations but I won’t get into that. I do not think its about simply looking like it. I’m not a lawyer.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:12 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
From what I’ve read the trade dress in question doesn’t deal with the back of the device at all. That seems ridiculous to me that you wouldn’t consider the product as a whole, but when you look at the what Samsung is getting knocked for it’s something like…
Rounded rectangle, black bezel, equal size bezel around screen and a metal/silver frame. I also don’t think the software is in discussion for tabs. There was an article here that went through all the trade dress claims, only a few apply to tablets.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:24 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You missed the point.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 10:40 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I disagree. I think I’m bang on to tell you the truth. I’ve done a side-by-side comparison of the two and the results clearly indicate two different devices all together. My 2 cents.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 10:46 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I disagree. I think I’m bang on to tell you the truth. I’ve done a side-by-side comparison of the two and the results clearly indicate two different devices all together. My 2 cents.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 10:46 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
A comparison in the Dutch Hague Court, which is a higher court than the German Regional Dusseldorf Court, invalidated one of Apple’s patents. Along with making a decision on 9 of 10 Apple patents/community designs as being non-infringing or invalid. The judge said that if Samsung had been infringing the 601 CD (supposed tablet Community Design), that he would have invalidated it just as he had the “Slide to Unlock” patent. Where prior art submission by Samsung showed Neonode’s N1 using it in 2004. So he could not invalidate the 601 Community Design, because it was also being contested in German Court and it simply wasn’t in his judgement being infringed by Galaxy Tab 10.1. Otherwise he could have and most likely would have!
There is no question that iOS is completely different than Android OS and yes that’s not what was before the three female judges in Dusseldorf. It was a question over the fact that Apple seems to be attempting to trademark/patent/community designs/etc everything that resembles any tablet PC form factor. A form factor that was first introduced at COMDEX 2000 and demonstrated. Although no tablet PC went on sale until Wacom’s Windows XP Tablet Edition model in 2002. That was two years before this 601 community design was issued in Spain in 2004. The design is so broad and general as to be applicable to every Digital Picture Frame, let alone Tablet PC’s and doesn’t even mention the word Tablet under any translation.
The judges in Dusseldorf aren’t even close to being technically minded, nor did they even bother to call in any experts. Their decision was entirely based on the fact that Community Designs and the injunctions that result from them are automatically granted w/o recourse or hearing from either party. It was only because Samsung held a Protective Order issued prior to Apple’s injunction the a review was being heard. Now Samsung has already filed for an appeal that will take it to a court that can actually fully invalidate this 601 Community Design and will most likely call in expert witnesses on the grounds that the Hague determination of it being non-infringing!
But the ruling by the Dusseldorf Court carries such little weight, that all Apple is able to block is Samsung’s German Division’s direct import into Germany and sold to retailers. Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 has already found the backdoor loophole into the German market. Many Germans have been simply going to Poland, Netherlands, Czech Republic, Switzerland, Denmark, etc to buy one cheaper anyway. Besides the fact that as long as retailers don’t get their supply of Galaxy Tab 10.1 from Samsung Germany, the tablet PC can still be sold there!
Patent expert Florian Mueller said in his blog www.fosspatents.com that the sales ban in Europe for Samsung Germany has no practical consequences. The German retail chain Media Market is still selling them and can still be resupplied by Samsung’s Parent in Korea!
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 1:09 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Thank you for that analysis. It was well though out and presented perfectly. Well done.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 4:05 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
i dont get it, his whole point was “So it’s not only about the exterior looks. It’s about the packaging,
interface, marketing materials etc. which in this case are all in place
to imitate the iPad.” yet you went to a completely different direction here, you even state that “With regards to marketing or branding though, I know absolutely nothing in this case.” then why did you respond to him, that was the only point he was trying to make…and yes, imo, samsung did wrong here, the galaxy tab does kinda look like the ipad.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 5:47 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Maybe I shouldn’t have replied directly to his comment but I believe he was referring to trade dress in general. I was commenting explicitly on the judge’s statements.
“The court is of the opinion that Apple’s minimalistic design isn’t the
only technical solution to make a tablet computer, other designs are
possible”
“For the informed customer there remains the predominant overall impression that the device looks like the design Apple has patented in Europe”
Posted on Sep 12, 2011 | 9:11 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“The fact is that it’s not just that the Tab ‘looks’ like the iPad, there
is way more to it. As a dude explained very well on the dutch site Tweakers.net:”
Let’s look at those “similarities” shall we.
Rectangular shape with rounded corners: This could potentially apply to a variety of displays out there, ranging from LED panels (Sharp QUATRRON) to refrigerator view screens. This couldn’t possibly be included in the injunction request.
Rear of device: iPad is made of aluminum I believe. The SGT is made of plastic and comes in either white or black. The Apple logo and camera are vertically mounted. Additionally the camera is off to the left side of the device. The SGT logo is horizontally mounted along with the camera. Its camera is centered on the device.
Aspect ratios:
iPad – 1.30
Galaxy Tab 10.1 – 1.46
Not even close despite Apple’s best efforts to present it otherwise (look up Apple and falsified or altered evidence).
OS’s: iOS4 vs. Honeycomb
Well anyone who argues that Honeycomb is even remotely close to iOS is obviously insane so I won’t even address that. Besides, Apple would have most likely gone after Google – seeing as stock Android has nothing to do with the manufacturer – if that was the case. So let’s look at Touchwiz. The only similarity that might exist between Touchwiz and iOS is the rows of icons. But even that’s ridiculous because Touchwiz also has those accompanied by desktop widgets. iOS – with its several shortcomings – obviously does not. Besides, couldn’t every version of Windows be cited as precedent as well? The “desktop full of icons” concept has been around for over 20 years in various OS’s. Anyway; I challenge any of you to pick out elements of the software that have been directly “ripped off” from Apple (and please don’t say icons or I’ll ignore you).
I don’t know about you but when it comes to the physical attributes of these devices, one is as different as the other. With regards to marketing or branding though, I know absolutely nothing in this case.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 11:25 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
If the customer prefers the other brand they should be allowed.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 5:57 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
No they shouldn’t.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 2:10 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I don’t care what the courts decide. It doesn’t impact me. Let the courts decide and I say this with utmost honesty. Apple lost once against MS for example, if they are to win against Samsung in this day and age, then good for them and they would deserve it.
But I do believe that if Apple wins indefinitely against Samsung(worldwide) it will go after the Xoom, the Viewsonic and the rest. They all look the same(to me). It already sued for the Nexus S in its war on Samsung.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:54 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
But I like Nexus S :(
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:13 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Apple’s already sued over the Xoom. This has been less interesting because the Xoom was already on the market (so Apple couldn’t get a preliminary injunction blocking the release), but I wouldn’t say any tablet in Europe is safe from Apple’s “trade dress” claims (especially in Germany).
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:52 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I don’t care what the courts decide. It doesn’t impact me. Let the courts decide and I say this with utmost honesty. Apple lost once against MS for example, if they are to win against Samsung in this day and age, then good for them and they would deserve it.
But I do believe that if Apple wins indefinitely against Samsung(worldwide) it will go after the Xoom, the Viewsonic and the rest. They all look the same(to me). It already sued for the Nexus S in its war on Samsung.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:54 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Are you referring to the citing of precedent? Then yeah what a silly thing to try to use in your legal arsenal. I mean why even consider the fact that there were historical frames of reference for current modern tablet design.
I’m thinking you’re sounding more like the hater. Stick to facts not conjecture or opinion.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:52 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Are you referring to the citing of precedent? Then yeah what a silly thing to try to use in your legal arsenal. I mean why even consider the fact that there were historical frames of reference for current modern tablet design.
