×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sale of Samsung Galaxy Tab Blocked in the EU

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the former-lovers-quarrel dept.

Patents 412

bizwriter writes with a news piece in bnet about the continuing battle between Samsung and Apple. From the article: "In a stunning and painful decision for Samsung, Apple got a German court to issue a preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Tab. According to patent analyst and blogger Florian Mueller, that means Samsung cannot ... sell its tablet in the entire European Union, except for the Netherlands."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

412 comments

Cant compete, but sue. (2, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035746)

Its better to block out competitors by trolling patents than outcompete them isnt it. god bless american companies ..... not.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

Cyberllama (113628) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035782)

What's unusual is that the Galaxy Tab looks and acts far less like an iPad than the Galaxy S does an iPhone. It's weird that they're gunning so hard after the tablet.

Unless Apple has a patent on the rectangle, I can't see how any court sees a resemblance. Their respective software doesn't look anything alike, and the form factor is basically the same as every tablet ever, including those that preceded the iPad.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

gorzek (647352) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036046)

Yeah, but Apple basically owns the tablet market right now with the iPad. While they've always had an edge in the smartphone market, they can't realistically kill all their competition there. In the world of tablets, however, they run the show and if they can keep everyone else out, so much the better (for Apple.)

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0, Troll)

The Dawn Of Time (2115350) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035790)

Is that what's happening here? Cause what it seems the court saw is that a Korean company decided to take for its own use protected intellectual property.

I guess it's hard to reconcile that with the geek dream that Apple is running scared, though. Also, Microsoft is dying.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

robmv (855035) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035922)

This is what you call intellectual property? a drawing of a rectangular screen with a earphone jack and a data connector [scribd.com]

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036086)

Hey, jackass. Apple invented the rectangle. And rounded edges? No human even had the creativity or brain power let alone technology to accomplish those. And the earphone jack? Come on, headphones were worthless until Apple invented the headphone jack. I'm not even sure why we had headphones before Apple invented the headphone jack. What were our ancestors doing with those things? And the data connector? Jeez. Apple invented data and then invented a connector to transmit that data. It is a well known FACT that there was no data before Apple. The data connector is APPLE's IP to protect. Nobody else can have data connectors.

Put it all together and you see this is CLEAR IP infringement. But, you say, the rectangular shape has been used before the iPad. SO WHAT? Because Apple invented the headphone jack, the data connector, data, rounded edges, the rectangle, and geometry those other products are all LIES.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (2)

myurr (468709) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036132)

Hey, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story. And it's clear that poor old Apple is having their intellectual property stolen! Look how similar these other tablets look to Apples invention (forgetting all those that came before and looked like that too).

Truth is that Apple IS running scared. They stole a march on the smartphone market by coming out with a better product than the competition. However they've struggled to keep ahead of the curve and Android phones are outselling the iPhone 5 to 2 with the difference growing all the time. In a few years they'll have retreated all the way back into being a niche supplier charging a big premium for their kit.

They again shook up the tablet sector with a different, better product but Android is starting to catch up with the Samsung tab being the strongest competitor. Apple are absolutely running scared as they can see the same thing that happened with the iPhone happening with the iPad.

That's not to say that the company will fail in any way - merely that they'll be one of many competitors with a sub 20% market share. And that just isn't good enough for their ambitions, which seems to be to provide all the channels via which we consume media which in turn requires a large market share, so they have their lawyers out there fighting for that dream. Apple have a good tech and design team, but they're not good enough to grab that monopoly only through building a better product. The legal route is the only one that can work for them.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

The Dawn Of Time (2115350) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036194)

Yeah, and Apple makes more profit on smartphones [bgr.com] than everyone else in the market combined. That's TOTALLY running scared.

Also, this is about tablets. I won't bother linking numbers here because it's 99% Apple, everyone else fighting for scraps.