I’m thinking you’re sounding more like the hater. Stick to facts not conjecture or opinion.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:52 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Aren’t you a little concerned that this ruling basically give exclusive rights to Apple to use “minimalist” design in Germany? It doesn’t concern you in the slightest that NO DESIGNER other than an APPLE DESIGNER is ALLOWED to be minimalist if they’re designing a tablet. It’s a nonsense ruling.
Look, I agree that Samsung seemed to copy the packaging and general look and feel, and that cumulatively Apple has a case. But those “apple haters” out there have a point when they say “it’s a rectangle with rounded corners and a screen.” Apple should NOT be allowed to own that design. It’s beyond ridiculous.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:17 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Apple does not own minimalism. There are other ways to make a simple tablet that do not directly copy Apple. Archos, Alessi, Sony, NotionInk Adam…
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:55 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
It’s weird how a design with a physically distinct mechanical button is considered more “minimalistic” than one that has no physical button at all.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:16 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
All of those tablets have horrible design which are not realistically competitive. If Samsung makes a tablet that looks like an Archos it will not be competitive. A tablet is such a basic simple thing that there are not that many ways to approach the design in a desirable way for users. Imagine if Ford was the only company allowed to sell cars with round tires and everyone else had to use oval tires. That kind of restriction will kill all competition.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:20 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I disagree about the horrible design, especially with the Sony.
http://hitechanalogy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Sony-Tablet-s-Sony-tablet-P-500×349.jpg
Creating something new (including a design) that is different and as good as or better than your competitor’s is called “innovating”. True story.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:07 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
HAHAHA Awesome … in fact that already happened .. i was reading comments just like that ..
Apple Paid the Court off, Doesn’t look like the iPad, and so on .. it’s pathetic !!
And most of all the Anti Apple Movement going on there with really nasty comments as well as really nasty personal remarks are getting pretty out of hand over there .. sad!
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:56 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
German judge is neither wrong nor they are right(Blaming Germany is a bit overreaching, don’t you think?). They are however very heavy handed with the enforcement part.
In the end it will just take a single judge to rule that that CD is too unspecific and lacks distinctive features. (Like the NL judge said, but that judge lacks the power to strike down the CD)
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:09 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
German judge is neither wrong nor they are right(Blaming Germany is a bit overreaching, don’t you think?). They are however very heavy handed with the enforcement part.
In the end it will just take a single judge to rule that that CD is too unspecific and lacks distinctive features. (Like the NL judge said, but that judge lacks the power to strike down the CD)
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:09 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
My only point is that Germany just essentially granted Apple a complete monopoly on tablet computers. The tablet isn’t even the same aspect ratio as the iPad, runs an OS that is completely different looking, etc.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:34 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
i just love how suddenly there is an army of armchair judges in comments that knows more than a real one
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:27 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
It’s all a conspiracy man. They’re trying to crush our freedoms and whatnot.
Also, Diana was nicked off.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:48 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Read enough Techdirt, and you start to take a fairly dim view towards judges and their understanding of technology, warranted or otherwise. Besides, as members of the tech community, we could probably tell an iPad 1 from an iPad 2 at 250 yards. The Galaxy Tab and the iPad 2 are so obviously different to us that we forget what it’s like to not know anything about this shit.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 8:43 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“The Galaxy Tab and the iPad 2 are so obviously different to us that we forget what it’s like to not know anything about this shit.”
See, that’s the problem right there. This isn’t about the typical TIMN commenter that can tell the difference. It’s about the 99.999999% of the rest of the world that can’t, because Samsung decided to throw in the towel on making their own design and well full-on KIRF for the whole kaboodle right down to the packaging.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:08 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Exactly. This isn’t about nerds it’s about ….. Yeah normal people :p
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:14 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Well informed consumer” is not a normal person off of the street.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:32 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
If I took all of the emblems off of two HD TVs could the average consumer tell the difference between the two? They have the same shape and both probably have a black bezel. I have never seen a trade dress case in the TV space because it is absurd. The TVs even play the same content and have relatively the same picture quality. I guess all HD TVs are KIRFs.
To me I expect a display to be rectangular and have a bezel, which in most cases is black. This doesn’t pass the common sense test. If all industries were like this there would be no innovation.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:56 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
No, it’s about a “well-informed consumer.” That is a higher standard than a person off of the street.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:31 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“The Galaxy Tab and the iPad 2 are so obviously different to us that we forget what it’s like to not know anything about this shit.”
The Galaxy Tab is so obviously similar to the iPad that you’d have to be a complete nerd not to see the forest for the trees and disagree with the judges decision here.
Samsung willfully make a copy of the iPad. To create not just the tablet, but re-create the look and feel of the iPad2. I’m happy they did: the iPad is the best designed tablet hardware, and an Android version would be welcome… but there are rules about these things and it is hardly surprising that Apple is willing and able to protect it’s products from direct imitations.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 2:18 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
What did they copy? Be more specific, because I really don’t see it.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:32 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Where’s the report button?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:38 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
hover over a comment and “flag” appears in the lower left corner
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:42 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Done.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:58 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Done !
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:03 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Whats there to report? Was Germany not wrong about the Jews? Is Germany not wrong about banning the importing of galaxy tabs? As an American Apple Jewish “fanboy” I see nothing wrong with his comment.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:13 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Comparing the Holocaust to an injuction concerning consumer products is just nog ok.. And it never will be..
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:16 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Slow down there dude! I don’t think he compared the holocaust to an injunction. Maybe it’s a little controversial as a comment, like almost anything relating to that subject, and is bound to get a few peoples backs up. But I think it’s clear he was only going for a light hearted dig at the Germans and not the Jews.
The best way to move beyond oppression is to empower yourselves against the root cause – in other words you should always be allowed to talk openly about events. Hiding behind the past and blanket banning talk, whether that be comedy or not, will only serve to further the negativity and prevent people from having a true understanding.
If an openly Jewish comedian had made the same gag in one of their routines, they would be praised for confronting the subject.
Then again, personal offence is different for all people, and if he genuinely offended you then you have every right to complain. I’d just say I don’t think there was any malice behind it…
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:45 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Yeah and why have a dig at the germans with this piece of history ?
Do germans always bring american slavery into discussions when we try to make a point ?
I doubt it
I fail to see how hate towards a race has anything to do with this case or can be compared to it .. and it sounds like all germans had an issue with jewish people i find that highly offensive.
And the example with the comedian is a little off don’t you think ? Are we on the comedy circut here ?
Make this comparison in a boardroom or at a Keynote speech and i am sure none would laugh.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:11 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
maybe if you were a German “fanboy” you’d take offense to your country being used as a synonym of hitler…
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:40 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Also, wasn’t germany praised and funded for their eugenics research by americans?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:39 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
YEP, sure was.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:29 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Shall we also bring American history ? like Slavery ? Thats not OK either!
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:13 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Hold the cursor over a comment and then press the newly revealed flag button on the left.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 8:08 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
In the name of upholding Intellectual Property, millions in Germany has reduced choice or probably has to pay a premium for their product. And the best part is, this is decided by only a few people high up.
Is this right or wrong?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:07 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
ridiculous, it’s really getting unbelievable.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:08 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I know, right? Samsung should really be spending their time and money innovating, not copying Apple.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:08 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The OS is where the innovation exists primarily, not necessarily the hardware. Other than performance boosts and improved screen resolutions, what else is there really? Improved camera? Not a huge deal to tell you the truth. Two screens? Not very functional or effective I’m afraid. Isn’t the iPad 3’s claim to fame going to be the retina display? That’s not innovation; that’s improvement. And yes, I’d say the same thing for Samsung too. Although a holographic keyboard projected from the device would certainly take it to the next level. We’ll see.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:10 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
And yet the court held up an injunction against Samsung, not Google. In fact Google was not involved in the case at all. So what should that be telling you? Well it should be telling you that Samsung is copying Apple’s designs too closely, but since you don’t like Apple or their products, I’m sure you will disagree as to what “too closely” means.
Luckily it’s not up to biased fandroids to determine what copies too closely and what doesn’t.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:18 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“…but since you don’t like Apple or their
products,”
I have an iPod touch, Apple TV and OS X running in a virtual machine on my PC for testing. I don’t hate Apple. I just hate the fact that their fear of competition – which benefits us all – is what’s really fueling this legal tirade.
‘And yet the court held up an injunction against Samsung, not Google. In
fact Google was not involved in the case at all. So what should that be
telling you? Well it should be telling you that Samsung is copying
Apple’s designs too closely, but since you don’t like Apple or their
products, I’m sure you will disagree as to what “too closely” means. "
And I disagree that’s all. Take the ruling out of this equation and what do you have? A side-by-side comparison of two devices that take on the tablet form factor. They’re made from different materials, have different aspect ratios, different colours, different thicknesses, and run different OS’s. Seriously; look at the two side by side, turn them over, rotate them, turn them on and then make your own judgement. If, after that, you’re still convinced that they’re identical enough to garner this sort of legal action then I’ll concede.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:05 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“ I just hate the fact that their fear of competition – which benefits us all – is what’s really fueling this legal tirade.”
Are you trying to make yourself look like an ignorant Apple hater? You’re doing a pretty good job so far. Yes, Apple has ABSOLUTELY NO REASONS for filing this injunction other than FEAR OF COMPETITION.
Because Apple is just so scared of the “competition” for the iPad 2. That makes sense if you’re a dumbass fandroid, but you’re claiming not to be one of those. So what’s your excuse for being this ignorant?
“And I disagree that’s all.”
No, you’re doing more than disagreeing. You’re actually inventing Apple’s motivations for filing an injunction, which is considerably more than “disagreeing”.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 4:44 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Are you trying to make yourself look like an ignorant Apple hater? You’re doing a pretty good job so far.”
The venom! Lol! It’s entertaining though. Thanks!
“Yes, Apple has ABSOLUTELY NO
REASONS for filing this injunction other than FEAR OF COMPETITION.”
It seems to be the only logical explanation considering how physically different the two devices really are. What else could it be? Again, this is working on the premise that these two devices are very different from one another.
“Because Apple is just so scared of the “competition” for the iPad 2.
That makes sense if you’re a dumbass fandroid, but you’re claiming not
to be one of those. So what’s your excuse for being this ignorant?"
No ignorance my friend; just facts. Android on tablets is trending upward and should eventually take that segment in much the same way it took smartphones. It’s just a matter of time really.
http://venturebeat.com/2011/08/12/android-tablets-peel-away-20-of-ipads-mega-market-share/
“No, you’re doing more than disagreeing. You’re actually inventing
Apple’s motivations for filing an injunction, which is considerably more
than “disagreeing”.
No I’m using deductive reasoning.
The iPad and Galaxy Tab 10.1 are two physically different devices that cannot possibly be considered identical copies of one another. Android has taken the world by storm and has caught a lot of its competitors off guard. One way to attempt to level the playing field is to litigate. Therefore Apple is going after Samsung – the number one Android manufacture at this point in time – in order to curtail their growth. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think that a competitor would do that, do you?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 5:14 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“It seems to be the only logical explanation considering how physically different the two devices really are. "
It’s funny how you think that, but a court judge, who is more informed about all aspects of this case in every way than you are, including the law behind it, disagrees with you. But you still think you’re right. I mean really, wow. Maybe the judge should have consulted you first, is that what you’re getting at? because you know better than she does?
“Android on tablets is trending upward "
Android on tablets is about 5% of the tablet market. Explain to me in excruciating detail how this makes Apple “scared”.
“No I’m using deductive reasoning.”
Which is also doing more than disagreeing. Thanks for proving my point. Again, your reasoning is based on literally nothing. The judge’s reasoning is based on knowing the law a lot better than you do, and being objective which you’re clearly not.
Apple is going after Samsung because Samsung is copying Apple’s designs, an offense that is obviously serious enough to be punishable in court. You understand how our patents system works, right? And that if Apple doesn’t protect their IP they could lose it? This is how that’s accomplished, and EVERYBODY does it, including Samsung and everyone else.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:45 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The judge’s reasoning here is not based on the law, it’s based on her opinion because this particular issue was a question of fact, NOT LAW.
Questions of fact are not legally based, they are opinion based.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:44 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Are you trying to make the point that this judge’s opinion is worth less than Captain Obvious here? If not, then what point are you trying to make? EITHER WAY, that judge is more qualified than you, me, Captain Obvious and anybody else who isn’t a judge to make that decision.
There is a difference between an opinionated jackass’s opinion and a judge’s opinion. But that should have been obvious, so why do I have to explain it to you?
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 5:52 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The OS is where the innovation exists primarily, not necessarily the hardware. Other than performance boosts and improved screen resolutions, what else is there really? Improved camera? Not a huge deal to tell you the truth. Two screens? Not very functional or effective I’m afraid. Isn’t the iPad 3’s claim to fame going to be the retina display? That’s not innovation; that’s improvement. And yes, I’d say the same thing for Samsung too. Although a holographic keyboard projected from the device would certainly take it to the next level. We’ll see.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:10 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
And this matters why?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:37 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The iPad form factor already feels dated anyways. I rather Sammy go in a direction like Asus and innovate with krazi hardware design.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 8:07 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Hey Apple, it’s called common sense…
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 8:43 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
so why has no one used this common sense before apple made the iPad?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:00 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Like Jojoo, Compaq or Knight Ridder did?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:52 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
All fails
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:18 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
That’s not the point.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:38 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
JooJoo. The tablet which must not be named.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:11 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Like Jojoo, Compaq or Knight Ridder did?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:52 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
so why has no one used this common sense before apple made the iPad?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:00 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
That’s a rather old industrial design for fridges. Apple’s design protection will run out in 2029 as well.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:46 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
If it is so common why does everyone wait for Apple to come up with it first?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:01 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
If it is so common why does everyone wait for Apple to come up with it first?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:01 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Really?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:29 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Really
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 11:40 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Why are you talking to Apple? The COURT made this decision. The COURT. If you have a problem with it, take it up with the COURT.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:07 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
… Did he just pull Godwins law…?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:12 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
great news that kick ass to some engadget ihaters (comments)
well, i couldn’t agree more with the judge sentence, theres other ways to make tablets, and copycat is not one of them.
looking forward to see ban in asia, australia, and the rest of europe.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 9:49 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
‘well, i couldn’t agree more with the judge sentence, theres other ways to make tablets, and copycat is not one of them."
Really? How? Octagonal? Decagonal?
Or how about a different aspect ratio with a completely different OS? Or how about different material? Already there I’m afraid.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:41 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Why not a different color bezel, or a thinner one? How about moving your nearly identical dock connector to a corner of the device? Why not make the corners more square?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:40 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
apple spending millions of hours and $ in research, design, experience and bring new materials to make the best for the consumer experience, and some korean company, just come along and make plastic copies of it.
this ban is just 0,01% of all copycraps that are on the market.
whats of the point of releasing a new tablet/smarphone every 3 months,profit ? market share? what about the consumer experience, and upgrades, and software support .
the way the economy is today, i cannot afford a device today that is obsolete tomorrow.
at least apple upgrade their products once a year, more or less.
this court decision is also a benefit to the tablet consumer.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:08 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“this court decisions is also a benefit to the tablet consumer”
How is that statement even justifiable? Lots of people in Germany could be waiting to pick up a Galaxy Tab 10.1, and now they can’t. The Tab isn’t a “copy” of the iPad. It isn’t. Saying so just means you haven’t used both devices.