This isn't running scared, this is Apple saying "We won't stand by while you try to use our work." I know that's not the Slashdot wisdom, but frankly Slashdot wisdom ain't exactly wise outside of certain limited facets of technology.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036338)

And you don't think MS with their arguably monopoly-like practices in the '90s wasn't the same thing? A really effective way to increase profits is to drive away the competition by whatever means necessary.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (2, Insightful)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035968)

This is Slashdot, which means anything that runs Linux is automatically the protagonist, even if the product is ripping off someone else's ideas.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (3, Insightful)

DriedClexler (814907) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036050)

If you think "rounded corners on a tablet" is "ripping off Apple's ideas", I know this company called Xerox I'd like to introduce you to.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035848)

Hmm...glad I got my nook, and rooted it into an android tablet.

HEY, there's the ticket...have Samsung and all the others....put out VERY powerful ereaders, which can be easily 'hacked' by most any user into a full blown working tablet.

So far, it seems one can put out any type of ereader...just have it easy to 'convert'...and voila...you have a market and Apple can't sue you.

Seems an easy way to get around most any patent that is software or 'use' related...sell the hardware with minimal installed software on board...call it something...but let it be easily altered to install software that raises it to its true potential.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035982)

... and why can't Apple sue you? Because the tablet doesn't look like a generic knockoff of their product.

Amazing how that works, too bad nobody let Samsung know about this!

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035852)

That's ok, it will just force Samsung to come out with a more innovative product and eat Apple's lunch for them. Not hard to do when your R&D consists of a bunch of lawyers.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035976)

Whose design R&D consists of a bunch of lawyers? Apple's? You can't be serious.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036082)

Heheeheee, I like how you, by force of reason and facts, explained the whole Apple design strategy. You MUST be some sort of top-notch marketing expert/executive?

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036084)

Yes, because the Galaxy Tab, and the Galaxy Phones, have not been, from the start, imitations of the iPad and iPhone.

Samsung is all about INNOVATION, clearly, they've demonstrated how well they do it already.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035864)

Sorry - did you mean to say "can't compete so just copy"?

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035866)

I wouldn't get mad at Apple, they didn't issue the design registration to themselves, they simply availed themselves of an opportunity the registrar provided and then used that opportunity to their advantage. To do otherwise would have been stupid. Samsung isn't blameless, they designed a tablet that violates the registration.

Of course the article (repeated by the summary) states the matter in the trollish possible way:

Apple got a German court to issue a preliminary injunction

rather than "A German court issued".

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (-1, Troll)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035890)

What are you talking about? Samsung ripped off the look and feel of the iPad. It's Samsung that can't compete.

Are people really okay with companies just blatantly ripping off other companies? I thought Slashdot trashed Microsoft for years over that.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035940)

"Look and feel" should never ever ever be something restricted by a legal monopoly. That's just stupid.
Compete on actual merit.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035964)

Wait, no, I take that back.

"Look and feel" is important.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036024)

No I don't. What I said originally is what counts.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036208)

Wait, I'm just a complete idiot for saying that. That's why I posted AC.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035962)

Shut up fanboy. It's a PC in slate format. The iPad is a large ipod which is a copy from many other touch screen electronic devices that were around while apple were still using buttons.

Why Everyone Hates Apple Fans In A Single Post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035966)

Go back to crying over your Starbucks about how Android is destroying your precious Apple products in sales.

This site is for people interested in tech news, not Hipster Douchebags like you.

Re:Why Everyone Hates Apple Fans In A Single Post (1, Flamebait)

joh (27088) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036028)

Go back to crying over your Starbucks about how Android is destroying your precious Apple products in sales.

This site is for people interested in tech news, not Hipster Douchebags like you.

No, this site is for pseudo-geeky anonymous cowards talking themselves up into a rage.

so (0, Troll)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036236)

samsung ripped off 'the rectangle', and 'rounded corners' ....

i think we have to thank apple for invention of 'the rectangle' and 'rounded corners', since apparently they were the inventors of these very important concepts, because everyone else into stone age has been so stupid that noone invented them ...................... not.

please, get real.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036188)

Its better to outright copy competitors than out innovate and out compete them isn't it. ;)

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

Xest (935314) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036284)

Agreed. This year there's been no iPhone 5 yet, the iPad 2 was a lacklustre update and iOS5 merely adds a few features Android has had forever lack the taskbar.