I’ve used both and there’s no way you’d confuse the two or accuse one of copying the other. The judge whiffed hard with this ruling.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:43 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Yes, I’m sure you know better than the court system what is a design infringement and what isn’t, since you seem to be a fandroid and therefore not at all biased in any way.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:06 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Looking alike isn’t the same as copying something. They look similar, not the same. Even if they looked the same in color, measurements, and on profile (there’s notable differences, by the way), the functionality of the devices differs greatly once you use them.
Many TVs are essentially the same looking. I can’t tell a Samsung from a Toshiba from an LG at first glance, but once I use them I can. Why aren’t they all fighting with each other?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:13 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Trade Dress”. Look it up.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:25 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Trade dress is a legal term of art that generally refers to
characteristics of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging
(or even the design of a building) that signify the source of the
product to consumers. Trade dress is a form of intellectual property.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress
Jeff, Jack is correct. The argument on my end is simply that they DON’T in fact look alike. Different dimensions, different colours, different camera placement and different materials used in their construction should easily differentiate the two. Think about it everyone. Four major physical characteristics that are different. That’s simply a fact. How can they be considered identical…in anyone’s eyes really (legal or otherwise)? Again, we’re talking about the physical device itself, not the packaging. Like I said before I’ve never seen Samsung’s packaging or marketing in light of it so I can’t argue from that standpoint.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:19 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
If different dimensions, different colors, different camera placement and different materials were the ONLY criteria for determining if something looks similar to something else, you might have a point. As you quoted above, it’s the “characteristics of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging”
Look at OTHER tablets not made by Samsung, then look at the iPad 2. Nothing similar. Now look at the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and at the iPad 2. Very similar. Exactly the same? No. Very similar? Yes. Button placement, number of buttons, placement in relation to the rest of the tablet, distance from screen to bezel, bezel thickness, similarity of function, all that stuff counts.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:10 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The tab is a tablet in the category that Apple defined with the iPad and looks a lot like an iPad. I’ve used both and laughed my way to the floor at how similar Samsung went compared to the Xoom I had sitting on the shelf.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:20 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
This whole thing is ridiculous and stupid. Anybody who thinks these kinds of rulings are a good thing isn’t interested in seeing valid competition spur on innovation. These injunctions and lawsuits do nothing but allow Apple to sit back and mildly iterate on their products while they successfully block competitors from the market that have legitimately attempted to improve the tablet concept.
Shameful.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:38 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Yeah, no I agree with you. Companies like Samsung should be allowed to shamelessly rip off Apple’s designs and profit from it, in fact it begs this question: Have you ever created anything? If so, would you mind if I borrowed the design and made money off it without paying you or acknowledging you in any way? Seems like you’re the sort of person who would be fine with that sort of thing.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:04 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Yeah, no I agree with you. Companies like Samsung should be allowed to shamelessly rip off Apple’s designs and profit from it, in fact it begs this question: Have you ever created anything? If so, would you mind if I borrowed the design and made money off it without paying you or acknowledging you in any way? Seems like you’re the sort of person who would be fine with that sort of thing.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:04 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Yeah, no I agree with you.”
Which one is it?
“Companies like Samsung should be allowed to shamelessly rip off Apple’s designs and profit from it”
That’s your opinion; conjecture at best. There are many of us who are of the opinion that they haven’t ripped off any more than Apple has (from its predecessors).
“Have you ever created anything? If so, would you mind if I borrowed the
design and made money off it without paying you or acknowledging you in
any way?”
This whole statement doesn’t apply. Apple didn’t “invent” the tablet.
“Seems like you’re the sort of person who would be fine with that sort of thing.”
You should have a Coke and a smile. You’re too angry.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:39 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Which one is it? Really? Wow.
Sure, it’s my opinion, which has been informed by the use of my eyes. And conjecture “at best”? Really? I’d say it’s an injunction that was upheld “at best”. Did you forget about that part?
Your opinion means nothing unless you are a judge. Are you a judge? No? Then your opinion means nothing. See how that works?
Of course my statement applied. Look up “trade dress”, apply it to this case, and see what you come up with. This injunction was upheld because the court agreed that Samsung was ripping Apple’s designs off. YOU may not agree with that, but as we already established, nobody gives a shit about an Apple hater’s opinion.
All clear now? You let me know if you need me to use smaller words or anything.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:00 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Which one is it? Really? Wow.”
It was a little joke but for the record, you still haven’t answered it yet.
“Sure, it’s my opinion, which has been informed by the use of my eyes.
And conjecture “at best”? Really? I’d say it’s an injunction that was
upheld “at best”. Did you forget about that part?"
Again; it’s not over yet and even judges make wrong decisions. They’re human after all.
“Your opinion means nothing unless you are a judge. Are you a judge? No? Then your opinion means nothing. See how that works?”
Likewise. Here’s what she said btw: “…Samsung, ‘did not keep the necessary distance’ in its design”. Well much like you – only without the sarcasm and venom – I have an opinion too and I think she’s wrong. Unless we’re talking about the packaging (I haven’t seen Samsung’s offering) these two devices are very different other than form factor.
“Of course my statement applied. Look up “trade dress”, apply it to this
case, and see what you come up with. This injunction was upheld because
the court agreed that Samsung was ripping Apple’s designs off. YOU may
not agree with that, but as we already established, nobody gives a shit
about an Apple hater’s opinion."
Apple didn’t invent the tablet form factor though. Why do you keep evading that rather glaring and obvious point?
BTW try and counter without the sarcasm or venom. There’s no need to use that tone.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:50 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Again; it’s not over yet and even judges make wrong decisions.”
Yeah, that’s what it is. The judge is “wrong”. Wow.
“ I have an opinion too and I think she’s wrong.”
That’s great, but your opinion is worth exactly jack shit. You’re not a judge, she is. End of discussion.
“Apple didn’t invent the tablet form factor though.”
This isn’t an injunction against the “tablet form factor”. Does that help clarify anything for you? Also, I use this tone on people who are too stupid to make a rational argument. I’m sorry you don’t like it, but maybe you could try not being an idiot.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:06 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Yeah, that’s what it is. The judge is “wrong”. Wow."
So what you’re saying is that judges always make the right decisions? They’re completely infallible? Why is there an appeals process then?
“That’s great, but your opinion is worth exactly jack shit. You’re not a judge, she is. End of discussion.”
Well lets just start that right up again! Look, once again, judges are human. They can certainly make mistakes. I’m also rather fond of my opinions. I find them to be well thought out actually. I guess you don’t. That’s your opinion.
“This isn’t an injunction against the “tablet form factor”. Does that
help clarify anything for you? Also, I use this tone on people who are
too stupid to make a rational argument. I’m sorry you don’t like it, but
maybe you could try not being an idiot. "
It is when you think about it though. Seeing as I’ve already excluded the possibility of Samsung “ripping off” Apple’s design through a physical comparison of the two devices, there’s really nothing left that would justify the existing ruling (assuming we’re talking about the physical attributes mind you). Like I said before, I’m not referencing marketing or packaging similarities because I have no frame of reference. Samsung might have very well violated those aspects of “trade dress” which the judge could have easily taken into consideration when she made her ruling. I just don’t know enough at this point to comment.
I don’t think I’m an idiot. :D
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:46 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“So what you’re saying is that judges always make the right decisions?”
Where did I say that? No, what I’m saying is that YOU are not more qualified than a judge to make this decision. Since you are not a judge, you are vastly more likely to make the wrong decision about something like this, I mean let’s face it, you’re hardly a bastion of objectivity.
“I’m also rather fond of my opinions.”
Really? Thanks, Captain Obvious. I never would have guessed that on my own. And here’s something obvious for you: Just because you like hearing yourself talk doesn’t mean you’re right.
“Seeing as I’ve already excluded the possibility of Samsung “ripping off” Apple’s design through a physical comparison of the two devices"
Oh, have you? Did you tell the German judge about that? Seems like it would have saved her a lot of work if only she had known about your deductive expertise in this matter. Maybe you’re right, you are smarter than a judge!
“I have no frame of reference.”
“I just don’t know enough at this point to comment.”
Really? That doesn’t seem to be stopping you. So never mind, cancel everything I said just now. You’re still an idiot.
“I don’t think I’m an idiot. :D”
I know, sweetie. I know. *pat pat*
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:35 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Judges make shit up. That’s what they do. It’s called “jurisprudence,” and it’s taught at your local law school. What does it entail? The fact that “Judges make shit up.”
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:37 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
In that case, using your argument, I’m going to unequivocally claim that every judgment in history that has been made against Apple has been wrong. Why? Because judges make shit up, and now you can’t prove me wrong.
Oh if only arguments didn’t have two sides, right? It would all be so much easier.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 5:47 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Improve Apple’s tablet concept*
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:16 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
It’s not Apple’s though.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:39 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Yes, it is.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 8:23 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Nope.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:09 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Come on, be serious – sure there were tablets before the iPad but they didn’t look anything like the iPad, they didn’t work anything like the iPad and they didn’t sell anything like the iPad.
Android tablets do work somewhat like it, in that they are scaled up smartphones rather than scaled down laptops. In that much they following Apple’s concept, though not in a legally actionable way.
Android tablets also mostly look like the iPad, much more than they look like pre-iPad tablets at any rate. Samsung is particularly egregious here and yes they have copied much of the enclosure design, you can disagree whether the design patent/community process should be considered valid or infringed but the resemblance is obvious and clearly intentional.
So far the only way that Android tablets definitely haven’t copied Apple’s concept is in the sales – though even there they are selling far better than the old Windows tablets and UMPCs.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:59 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Why not “innovate” and create a design different from Apple’s? It’s not impossible. In fact it has been done several times. Why do they have to copy it right down to the packaging for god’s sake?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:00 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Maybe Samsung can come up with their own ideas? Maybe?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 8:00 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
LOL @ everyone defending Apple when this basically confirms that they think their entire customer base are a bunch of mindless idiots who can’t tell two differently sized rectangles apart.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 10:47 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You understand the COURT made this decision and not Apple. Right? The court? Why are you blaming Apple? If this were a non-issue, it never would have made it to the court in the first place, never mind succeeded.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:02 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You know APPLE started the lawsuit, right? Not the court? Apple called their customers morons, the court happened to agree.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:21 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Yes, the court “happened to agree” because Apple had a valid case. Did that not occur to you or something? Did the court “happen to agree” because it was a nice day and they were feeling lackadaisical? Don’t be stupid about this.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:23 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
One very small court and it isn’t even close to being finished yet.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:26 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“injunction upheld”. Are you going to try to argue that Apple didn’t have a case too? Or are your eyes functional?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:56 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Samsung said it would appeal the German injunction. It said in a
statement, “We are disappointed with this ruling and believe it severely
limits consumer choice in Germany.”
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2108093/samsung-galaxy-tab-101-injunction-holds-germany
Next.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:59 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Samsung was disappointed in a verdict against them? I am SHOCKED. Utterly and completely SHOCKED. And they’re going to appeal?
S-H-O-C-K-E-D. Absolutely completely stunned beyond belief.
Anyway thanks Captain Obvious, now I know who to call if I need to know what color the sun is.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:15 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You appear to be shocked. Regardless, it’s still being appealed. That’s law for you.
“Anyway thanks Captain Obvious, now I know who to call if I need to know what color the sun is.”
Anytime Captain Anger. Apparently you need to.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:22 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
No seriously, any time you want to chime in with anything we didn’t already know, that would be great. I’m not really sure what point you’re trying to make other than stating the blatantly obvious when you say they’re going to appeal – of course they’re going to appeal. That doesn’t mean they’ll win, and it doesn’t mean they’re not guilty of trade dress infringement.
Since this injunction was held up – twice, in fact – in addition to the injunctions Apple has been granted in OTHER countries for the same thing – the really obvious part that you seem to be missing (which is strange since you’re Captain Obvious) is that apparently Samsung is actually guilty of creating a product specifically to mimic the iPad, i.e. to ride Apple’s coat tails.
Believe it or not, Apple has every right to sue for an injunction for that. I’m not really sure how all of this escaped your notice, but hey, there it is.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:28 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“injunction upheld”
“No seriously, any time you want to chime in with anything we didn’t
already know, that would be great. I’m not really sure what point you’re
trying to make other than stating the blatantly obvious when you say
they’re going to appeal – of course they’re going to appeal. That
doesn’t mean they’ll win, and it doesn’t mean they’re not guilty of
trade dress infringement.”
You were insinuating that entire proceeding was over. I simply pointed out that it wasn’t. That’s all. Calm down. :)
“the really obvious part that you seem to be missing (which is strange
since you’re Captain Obvious) is that apparently Samsung is actually
guilty of creating a product specifically to mimic the iPad, i.e. to
ride Apple’s coat tails.”
Please prove it. I’ve already compared the physical attributes of both pieces of hw and there’s really nothing identical about the two. Software? Night and day.
“Believe it or not, Apple has every right to sue for an injunction for
that. I’m not really sure how all of this escaped your notice, but hey,
there it is. "
Ok. Thanks.
Why are you still so angry though? Did an army of Korean Samsung engineers punch you in the stomach? Relax. Captain Obvious sounds fucking stupid btw.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:37 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Please prove it.”
Okay, a German court just upheld an injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 because it’s entirely too similar to the iPad, where other tablets don’t seem to have that problem. Did you forget what this article was about?
If there was “nothing identical”, I seriously doubt an injunction would have held up in court. See how basic facts sort of bash your opinion into the ground?
“Captain Obvious sounds fucking stupid btw.”
Who’s Captain Angry now? Also, if you think it’s stupid, then stop stating blatantly obvious things, because that’s equally stupid. See how that works?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:03 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
‘Okay, a German court just upheld an injunction against the Galaxy Tab
10.1 because it’s entirely too similar to the iPad, where other tablets
don’t seem to have that problem. Did you forget what this article was
about?"
Ignore the ruling and use your own judgement. I’ve already gone through a pretty thorough comparison of the two tablets myself. You’ll find that the two differ physically in just about every way.
“Who’s Captain Angry now?”
“Fucking” is just an adjective. Besides, I was very calm when I wrote it (you’ll notice no use of an exclamation point). You’re still Captain Angry though.
“Also, if you think it’s stupid, then stop stating blatantly obvious
things, because that’s equally stupid. See how that works?”
You leave me little choice. You refuse to acknowledge those “obvious” points so in order to get them across, I need to constantly reiterate them. Sorry.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:29 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“Ignore the ruling”.
Yes, you’d like to do that, wouldn’t you? It would make the fantasy you’re trying to live out so much easier. But the thing is, here in reality there has been a ruling. Twice. And more than that in other countries.
And yes, you’d like me to believe you’re not angry even though you used “fucking”, but I’m allegedly angry even though I didn’t use “fucking” at all? Do you ever apply your special brand of logic to your own arguments? If you did, I’m pretty sure you would explode.