All we've seen from Apple this year is patent trolling, so is that it now? Apple's innovation spree has hit a brick wall and it's got to be all about the patent trolling now?

It's pathetic.

Come on Apple, you were better than this, you sparked a smartphone revolution, and now that revolution has run ahead of you you want to kill it?

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036396)

While I'm not that excited by iOS5 I think iCloud is pretty innovative. They also clearly are merging elements of iOS with OSX. Like it or hate it but it's hard to say Apple hasn't been innovative this year.

Don't get me wrong. I don't like the patent system and really don't like how much (but not all) of Android simply rips off others and then gives it away for free. However competition is good. I don't think the iPhone would have become nearly as good as it is were it not for Android chomping on its heels. I think others could be seriously competing with Apple in the tablet space but instead we've had some remarkable head scratchers like the releases of the HP tablet and the Rim tablet. Both clearly not ready for release and ultimately hurting the platform. I think though that both have some pretty innovative features. (Well Rim less so than HP and most of what I like in Rim seems ripped off from HP)

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (0)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036400)

I bet the outcome would be different if Samsung were an European company.
Europe Hates America... Unless you need to compare it with Asia, Africa, South America. I think Europe may favor Antarctica.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (1)

ElmoGonzo (627753) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036402)

Apple can't compete on price. If there is a comparable product available at a significantly lower price it will overcome the advantage provided by the cachet of the Apple logo. Apple knows this so it does its best to keep those products off the market and if that won't work there's always license fees to augment the revenue stream. Whether or not those patents represent true, non-obvious, innovations is eventually settled in court. But regardless of the eventual outcome, it is Apple's best interest to keep the competitive products out of consumers' hands rather than allowing them to develop a following.

Re:Cant compete, but sue. (2, Informative)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036404)

Its better to block out competitors by trolling patents than outcompete them isnt it. god bless american companies ..... not.

Well, for starters Samsung is a Korean company.

At this point, I have no idea who sued who first ... but Samsung made the components for Apple, and Apple is asserting that in the process, Samsung ripped off their technologies so they could make their own product. (A little googling managed to turn up this [ibtimes.com] timeline -- apparently Apple sued first.)

Sadly, with patents being such a big factor in what products you can make without getting sued (for instance, Android phone makers paying Microsoft) ... I don't see how you can have anything but product competition being defined by lawyers and the courts.

Unless you toss the notion of patents altogether, do you have a proposal of how companies will make products with out constantly suing one another? Because quite frankly, as it stands, the patent system pretty much guarantees that your lawyers are more important than your engineers.

Patents exist so that you can avoid having to out-compete, you either get in injunction, or make them pay you an obscene licensing fee per unit that makes it impossible to compete effectively.

Design patents (4, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035754)

From the article:

Note that this preliminary injunction is all about a design-related intellectual property right, not about hardware or software patents.

This might be confusing to readers in the United States, where exclusive rights in industrial design are treated as patents [wikipedia.org] .

Tagged as ohnoitsflorian

Re:Design patents (2, Informative)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035776)

Anything from Florian should be regarded as primarily ad-banner trolling.

Re:Design patents (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036016)

And ignoring Florian is somehow making the injunction in Europe go away? People, grow up, please.

Re:Design patents (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036370)

TFA was covered by less-biased news outlets all over the world. It would've been announced by at least ten other submitters. It seems the editors are intentionally driving this website into the ground by their continual dalliance with Florian.

Why can't Samsung do the same? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035772)

Great news for Apple fans I guess, but I have to wonder why can't Samsung block Apple's sale? Can't they just think of something and sue Apple for it?

Re:Why can't Samsung do the same? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036000)

Can't they just think of something and sue Apple for it?