And which of these allegedly obvious points am I refusing to acknowledge? The ones based entirely on your own biased and badly misinformed opinions?, Yeah, there’s a good reason I[’m not acknowledging those. However the Captain Obvious thing has nothing to do with your opinion, it has to do with you regurgitating the absurdly obvious, i.e. “samsung is going to appeal”.
Well, DUH.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:25 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Well. I’m not too particularly fond of being shit on every other sentence so I’m just going to end this here. Maybe someday you’ll be able to participate in a civil discussion. Until then my advice is to just relax and make your points without acting like an abused pitbull. Anyway; if it makes you feel any better you can tell everyone that you won. Lol! Your turn now. Venom and vitriole…GO!
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:44 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Oh I’m sorry, are you tired of being called out on the stupid shit you’re spewing here? My heart bleeds for you. Tell you what, when you are able to hold up your end of a conversation without simultaneously saying things like “I know better than a judge does” and “I don’t think I’m an idiot”, we’ll try again.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 5:34 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You need a hug. Come here. :)
Posted on Sep 12, 2011 | 9:12 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I think it’s worth noting that Apple has ignored products from other manufactures it doesn’t see as a threat. Best example is WebOS, WebOS has way more in common w iOS than Android does, but it’s not a threat so Apple ignores it. Samsung, however, is becoming prominent in the arena and Apple wants to squash it. Apple is successful now, and you would have to be blind not to see that corporations are cutthroat these days. The trade dress validity notwithstanding, it could just be the vehicle Apple chose to push their agenda of staying #1 in the world for consumer electronics. You have to allow for that possibility, however absurd it may be.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:46 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Apple has 95% of the tablet market. In what possible way would that lead you to believe Apple is “scared” of anything? Samsung has sold the absolute tiniest fraction of iPad sales in the tablet market. Did you not know that? Last I heard the number was 20,000. Total. Worldwide. Apple has sold well over 200 MILLION iDevices. Is that number just to big for you guys to comprehend or something?
Any argument that involves Apple being “scared” or Samsung being “a threat” is automatically disqualified on the grounds of complete blithering stupidity.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:21 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
They’ve got the same damn “community design” case pending against Motorola for the Xoom as well.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 4:21 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
U r cluelezz.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:15 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I don’t think a Galaxy Tab looks like an iPad/iPad2 but hey what do I know.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 11:18 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
More than German judges.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:57 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
"The court is of the opinion that Apple’s clamshell laptop design isn’t the only technical solution to make a laptop computer, other designs are possible."
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 11:34 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Geschmacksmuster are such a load of bullshit.
It’s clear to everyone that Samsung copied Apple here but who gives a damn about that? If rulings like this one are upheld, NOBODY is able to program anymore since Geschmacksmuster are also a way to kinda-sorta copyright code-snippets here in Germany.
The whole system is broken.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 12:45 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
It’s not clear to me.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:53 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
U CAN NOT BE SERIOUS ?
Why is there no report Button here ?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:02 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
There is a “collapse” button.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:31 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
This seems totally insane to me. That wording makes it sounds like apple now owns the idea of minimalist design?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 1:33 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I support Apples software patent claims, but I find this decision to be a little bit chilling. I don’t believe that there are that many different ways to design a tablet and saying that Apple is the only one that can use a minimalist design with round edges is frightening. How can a company effectively compete with these restrictions? It would be like a car company being the only one allowed to use an aerodynamic design with round tires.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:13 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Apparently Apple didn’t invent the tablet, right? That’s what all you haters say. So why can’t Samsung use or create one of the other dozens of different tablet designs that existed before the iPad?
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 1:20 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
maybe, after all these years, only apple got the design right… and samsung wont waste money in R&D, so “lets just copy them!”
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 5:37 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
So in Germany, only two kinds of tablets can be sold
-Apple already got the minimalistic design category; once the intricate/complex design category is taken, that’s it for the Germans! Otherwise you’ll be sued!Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:15 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You’ll notice that Apple does not have cases against any other tablets. So it’s actually quite a lot more than “two kinds of tablets” unless you think the only kinds of tablets are “Apple’s” and “everybody else’s”.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:58 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Not yet. That’s because nothing in the market yet is thinner and lighter than their magical tablet. And getting great reviews. Apple’s lawyers are just waiting for that next blockbuster tablet and it will suddenly look like iPad to Apple’s eyes!
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:24 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Yes, if only it weren’t for those darn great reviews.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:56 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Yup, because reviewers are always right!
Your trolling used to be of a much higher quality … what happened?!!
:(
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:52 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You’re suggesting every positive review of an iPad is wrong? Wow. The trolling used to be higher quality, what happened to that?
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 5:28 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
are you some nazi apologist who thinks that germany was RIGHT about the jews???
that’s pretty disgusting dude
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:36 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You compared a trademark dispute to one of the greatest atrocities in human history. I stand by my original point.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:11 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You compared a trademark dispute to one of the greatest atrocities in human history. I stand by my original point.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:11 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Germany != nazis.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 8:20 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I could (and do support) the smackdown Samsung get’s the world over based on Touchwiz. That’s a blatant rip-off from iOS. They deserve the grief they are getting on trade dress issues. And they deserve the grief they are getting from the Galaxy S/SII line-up that looks a lot like the iPhone. But getting an injunction on a f——-g rectangle? Are you kidding me.
The court is saying that nobody but Apple has the right to make tablet computers which are rectangles with rounded corners. Is Dusseldorf getting their judges from East Texas or something? This judge just decided that Apple should get a monopoly on tablet sales in Germany based on the shape of the tablet and in spite of the fact that there have been tablets that were rectangles with rounded corners before.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 2:58 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I don’t think they’re even placing an injunction on samsung because of touchwiz though, its because of its basic design, which I don’t personally think looks like an ipad to anybody, how many different ways can you make a tablet look different? If you’re basing this whole patent legal crap over the general shape of the tablet, that’s ridiculous. Desktop PC’s for instance, have always been a rectangular box, for the most part and nobody sued anybody else over the design of the rectangular box for a desktop pc. Nobody sued anybody else when it came to the design of a laptop, a keyboard, with a hinged screen. If you’re going to sue samsung over touchwiz, i can see that. But according to all the legal crap going on now, it seems that samsung is being shutdown because it has a tablet- like shape, rectangle and kinda has the same shape as the ipad, which to be honest, is the only way anybody has made a tablet look. I’m really not sure what else they’d have to do to change the look of the device. Make it into a circle? I mean, how far is too far?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 3:21 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
can nilay please comment on this stuff? thanks! :)
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 4:11 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Why? He will just comment on how a company should ABSOLUTELY be able to have total design rights on a rectangular screen that looks nothing like either the iPad or the Galaxy Tab. He will dismiss that the freaking etch-a-sketch had this exact community design idk even know when they first came out but a long time ago. He is pro any patent as long as you file it first. Been made pretty clear on the podcast with him vigorously defending the most inane patents.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 11:13 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
well this injunction is not even based on patents …
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 8:54 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Apple is desperate. The iPad was their big hope for some future cash cow. It took Android tablets less time than Android smartphones vs the iPhone last year for Android to completely dominate in the tablet market. Before the end of the year, Android tablets will dominate more than 50% of the tablet market. Apple is sad.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 5:35 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
That’ll be a neat trick because right now Android tablets have about 5% of the market. But you heard it here first folks – inside of 4 months, Android tablets will have 50% of the market. Oh and also Apple is sad. I’m guessing because they have over 70 billion in cash, they’re completely debt free, they’re the most valuable company on the planet and stuff like that.
I can totally see why, I mean if my company was like that I’d be sad too.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 5:56 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Back in June, Android tablets already had 34% of the worldwide tablet market http://www.eurodroid.com/2011/07/11/stats-android-accounted-for-34-of-global-tablet-sales-in-q1/
By now Android tablets have more than 40% of the tablet market.
Before the end of the year, Android tablets will dominate with more than 50% of the tablet market.
Apple is sad because they know their profit margins are quickly going to go away. Which means their valuation is going to crash down, and their cash reserves will have to be used up on unimaginative alternative attempts or given back to the angry share holders as response to the quickly lowering share price.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:21 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You treat news from a fandroid site as gospel? No wonder you’re stupid. That 34% number you’re quoting is SALES. in the 1st quarter. Not market share. Maybe you should learn to read. The “tablet market” includes ALL iPads, including the first and second gen iPads. In that market, Android tablets have about 5%.
Will you pay me money when Android tablet market share is less than 50% after December?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:55 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The Android tablet market is already more than 50% today if you include China and the rest of the developing world. Those numbers are not an Android fansite, those numbers are IDC, GfK, all of the most major and respected market analysts show it.
Apple numbers are also always sales, market share can mean two things it can be sales and it can be overall tablets in use. I speak sales, Android tablets are going to be over 50% of daily worldwide tablet sales before the end of the year.
And yes, you can go ahead and go back with Apple and be sad.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 6:59 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The figures quoted in that article aren’t even sales – they are shipments. In a quarter where a huge number of Android devices launched so shipments include initial stock.
The last actual sales figure estimates are that Android sellers have sold around 3.5m-4.0m devices of which 1.2-1.5m were Honeycomb- i.e. genuine iPad competitors.
Apple has sold in the region of 30m iPads of which 9m were sold in the timescale Honeycomb tablets were available.
All Honeycomb tablets are now being heavily discounted with the exception of the Transformer, which started low. Doe this sound like Android are winning share?
Amazon will start winning a big chunk of sales when they launch but it will mostly be at the expense of the companies that are selling the sub $250 devices that make up the majority of Android sales. And, of course, it won’t actually be Android:)
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 6:36 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Honeycomb numbers are a little higher now – going off of Google’s market place data it’s at 1.4% of all Android devices, which would probably be around 2mil, depending on your estimate for total number of activated devices.
http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/platform-versions.html
Still not 30% of the tablet market of course, since they seem to be selling only around 400k per month. Maybe 10%.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:44 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
bollocks, apple only gives you shipments as well.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 12:46 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Usually Apple quote sales but, even when they talk shipments, most shipments are going direct to sale, not sitting in stock for months on end like the Xoom or, even worse, teh original Tab where they are still trying to clear stock manufactured in 2010
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 2:46 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You’re dreaming, there are more unsold Apple product shipments out there than all other consumer electronics makers combined.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 8:02 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Apple reports the channel inventory numbers in each earnings conference call, so we know exactly how much they have out there and unsold. For the iPad it was well under their target of 4-6 weeks sales, only around 1million units, which is tiny in the context of the millions of iPad-2s that they’ve sold. In fact it’s under 2 weeks sales.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/280344-apple-management-discusses-q3-2011-results-earnings-call-transcript?source=nasdaq
So lets get this right – you simultaneously think that Android is selling over a million units a month (30% of market), but with under 4 weeks inventory (implying a supply shortage). Exactly which words would you like to eat?
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 10:57 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Exactly, Android tablets such as the Archos ones have been constantly out of stock for the past 11 months, the thing with the Android tablet makers compared to Apple, is that most can’t afford to produce them fast enough. And the big Android tablet makers like Samsung, Dell, Acer, Asus, etc, those guys aren’t yet willing to invest what’s needed to completely crush Apple. It’s been the same all the way back to the iPod. The other big consumer electronics makers don’t immediately invest big enough sums to dominate the market before Apple. With Smartphones and Tablets it’s going quite rapidly, just as with everything else, the industry does wake up and does eventually dominate over Apple.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 4:42 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Archos? Seriously? Sorry but Archos is a tiny fraction even of the Android market, talk serious players please. Remember you believe that 30% of tablets sold are Android, I doubt even 1% of that is from Archos.
Are you saying that the xoom is out of stock? The Galaxy 10.1? The G-Tab? The HTC Flyer? The Transformer? Really?
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 6:09 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Sure you dream on, Archos is a small 100-employee company, and last November-December sales months, GfK reported Archos had 22% of the tablet market in France. Sure France is just one country, and Archos is a French company, yet Archos is nearly just as big in Germany, UK, Hong Kong, the US etc. Now imagine what happens with the Android tablet market with all the Honeycomb companies joining the party since last February. Android tablets are selling over 40% of the worldwide tablet market today, and that is going to be over 50% before the end of the year. You can keep on not believing it, go ahead and start queuing up in front of your local Apple Store, you fanboy.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 6:18 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Yes Archos is small and only somebody hopelessly euro-parochial could think otherwise, total sales for the last quarter were 70 million euros, that’s for everything not just tablets. If you assume that their PMP business is still any significant proportion of that then their tablet revenues are tiny on a global scale.
You realize that Apple’s tablet sales last quarter were $6 billion right? You realize that Moto’s were above $160 million, and even android fans mock the Xoom!
The problem here isn’t that I don’t believe the Android penetration numbers that you cite, it’s that apparently you don’t believe them if you think that Archos is a significant Android tablet vendor, and if you believe that Android tablets have fewer than 1million units in channel.
You have no answer to the google data indicating around 2million honeycomb tablets in end user hands. You have no hard data on tablet shipments from any vendor other than Moto, actually you probably don’t even have that data because you don’t appear to bothered about checking primary sources – but it exists.
Sorry dude, but I’m not the fanboy here, I’m the one with numbers and not just fantasies of Archos global domination.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 9:45 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Archos is a small 100-employee company, they are selling tablets at a rate of about 1 million Android tablets per year. Sure that is less than Apple. I suggest though that that has nothing to do with consumers appreciation of Archos vs Apple, that is only because Archos does not have the investment means available to them to manufacture more tablets and put them in the store. Add to that the dozen or more bigger companies than Archos that are now joining the Android tablet market, you’ve got potential volumes that are much larger, you’ve got Samsungs and the likes who can if they want totally dominate global tablet sales, it’s just a question of them wanting it or not. And Apple is desperate about that simple fact that is why Apple is suing the Samsung Galaxy Tab and Smartphones stuff, Apple hates the idea that they suddenly loose all the market share in what they are telling their share holders they are supposed to continue to have a dominant market share of.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 6:48 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Your french pride in Archos dinky achievements aside you still haven’t provided any data to support your contention – that Android is both shipping 40% of tablets and that Android has fewer than 1million units in channel inventory. Your talk about companies joining the market is entirely besides that point since your claims are about the market as it is right now.
Stop trying to change the subject, either provide some data for your (balmy) assertions or admit your error.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 9:42 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Here’re numbers from last year by one of Europe’s major analyst groups GfK, Archos had 22% of the sales in November and December in France http://archosfans.com/2011/02/08/france-archos-has-22-tablet-marketshare/ vs 68% for Apple. If you think that type of number for Android tablets has gone down you need to take a walk.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 9:49 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Ok – let’s take that link and go to your source. Here’s what we see when we run it through google translate.
The sales in question being those of “sell-out”, that is to say the sales to final consumers (and we have seen how the distinction sell-in (sales to distributors) / sell-out could be important by the simple example of Samsung …).
ie. your own hand picked research study that favours your favourite firm acknowledges that android tablet makers such as samsung are engaging in channel stuffing – something that you deny.
Thanks though for pointing out that you run the biggest archos fan site on the web, if there were any doubts as to your fanboy status they have now been removed.