You see there are these things called laws and Samsung broke them.

Re:Why can't Samsung do the same? (3, Informative)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036172)

I'd be a lot more broken up about it except that Han shot first [slashdot.org] . AFAIK, Apple only started filing suits to block Samsung's hardware sales after Samsung began ITC proceedings to block Apple's hardware sales in the U.S. Even in the best case, trying to block import of a major company's devices via the ITC is a case of mutually assured destruction, and in the worst case, it's throwing the hand grenade soon enough for the enemy to throw it back.

rather generic (1)

SkunkPussy (85271) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035778)

looking at the design IP, its just a flat thin shape with curved edges and corners.

it seems pretty generic...

Re:rather generic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035856)

Yea looks like any old generic iPad.

Re:rather generic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035934)

Which looks like any flat screen touch monitor

Re:rather generic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035946)

Yeah which looks like any generic pad. Writting pad, Drawing pad, cleaning pad. They are all flat thin shapes, some with curved corners and other with pointed corners.

Just how many shapes are practical for a touch screen devise with not keyboard.

Wake up people!

Re:rather generic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035948)

you mean like any old generic Star Trek: TNG PADD right?

that stuff that was shown globally back in 1987...

Re:rather generic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036220)

You mean the Star Trek: TNG PADD that looks nothing like an iPad.

Re:rather generic (1)

SilverHatHacker (1381259) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035900)

Does this cover anything with that shape, or just tablets? Because I have a slice of bread I think they might be interested in...

Re:rather generic (1)

GNUman (155139) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035902)

Yeah, the description in the document under code 54 (i.e. Indication of the product) it literally just says "Handheld Computer".

Re:rather generic (1)

GNUman (155139) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035950)

oops... I guess that makes sense, given that they are registering the "design", not the "invention", of a handheld computer.

Re:rather generic (1)

wintercolby (1117427) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036276)

From what I could tell of the design, it was rounded at the bottom and squared at the top. The iPad is tapered to rounded edges, the design isn't. The Galaxy 10.1 has the rounding in the middle, and not the top. The front of the Samsung resembles many flat screen TV's, only smaller. What are they suing over again? Having looked at both products, both seem to be significantly different from the design.

Dont feed the troll (5, Insightful)

Local ID10T (790134) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035804)

Stop quoting Florian Mueller as news.

Re:Dont feed the troll (2)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036094)

Could you elaborate why florian mueller is so evil? I don't get it.

Re:Dont feed the troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036140)

because he doesnt have a clue maybe?
pretty much everything ive seen him write has turned out wrong.

Re:Dont feed the troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036178)

You mean besides the baby eating?

Re:Dont feed the troll (3, Interesting)

Nick Ives (317) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036180)

He has a history of saying controversial things to drive traffic to his weblog. He had a long running feud with PJ and the Groklaw community in general where his analysis into the various SCO cases was consistently shown to be total crap.

It's also very doubtful that he has any legal qualifications whatsoever. He's just an attention whore trying to scrape a living on Adsense revenue. He deserves pity, but not attention.

Unjustied Nerdrage in ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035814)

...3...2...1

OK, Fandroids, I'm ready. Sitting in my comfortable chair with a bowl of fresh popcorn. Entertain me!
Commence the Nerdrage over Samsung found being guilty of infringing IP.

Can we please get an "INGORE FLORIAN" checkbox (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035816)

PLEASE!

The guy's like incredibly annoying, a troll and full of crap.

Please, either quit posting his crap or give me a way to ignore the *astard.

How Humiliating For Apple To Be Reduced To This (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035846)

I remember sitting at a restaurant with a few Apple employees a few years ago chatting about all things computing. I remember there was always a tone and underlying implication in everything they were saying: "Apple is Different. People will naturally pick Apple products if given a choice. They are simply that much Better."

Re:How Humiliating For Apple To Be Reduced To This (2)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035924)

Uh, why would it be humiliating for Apple to protect itself from getting ripped off? Every company protects itself from this. As an Apple spokesperson put it: “It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging. This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property when companies steal our ideas.”

Even Slashdot has stopped another website from copying its content in the past.

Re:How Humiliating For Apple To Be Reduced To This (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035928)

I bet they are humiliated. How will they cope with all the angry greeks on the internet!

Re:How Humiliating For Apple To Be Reduced To This (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036126)

I bet they are humiliated. How will they cope with all the angry greeks on the internet!

They'll likely respond better to the greeks than the geeks!

Re:How Humiliating For Apple To Be Reduced To This (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37035956)

And looking at Apple's sales data, that overwhelmingly seems to be true.

Cronies... (1)

vvaduva (859950) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035932)

And the use of government power by corporate cronies continues...why let the market decide which device should be sold and bought when you can use the power and violence of Government to work in your favor?

Re:Cronies... (1)

cdrguru (88047) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036130)

The point is that today if such things were eliminated, Apple would be out of business in a month. Why wouldn't some company in China simply reproduce the iPad, iPhone, iXYZ, whatever for half the price? And, considering it cost them a tenth of the manufacturing cost (using 100% slave laber as opposed to Foxconn using people that are only 3/4th slaves), it would be extremely profitable.

For a month. Until someone else copied it yet again.

I'm really not sure why we aren't seeing a flood of iPad clones in the US. Some of them with backwards Apple logos on them and the like. The only thing I can imagine is that with the hardware and firmware copied such devices are blocked from connecting to iTunes meaning the cloners would have to (very expensively) set up their own servers and such.

Re:Cronies... (2)

Renraku (518261) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036232)

Apple hardware is somewhat expensive and hard to replicate to begin with. They do use high quality parts. My guess is that some other people have tried to make clones using cheaper parts and they've fallen apart in their hands

Re:Cronies... (1)

PNutts (199112) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036358)

And the use of government power by corporate cronies continues...why let the market decide which device should be sold and bought when you can use the power and violence of Government to work in your favor?

Yeah! We hate Apple for this! How dare they influence the EU to determine which browser we use! Oops, I meant hardware. I thought this was 2009 thread.

Pathetic Apple (4, Informative)

loconet (415875) | more than 2 years ago | (#37035984)

The community design document can be found here [scribd.com] . They're effectively preventing anyone from creating a mobile computer device that is rectangular in shape with round corners. Unbelievable.

Re:Pathetic Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036280)

Absolutely ridiculous that anything in that document could be protected in any way.

Re:Pathetic Apple (1)

pxpt (40550) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036346)

Also looks very similar to virtually every flat screen TV out there - perhaps Apple should start seeking damages from that market too...

Just as the old saying goes (2)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036002)

Those who can, do.
Those who can't, sue.

Re:Just as the old saying goes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036074)

Except, oh wait! Apple does.
...to the tune of 20 million and counting...

It's a preliminary injunction (2, Interesting)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036014)

And a high risk strategy. Currently Apple is doing everything it can to inflate its share price in the short term while creating enemies for the long term. An EU design registration must be on features that are not function-related. If it can be shown that a design feature is in fact the result of an in optimisation, or required for compatibility with a pre-existing requirement, it can be invalidated.

For instance, suppose I register a box with round corners. Now you show that the real reason for round corners is so that the box, designed to go in a pocket, will not put too much stress on the pocket material. It is a human factors improvement; it should not be usable as a design copyright.

I'm sure that Samsung will be actively pursuing any way of showing that Apple's tablet design follows naturally from engineering factors for a portable computer. Meanwhile, Apple had better hope its new manufacturing partners don't start to worry about which of their products it might go after.

Apple statement (4, Insightful)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036020)

“It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging. This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property when companies steal our ideas.”

Apple is in the right here. Certain companies just want to copy Apple's designs, slap Linux on them, and make money, and the only reason geek communities like Slashdot support it is because they run Linux, even though Slashdot has previously trashed other companies like Microsoft for ripping off people's ideas.

Just look at what Android phones looked like before and after [andrewwarner.com] the iPhone was released in 2007. At first, they looked like Blackberries, and then all the sudden, they all looked like iPhones.

Re:Apple statement (2, Informative)

synapse7 (1075571) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036146)

"... from the shape... companies steal our ideas." They are saying our phone is rectangular and nobody else can also produce a rectangular phone seems ridiculous(asinine, other 3-4 syllable adverbs), yet you agree with this?

What a relief - for those opposing patents (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036052)

The patent mess finally impacts non techies here in Europe. Some of them want a Galaxy tab. And they can't. Because of patent stuff. Much easier to explain than (invisible) innovation that hasn't happened because of patents, and (invisible) price hike because of patent related costs.

Or is this about patents? Or design rights? Actually it's about neither. It's about blocking competition. Using intellectual property. Don't care what flavour, it just sucks.

Re:What a relief - for those opposing patents (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036266)

Yeah, at least 3 or 4 people in Europe were waiting with breathless anticipation for the launch of the clunkily-named "Galaxy Tab 10.1," a knockoff of the iPad 2 which costs more or less the same price as an iPad.

The rest of the people don't give a shit, because they've already bought an iPad 2, and love it.

Not about patents (5, Informative)

prefec2 (875483) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036060)

This is not about patents. It is about the design of the Galaxy Tab which looks so similar to the iPad. I do not know the correct English term. In Germany it is called Produktmusterschutz (copyright on product pattern/design/the art of appearance). Like you are not allowed to open a fast food restaurant McDonald's without asking the company of that particular name. As they own the brand and the design of the logo and shops etc.

Re:Not about patents (1)

BarC0d3z (825670) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036168)

Your post reminds me of that movie Coming to America... McDowell's and their Golden Arcs.

Re:Not about patents (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036262)

Your post reminds me of that movie Coming to America... McDowell's and their Golden Arcs.

Are they still having that special on Big Micks? If so I gotta get over there!

Re:Not about patents (3, Informative)

DdJ (10790) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036218)

In the United States, this is called a "design patent". It's the mechanism by which such things as the shape of the coca cola bottle or the design of a font are protected.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_patent [wikipedia.org]

Re:Not about patents (1)

prefec2 (875483) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036318)

Thanks. In Germany it is more like a copyright than a patent. As a patent describes a technical principal, while the copyright protects a specific implementation. However, they got only an injunction which means this can change very rapidly.

Blocked in the EU, you say? (4, Interesting)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036164)

It was only a couple days ago here on Slashdot I read several comments along the lines of "that sort of crap only happens in your American legal system, not in Europe". So one of two things must be true.

1) Apple has a legitimate case; or

2) European law has the same issues as American law.

European Linux fans need to try to figure out which one it is without having their heads explode.

Re:Blocked in the EU, you say? (2)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036270)

Judge doesn't care if Apple has legitimate case, he looks first if it does look like Apple can argue about something legal here. This action is to stop to cause damage to Apple (theoretically) due of illegal action. If Apple looses (and I bet it will, because otherwise they would have sued 6 months ago - now they are loosing market share and have launched lawyers to repair damage), they will open themselves to colossal civil suit with will eat trough their profits in Europe in minutes.

What is interesting that I didn't know that Europe has similar kind of injunctions than US. Not that I'm against them - product look copycatting is more reasonable to be angry about than software patents - but this case really looks moot and just temporary measure to frighten Samsung.

Thats why I'll newer buy Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036242)

We all know that Microsoft is bad but Apple is even badder.

Now I know I want one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37036252)

I was on the fence, but if they're so close that they're getting sued for their look/feel, I just got that shove I need.

go one step further (0)

nimbius (983462) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036296)

and ban all tablets until definitively proven they are useful in any context outside of cellular revenue projections and micro transaction based gaming.

eBay opportunity (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 2 years ago | (#37036344)

Time to buy as many as you can get your hands on to sell on eBay at a nice 25% markup.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...