Posted on Sep 12, 2011 | 7:51 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You’re basing that 50% number off the 34% number, which as I already told you, is a SALES number for ONE QUARTER.
NOT. MARKET. SHARE.
If you refuse to pull your head out of your ass I can’t really do anything to help you. Total market share ≠ one quarter. Basic math.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 5:27 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
What matters are the tablets sold each day, not the tablets sold 18 months ago. I am talking about the daily sales, Android tablets are going to cross the 50% on the global tablet sales number before the end of this year, if they haven’t already.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 6:44 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
No, that is not actually what matters. If there are 200 million iPads sold and 20,000 Android tablets sold, that does not indicate that Android tablets are “doing better” than the iPad. People who are better at math than you are already know this.
Posted on Sep 12, 2011 | 2:45 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
More like, by the end of the year, Android tablets will sell at a rate of 200 thousand per day and iPad will be less. Just like with the smartphones a year before, the Android tablets are gaining market share vs the iPad faster than Android smartphones did last year vs the iPhone.
Posted on Sep 12, 2011 | 3:12 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
No, that is not actually what matters. If there are 200 million iPads sold and 20,000 Android tablets sold, that does not indicate that Android tablets are “doing better” than the iPad. People who are better at math than you are already know this.
Posted on Sep 12, 2011 | 2:45 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The majority of sales in that 34% were non-branded sub-$250 devices that do not compete in the same market as the iPad
Genuine iPAd competitors (Xoom, Transformer, etc) have sold about 1.2-1.5m compared to 9m iPads in the same period. Sales of those devices are tailing off already after the initial rich from launch.
Android is making absolutely no headway at the moment
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 6:22 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
You go ask buyers of Archos and the like if they think those do not compete with the iPad. Such bollocks to think like that. $99 Android tablets are tablets, stop ignoring this fact.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 12:49 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
So the buyer of a $99 Archos was really going to buy an iPad? You are the one talking bollocks.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 2:43 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
That’s the whole point, people are never going to buy the iPad again anymore.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 8:03 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
So an idiot judge sides with a big greedy company – hardly surprising I guess.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 5:52 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Judged against another cheating, absolutely gigantic corporation with monopolistic practices in their own country. You thought Samsung was a mom-and-pop business?
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 8:05 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
So an idiot judge sides with a big greedy company – hardly surprising I guess.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 5:52 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Rumor has it that Johanna Brueckner-Hofmann will next be banning all televisions since they clearly look the same being a big square with a picture inside. No rumor who gets to keep the design prize.
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 5:56 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Calm down and let me explain.
The IP
What Apple has in Germany is called a Community Design. It is similar, but not the same as a Design patent. Apple is currently asserting three design patents against Samsung in the Northern District of California. The German decision has no legal effect on that case. None.
Apple’s Victory
Apple has won a fast track injunction. The main proceeding of this case will continue in the same court (Regional Court), and take about 1 year. Samsung could still win in the final decision. A hallow victory at that point because they would have lost so many sales over the year. However, Apple would be liable to Sammy for damages.
The decision by the judge referred to the “Galaxy Tab” not just the 10.1 specifically. Any Galaxy tab that violates the Community Design is also banned. This probably includes the 7.7. It might not include the Note. That stylus might be enough to differentiate it. The 7 is safe because Apple did not catch it soon enough. But who wants a 7, now that we’ve seen the new hotness?
Samsung’s Options
Samsung can appeal to a Higher Regional Court in another fast track proceeding. This could overturn the ban in a couple months. The other option is wait 1 year, as explained above, and appeal if they lose, which will take probably another year.
German Consumers
A judge in The Hague did not uphold the very same Community Design, so this ban does not extend to the Netherlands. Germans could just go to there, watch the windmills, and bring their favorite Galaxy back home in a box of tulips. I don’t know if it is illegal to bring a violating device into the country. It almost certainly would be for the purpose of resale, but I can’t imagine German customs officials confiscating everyone’s personal galaxy tabs as they get off the train.
The decision is limited to Galaxy Tabs. It does not include tablets of any other manufacturers. It would certainly help bolster Apple cases against others, but those would need to be filed in a timely manner in order to fast track a sales ban. Timely means about a month after Apple becomes aware of a potentially offending product.
Non-German Consumers
This means nothing for everyone else. In the EU this decision might be used to persuade other courts to come to the same decision, but the EU does not have a unified legal system. This does not set a binding precedent outside of Germany.
If I misspoke somewhere, I prefer to be corrected, not crucified.cite, and an informative read for those interested: http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/09/apple-wins-again-in-germany-galaxy-tab.html
Posted on Sep 09, 2011 | 7:53 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Well done.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 7:48 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Apple is my least favorite thing in the entire world. They doctor photos and manipulate the courts. The touchpad looks wayyyy more like the ipad, and i haven’t heard a thing about it. What it boils down to is that apple doesn’t like competition.
Posted on Sep 10, 2011 | 5:33 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Really, you hate Apple? I never would have guessed. Good thing your opinion doesn’t matter, huh? For example, explain to me how Apple manipulated the court to give them an injunction… twice. And once in another country. Don’t say they did it – tell me HOW they did it.
I like how when Samsung tries to ride Apple’s coat tails, it’s “Apple doesn’t like competition”. But if Apple made a device that suspiciously resembled a Samsung device it would be totally different. Right? That would ALSO be Apple’s fault, am I right?
This is why Apple haters are too stupid to have an opinion.
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 5:20 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
“As you’ll recall, the court issued a preliminary injunction in early August that temporarily prevented Samsung from selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the EU — a ruling that was later scaled back to just Germany.”
I just got a $
830 iPad2 for only $ 105.39 and my mom got a $ 1500 HD TV for only $ 253.94,
they are both coming with FedEx tomorrow. I would be an idiot to ever pay full
retail prices at places like Walmart or Bestbuy. I sold a 39" HD TV to my
boss for $ 600 that I only paid $ 80.23 for. I use http://bit.ly/beta014
Posted on Sep 11, 2011 | 1:15 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
I didn’t notice that something like this is happening. How awful for being rejected. I think they will be looking for so some other ways to resolve the difference.
Posted on Sep 12, 2011 | 6:35 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
It is sad that Samsung has resorted to copying Apple designs, often improving in some ways upon them, while Apple files lawsuits in every court they can find over different products that don’t appear to actually imitate anything. It is also frustrating as a consumer.
Posted on Sep 12, 2011 | 2:25 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Are you insane? By Apple preventing Samsung from building tablets that just copy the iPad, they are FORCING INNOVATION. That is a GOOD thing for consumers. Not a bad thing.
Also if the Samsung tablet didn’t imitate anything, an injunction wouldn’t have been upheld in court. Twice. But go ahead and pretend you know better than a judge.
Posted on Sep 12, 2011 | 2:42 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
The courts often make decisions that make little sense and have little to do with actual law or morality (not always the same things). OJ Simpson, Bush v. Gore, and more should serve as examples (I’m not necessarily disputing specific outcomes but there were many decisions within both examples that were extremely questionable).
Sometimes the rest of us, some with a J.D., or simply the ability to read and interpret with reasonable accuracy, do know better than certain judges. Judges are NOT impartial. They are not *necessarily any more highly trained than many good lawyers. They are simply legal experts who serve a difference purpose within the court systems. Many are simply politicians and we know how “highly revered” politicians in general often are.
Also, to answer your question: No. I am not insane. Thank you for your concern.
Posted on Sep 14, 2011 | 2:36 PM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
why???
http://tabletpc-id.com/samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1
Posted on Oct 03, 2011 | 3:21 AM EDT reply Recommend Flag actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed