Beta
×

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!

Samsung Halts Galaxy Tablet Promotion In Germany

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the no-tablet-for-you dept.

Patents 325

An anonymous reader writes "Samsung Electronics said Sunday it has pulled its latest Galaxy tablet from the IFA trade show in Berlin, after a German court approved an Apple-requested injunction — the latest move in a wide-reaching patent dispute between the two firms."

cancel ×

325 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

One ...! (0)

ego centrik (1971902) | more than 3 years ago | (#37306958)

_ there was only one.

Funny that (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37306992)

pulled its latest Galaxy tablet from the IFA trade show in Berlin

Just as an Apple fanboi pulled his dick out of his bum-chum's arse.

It just shows how stupid the patent law is. (4, Insightful)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307020)

Apple did not invent [osnews.com] the tablet PC, but they want to ban anyone else from making anything resembling a tablet PC.

Re:It just shows how stupid the patent law is. (0)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307044)

No, Apple wants to stop companies building tablets that look very much the same as an iPad. There was a recent review of tablets on theregister, with photos of ten tablets, and eight of them were designed to look very much different from an iPad.

Re:It just shows how stupid the patent law is. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307058)

The iPad is not an original design. It's copied from tablets prior to it.

Basically, fuck Apple.

Re:It just shows how stupid the patent law is. (4, Informative)

webmistressrachel (903577) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307074)

There is NOTHING unique about the iPad, certainly nothing unique that other manufacturers do.

Shape and size? The natural results of designing a case around a screen, CPU, RAM, battery etc.

Material? Common in the Hi-Fi and A/V industry. Copied, blatantly, by Apple.

Software? OS? Walled garden? Unique, and UNWANTED by everyone that hasn't bought this tablet!! (and uncopied by any other maker!)

Re:It just shows how stupid the patent law is. (4, Informative)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307150)

Shape and size? The natural results of designing a case around a screen, CPU, RAM, battery etc.

Don't forget that Apple actually lied in court [electronista.com] by showing distorted images making the sizes look the same when they are quite different. The previously did the same thing with the Galaxy Samsung S phone [webwereld.nl] so this is a well tried tactic by Apple

Re:It just shows how stupid the patent law is. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307416)

Actually no they didn't. They present pictures of both (yes those picture aspects were changed to make them look more familiar) but they also had physical representations of the models in court. The decision wasn't made off the photo's alone.

Re:It just shows how stupid the patent law is. (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307478)

Actually no they didn't. They present pictures of both (yes those picture aspects were changed to make them look more familiar) but they also had physical representations of the models in court. The decision wasn't made off the photo's alone.

Do you have a citation for that?

Re:It just shows how stupid the patent law is. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307576)

Apple themselves stated in the evidence that the Galaxy S was larger in dimensions and the photo in question was just one (I believe it one of the photos on page 28 of the evidence presented). It was the only photo with the 'bad' dimensions. It is believed by legal experts that the photo is actually a prototype photo similar to the mock ups released by Samsung prior to the actual product release showing it was 'thinner' than the iPad.

http://gadgetsheaven.n-ame.com/?p=2309 [n-ame.com]

Galaxy S does include “some non-identical elements, such as the slightly larger dimensions.” This supports the idea that Apple isn’t trying to secretly submit this evidence to the courts. Many have noted a German court’s decision to grant Apple with the original preliminary injunction on the Galaxy tab didn’t take the doctored images into account. In fact, patent expert Florian Mueller noted ”the court’s decision was based on both Apple’s motion and Samsung’s pre-emptive opposition pleading” and also stated “Samsung is in a legally weak position against Apple. If Samsung wants to inspire confidence, it has to understand that half the truth is sometimes tantamount to a whole lie.”

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/08/is-apple-faking-evidence-to-crush-the-competition-not-likely.ars [arstechnica.com]

Müller doubts that the images are outcome-determinative for the case in The Netherlands. "Apple has asserted in its Dutch complaint several technical patents, unrelated to the size of the device, and a Community design that's also about a shape rather than a particular size," he said. Furthermore, Apple clearly noted that there is a size difference between the two devices in its legal filing.

http://9to5mac.com/2011/08/19/samsung-claims-apple-doctored-galaxy-phone-images-in-netherlands-court/ [9to5mac.com]
http://gadgetsheaven.n-ame.com/?p=2309 [n-ame.com]

The decision to ban was not made of off a single photo out of a series of photos. Would you, if you were a judge, base your decision off of an image when the relevant piece of hardware can simply be handed to you for inspection?

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/apple-accused-of-doctoring-image-to-sink-galaxy-tab-101-in-europe-update/14246 [zdnet.com]

[UPDATE: The judge at the middle of this case claims that he actually handled the tablets to back up the images supplied by Apple.]

Re:It just shows how stupid the patent law is. (0)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307526)

Actually no they didn't [...] yes those picture aspects were changed to make them look more familiar

Which is it?

It's sad that you guys are so brainwashed as to defend a company that's lying to a court, while at the same time admitting that they lied.

Re:It just shows how stupid the patent law is. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307138)

They look almost identical to samsung tvs, just smaller.
Samsung made its tvs before apple made its ipad

That backfired. (3, Interesting)

drolli (522659) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307002)

Clever, Apple, clever. Today from the "How do i make my competitor look more important than he probably is"-department.

Attention for free. Show you tablet one day on a Exhibition, then get the free headlines that "It was pulled due to a court order from Apple".

This directly makes the tables an competitor to the ipad (which they are not, they have different audiences, different sizes, and different advantages/disadvantages; i could well imagine to buy both).

Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPad (0, Troll)

bonch (38532) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307198)

Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPad [designer-daily.com]

To deny the obvious design cloning is to reach an extreme level of Apple-hating that even I can't understand.

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307220)

"Some [...]"

The Sony Ericsson P800 from 2002 was way more iPhone than anything Apple had dreamt up until then. Apps, full screen touch, full web, smartphone.

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307418)

I worked on that. I'm confident the truth regarding how the Sony Ericsson joint venture was supposed to be the Apple Ericsson one until one of the parties involved shat on the other will come out one day, a deal done just as the P800 was all designed and ready to launch having been designed and built by Ericsson alone. Hint: No-one noticed how the iMac of the day [downloadatoz.com] looked like a mini P800? [se-mc.com]

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307504)

Yeah, that's some VERY selective choices of devices...

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (1)

electrofelix (1079387) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307222)

Could just as easily say pre touchscreen and post touchscreen.

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307552)

Are you trying to say that the iPhone was the first touchscreen device..?

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (4, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307248)

That's disingenuous. Also before the iPad were things like the Nokia N700 (Maemo) and the SmartQ series (Ubuntu/Wince/Android). The SmartQ devices, in particular, look a lot like the Samsung design, yet predate the iPad by years.

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (5, Informative)

X.25 (255792) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307296)

http://www.designer-daily.com/android-device-design-before-and-after-the-iphone-ipad-18040

To deny the obvious design cloning is to reach an extreme level of Apple-hating that even I can't understand.

http://i.imgur.com/NbDRW.jpg [imgur.com]

Mod parent up (1, Informative)

Dragon Bait (997809) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307388)

The graphic linked to is informative.

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (1)

ooshna (1654125) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307464)

Thank you finally a comparison that isn't totally bias.

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (0)

CheerfulMacFanboy (1900788) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307466)

http://www.designer-daily.com/android-device-design-before-and-after-the-iphone-ipad-18040

To deny the obvious design cloning is to reach an extreme level of Apple-hating that even I can't understand.

http://i.imgur.com/NbDRW.jpg [imgur.com]

Yes, you can obviously make a tablet without fear getting sued by Apple - but Samsung decided they'd rather copy the design.

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307532)

Appropriate name, since you apparently "overlooked" the much bigger issue - that the design was common enough BEFORE the iPad existed that no patent ought to have been allowed. Samsung are 100% in the right here - so they're piggybacking the success of a design Apple helped popularise, that's too bad, if Apple didn't want that to happen they should have come up with a unique design. Hopefully sanity will return to the courts at some point and this will be thrown out.

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307562)

Did you even look at 2003?

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (5, Interesting)

SnowZero (92219) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307316)

So, if visual design is what matters, and not the software (which is different since the iOS is so superior as you would remind us), what do you think about this Samsung digital picture frame from 2006?:
    http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/samsung-digital-picture-frame-stores-pics-movies-music/ [engadget.com]

Form follows function, which is why every TV and computing device is destined to look the same once a level of miniaturization is reached. That's why you see similar tablets in a 1970s TV show ("The Tomorrow People") and a movie from the 1960s ("2001 a Space Odyssey").

Apple certainly is a style trendsetter, but really it is more about bringing things to market that are the closest to what the visionaries have already described. There's a rather clear evolution from other mp3 players through to the ipod, iphone, and then ipad. And yes, along the way things came from non-Apple sources too.. the next iphone will have screen dimensions suspiciously like an HTC EVO, and a notification bar straight from Android. That's what happens in competition.

I'm sorry this conflicts with your worldview that all these nice Apple products were invented in a vacuum.

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307398)

apples community design is from 2004, afaik iirc, it's just a fucking rectangle.

however, there's prior design art starting from the sixties to a device that's just a rectangle.

but what do you expect from a company that says that overlapping images on screen are a novel idea.

Apple has no choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307518)

I agree with everything you have said.

But we're going to see more and more of this because computer technology, software and hardware, has become an easily copied commodity. It has become so complex and relies on so many differing pieces that it is getting increasingly difficult to differentiate between products. That leaves functionality and design as a product differentiator.

Apple has no choice but to do what they're doing.

Re:Apple has no choice (3, Insightful)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307590)

. It has become so complex and relies on so many differing pieces that it is getting increasingly difficult to differentiate between products. That leaves functionality and design as a product differentiator.

That makes no sense. If things are complicated, it's easy to differentiate. It's because the design of a tablet is so simple that all tablets look the same (barring colours, and whether to round off certain edges or not).

Here's another choice Apple had: not suing other companies for using a shape that was around before the iPad..

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307414)

Did your linked page originally came from realitydistortionfield.com?

The LG Prada phone was winning design awards months before the Iphone was first announced. Note that this article on the Prada phone is dated before the Iphone was first announced: http://mobile.engadget.com/2006/12/15/the-lg-ke850-touchable-chocolate/ [engadget.com]

Likewise, the Ipad closely resembles prior tablets. Here's the Crunchpad prototype from six months before the Ipad was first announced: http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/03/crunchpad-the-launch-prototype/ [techcrunch.com]

Here's the Knight-Ridder concept tablet from 1994 (16 years before the Ipad was first announced): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtPQDQNcI&feature=player_embedded#at=139 [youtube.com]

Sorry fanboys.

Re:Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPa (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307434)

To say that trends in design that goes on in all parts of every business is something Apple owns an absolute right to do is reaching a new height on Apple fanboism.

Really, so going flatter with a cleaner surface is an Apple thing? It is something Apple owns the exclusive right to do? Also since Apple did not "invent" this new design (completely stolen from others, such as digital photo frames from... uhm Samsung predating the iPhone and iPad by years... How do they claim right to it? Because they had smarter lawyers who found out that no one patented flat useless squares with smooth surfaces!

Re:That backfired. (0, Flamebait)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307454)

The only way someone this late in the game is going to buy an Android tablet is one of three ways:

1) Integrated as part of an ereader (B&N, soon Amazon, etc)
2) Potential customer has never used an iPad before
3) Potential customer bought online without test driving one in a store first

Don't get me wrong, I love android (and my android phone), but until Google sorts out Android on the tablet, Apple's product is still light years ahead of Android in the tablet market (i.e. for the average consumer, don't tell me about App Launcher X for the power user please). Android has a long ways to go to be competitive in this market, and I suspect the only reason corporations/manufacturers are being dragged kicking and screaming in to this market (how many CEOs have flat out gone on the record to denounce the tablet market in slashdot stories in the last quarter?) is that stockholders want a piece of that Juicy iPad Market despite android not being ready. If I was being forced by the board and stockholders to produce an Android tablet, I'd be making the same cautious remarks about sales figures, and doing premptive damage control now rather than after the Christmas retail season where retailers are sitting on mountains of unsold non-iPad tablet stock.

The hardware is amazing, but until Android catches up, tablets are going to be a non-starter in the retail sector unless you can dramatically improve the software by ten-fold, or get the price of a full-featured 9" tablet under $150

Re:That backfired. (2)

drolli (522659) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307470)

i bought a first gen galaxy-tab and it has proven to be what i expected it to be:

-Universal e-book reader
-good device for viewing documents of all kind
-fits in the pocket of my hiking trouser
-reasonable web browser
-excellent software selection
-easy to develop your own small apps

i find the hickups which seem to be related to samsung using an own filesystem a little annoying, but overall the decision was right.

Re:That backfired. (2)

AndGodSed (968378) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307596)

The only way someone this late in the game is going to buy an Android tablet is one of three ways:

1) Integrated as part of an ereader (B&N, soon Amazon, etc)

2) Potential customer has never used an iPad before

3) Potential customer bought online without test driving one in a store first

*AHEM*

I bought a first gen 7" Tab, and will get one of the newer ones later this year/early next year.

To answer your three points one by one:

1) It isn't an integrated e-reader (obviously) but the Amazon Kindle app works fantastically on it.

2) I used iPad 1's extensively before making my buying devision - I was even given one to use for two days and reviewed it for my blog. I dislike it.

3) Further to my point above, I used the iPad 1, and since it came out the iPad 2 as well.

Now to my buying decisions specific to me getting the 7"er GTab P1000

1) Petter dot pitch, or pixel density of screen resolution. (easier on the eyes to read)
2) At least similar internal hardware specs.
3) No walled garden crap.
4) It has a better form factor than any larger tablets - iPad cannot be compared here because I dislike any of the 10" tablets - for my use they won't work.
5) It makes and receives phonecalls and sms'es. It is also my phone - one device to perform two functions.
6) I can easily build apps for it myself. (and I have - not in market, personal use for notifying when one of my works webservers decide to go bork)
7) 3G/HSUPA, WiFi and GSM on my 16gig model for less than an iPad 3G would cost, and I can add a flash card if I so choose - no need so far.

I have not rooted my device, no need. Two things the iPad does better than the gTab is MUCH better battery life (I usually get a day to a day and a half out of my Tab) and the viewing angle on the iPad screen is better. I gladly live with those two for all the other advantages it has.

The Tab is a superior device.

Doesn't make sense (0)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307012)

Apple has no injunction against any Samsung 7" tablet, and hasn't tried to get one. So Apple is definitely not the reason for this withdrawal. Maybe Lenovo is right, and maybe Samsung has only sold 20,000 of these tablets to end user world wide so far.

Re:Doesn't make sense (3, Informative)

EdZ (755139) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307072)

Apple has no injunction against any Samsung 7" tablet, and hasn't tried to get one

Samsung itself [yonhapnews.co.kr] , along with hundreds of news outlets [google.com] , would no doubt be interested in hearing your theory. Do you have the slightest shred of evidence to back it up?

Re:Doesn't make sense (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307128)

Since when do Apple fanboys/viral-marketing-droids or even Apple's lawyers need evidence? They just fabricate stuff out of thin air to fit their view of the world.

Re:Doesn't make sense (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307180)

That's because they know that all court decisions have an element of randomness.

Imagine if they win: They'll have a legally enforced monopoly on tablets!

If they lose...no biggie when you've got billions in cash.

Re:Doesn't make sense (2)

crossword.bob (918209) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307488)

Imagine if they win: They'll have a legally enforced monopoly on tablets!

Not so. They'll have a legally enforced monopoly on a very particular design of tablets.

Like the judge said: “There are a lot of alternative ways to design a tablet device, as the market amply shows.” Doesn't sound like he has any interest in stopping others from making tablets.

Re:Doesn't make sense (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307524)

Why can't this same judge see all the devices which were designed prior to the iPad and see that Samsung could just as easily be copying those?

(eg. http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/03/crunchpad-the-launch-prototype/ [techcrunch.com] )

I don't get it ... hence my comment about the outcome of all lawsuits has a random/human element to them and no matter how "obvious" things are the court might still make the wrong decision.

Apple: trolling justice for decades (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307346)

Apple is well known [wikipedia.org] for abusing justice with frivolous court actions. No one can complain if people assume Apple to be guilty by default.

They think they have the monopoly rights to all the concepts they copied from Xerox [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Apple: trolling justice for decades (1)

inasity_rules (1110095) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307422)

they copied from Xerox [wikipedia.org] .

I see what you did there...

Let's go! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307022)

Apple hater circle jerk in one, two, ...

Why the hell are they allowing this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307026)

Apple LIED in court about evidence. Nothing screams retarded more than this court allowing this crap to continue given the fact that they outright faked that evidence... TWICE.
Yeah, TOTALLY by accident, stupid judge(s).

I hope Apple get destroyed by this, I seriously do.
While that won't happen, I hope they at least come closer to destruction.
They deserve every bad thing they can get from this.

Re:Why the hell are they allowing this? (3, Insightful)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307046)

Lying is one of apple's forte's. Remember the "can we please use the Apple trademark and we promise never to go into the music business [lowendmac.com] "!

Re:Why the hell are they allowing this? (2, Insightful)

bonch (38532) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307190)

For crying out loud, you're bashing Apple for going back on a promise they made 30 years ago . "Music industry" back then meant selling vinyl records. How is that lying anyway? 30 years passed before they decided to start producing MP3 playback devices in a totally different music and technology landscape.

Re:Why the hell are they allowing this? (4, Insightful)

cbope (130292) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307252)

Are you serious? How much time has to pass, in your opinion, in order for it NOT to be a lie? Are your wedding vows still valid after 30 years?

Re:Why the hell are they allowing this? (0)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307258)

Are your wedding vows still valid after 30 years?

Just think, a few years ago you would not have reasonably been able to ask an Apple fanboi this question. Now same-sex marriage is commonplace.

Re:Why the hell are they allowing this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307196)

Lying is deliberately saying something that is untrue.

A statement can't retrospectively be turned into a lie.
At the time they said that, they had no intention - and in fact probably couldn't remotely conceive - of entering the music business.
When the situation changes, they change their minds.

What do you do?

Re:Why the hell are they allowing this? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307144)

German courts and laws aren't much better than those of some 3rd world nation. It's all about who you know and who has more clout. Evidence and justice are quite irrelevant.

There's a reason why the saying "On the high seas and before the court, one's fate is in Gods hand." is very popular here.

Re:Why the hell are they allowing this? (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307214)

There is famboi then there is just being a hater.
What will happen is there going to be some arguements and probably an agreement to share their patents.

epic backfire (-1)

infinite jester (206583) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307034)

Samsung filed this suit against Apple, not the other way around. How weak must their case be that after suing Apple, the judge rules that Samsung's own products be pulled from the shelves?

Samsung Electronics Counter Sues Apple as Patent Row Deepens [businessweek.com]

Re:epic backfire (3, Insightful)

EdZ (755139) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307048)

Um, your link itself explains that Apple sued Samsung first, over "allegedly copying it's products".

Counter claim: 3, 2, 1 (3, Interesting)

Teun (17872) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307036)

It would greatly surprise me when Samsung isn't preparing a monumental counter claim to make up for lost revenue.

Apples claims will not stand up to reality.

Not sure the guilt trip works... (1)

SebZero (1051264) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307050)

...but anything to help it win is welcome.

The patent disputes are an utter can of worms with the who-copied-who arguments, however the claims of copying design elements are utterly stupid to the point of being insulting. If someone walks into a shop intending to buy an iPad, but walks out with a ** 7.7 inch ** samsung galaxy tablet, there are 2 things that need to happen:

1) Help needs to be organised - they will probably need help switching the device on, yet alone using it.
2) Serious questions need to be asked about how such a dimwit managed to get that much money.

Will this bite Apple? (3, Interesting)

Zouden (232738) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307066)

I wonder if this will end up hurting Apple because it will start people thinking that if Apple is trying tactics like this to stop sales of the Galaxy Tab, then the Galaxy Tab must offer serious competition to the iPad. Apple normally don't resort to legal tactics to stop competitors since they can usually rely on producing a better product.

The fact that the display booth at IFA was hastily covered up [engadget.com] just smells of desperation on Apple's part. Of course it's more complicated than that, but most people won't see it that way. I suspect this battle will just result in bad PR for Apple, and extra publicity for Samsung.

Re:Will this bite Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307142)

Apple normally don't resort to legal tactics to stop competitors since they can usually rely on producing a better product.

Yeah, one that drop calls when you hold it "wrong", that's a better product right there.

Re:Will this bite Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307204)

This is what most apple customers actually believe.

Re:Will this bite Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307256)

A better product that is generating huge profit and that never had to be recalled. The call dropping was vastly over exaggerated, and most people except apple bashers know this

Re:Will this bite Apple? (5, Insightful)

bjourne (1034822) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307210)

Doubt it, those of us who value digital openess are already avoiding Apple products like the plague.

Re:Will this bite Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307236)

Digital openness like Darwin/Free BSD etc. Mach Kernal, Webkit etc...

All open and free

Pick your targets

Re:Will this bite Apple? (1)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307322)

Maybe "digital openness" includes the ability to phisically open the device, replace a part, or install a custom OS on it. And just maybe he was referring to iOS devices.

Re:Will this bite Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307338)

Maybe he was referring to 'Apple Products" - may be not

Re:Will this bite Apple? (3, Interesting)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307224)

No.
1. Most consumers don't know and don't care.
2. Apple is still turning out high quality.
3. Most consumers feel good about choosing a winner.

Re:Will this bite Apple? (2)

igb (28052) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307334)

I wonder if this will end up hurting Apple because it will start people thinking that if Apple is trying tactics like this to stop sales of the Galaxy Tab, then the Galaxy Tab must offer serious competition to the iPad.

What proportion of the potential iPad market follows technology court cases, forms an opinion on them and then uses that opinion to influence their purchasing decisions? 0.1%? More? You think?

sigh of relief (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307096)

this is exactly i was thinking at-least dust over Samsung settled(http://www.yummyhits.com/samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1-still-ban-in-germany/) in positive manner...

Choice decided by courts (2)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307122)

Well, I for one am reassured, now that courts will be controlling the scope of choice for me, when I go shopping for gadgets.

The Galaxy is a copy? "Imitation is the highest form of flattery." Humans have been copying others' ideas since the invention of the wheel. What about the violation of the patent: "A Method and Process for Producing Fire by Rubbing Sticks Together" ?

Hey, let the market decide . . . do you want the real thing with a chic logo . . . ? Or some cheap rip-off . . . ? Check your wallet first.

Re:Choice decided by courts (5, Interesting)

galaad2 (847861) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307140)

good artists copy, great artists steal. And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas

Source: Steve Jobs himself
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU [youtube.com]

Re:Choice decided by courts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307452)

The market did decide. They didn't sell for shit and Samsung was caught buffering their numbers with 'shipped' instead of 'sold'.

Ridiculous (0)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307126)

It's ridiculous how a government court helps to destroy competition, government system is set up to create monopolies via all these "intellectual property" laws, and how at the end the CONSUMERS suffer due to fewer choices and higher prices.

When the revolt takes place against the banking system, it should also take upon the government destroying free market system. This does not help anybody but Apple in this case, and who cares? The consumers suffer, Apple should not even be on the radar of thinking for these so called 'socialist governments'.

Re:Ridiculous (2)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307458)

Here in Germany we believe that an unfettered free market is going to be significantly worse for us than the current government.

Re:Ridiculous (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307474)

Well, I am HERE in Germany right now, though I don't spend all of my time here and I disagree with you. Only government workers in Germany believe what you believe, I haven't heard anybody who is not a government worker espouse these ideas.

Germany should know better (0)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307156)

Germany should know better, but it clearly doesn't remember its own history even though it's still paying for it.

The economic sanctions imposed by the French and British against Germany, the entire 'reparations' idea basically caused so much harm to Germany economy, that it became politically weak and allowed we know who to come to power and thus WWII became inevitable.

Any trade restrictions are similar to such sanctions. This kinds of stuff leads to wars. OK, nobody is going to a war just because of some computer being denied sales but the important thing is the trend. If Germany keeps doing this shit - basically preventing trade from taking place and thus causing harm to all parties involved - the consumers and the producers, eventually this will result in a war. It won't be because of computers, but it may just well be because of food, energy, water sale restrictions, and this here sets more and more precedents for such sanctions.

Wars are always about economics, it's always about making somebody too poor while somebody else gaining from it, and eventually these imbalances result in some form of armed conflict.

Re:Germany should know better (2)

skyride (1436439) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307240)

OK, nobody is going to a war just because of some computer being denied sales but the important thing is the trend

Statistically speaking, I don't think 1 event is a trend.

Re:Germany should know better (0)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307284)

It's not just one event, there is a trend. It's in everything in Germany, from food to automobiles, to clothing, chemicals, whatever.

Re:Germany should know better (0)

Johann Lau (1040920) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307354)

it's probably in your brain. move elsehwhere and soon enough you'll find it there, too ^^

Re:Germany should know better (0)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307396)

I move around plenty. Germany is doing this very extensively. It also uses taxes/printing/borrowing to subsidize various industries and consumer goods, there are people crossing the border to Germany from Italy to buy pasta, which was produced in Italy and bought up by Germany and subsidized to the point where it's cheaper for Italians to come to Germany to buy it.

There are laws here that make it impossible to sell food on global market, there are various special taxes making it extremely expensive to move food from one location to another, so local farmers are subsidized, which causes massive resource mis-allocation and I observed this entire ideology back in USA and Canada as well, where food is subsidized and this causes it to be much more expensive, because places where it could be grown cheaper (like Africa) are put out of business by these subsidies.

Re:Germany should know better (2)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307494)

Letting your whole food production wander off to cheaper workers is a terrible idea for the stability of the country (a trade problem could cause mass starvation and Germany has always been limited in long range trade as our navies could never stand up to more seafaring nations like Britain and France). Just because our farmers need to have enough money to buy TVs and other luxury goods they aren't somehow inefficient money eaters. Everything costs more when made here but that's only cost to the consumer. Our human workers still require the same amount of nutrition for the same actions. Our machinery is the same stuff they're using anywhere else (maybe even more modern and efficient). Our farming practices are set up to keep the ground usable. We don't burn down tropical rainforest just to grab new farmland because our old areas got depleted.

There are more costs than just the money exchanged at the supermarket. I don't disagree that international trade is heavily exploiting Africa by paying them so little they almost starve and thus pushing them to farm more cash crops and overfarm the land until it's unusable leading to rainforest burning but that's not going to get better by abolishing our own farming.

Re:Germany should know better (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307558)

Who says about abolishing farming in Germany (or France, etc.)? I am talking about subsidies that the businesses are getting from tax payers to keep producing overpriced products, which is basically a bail out, a perpetual stimulus to keep those people occupied in that industry. When you say: "everything costs more when made here but that's only cost to the consumer" - duh. Consumer is the market. Individuals are forced to pay for overpriced products because of the way the tax policy is set up, so instead of allowing the prices to fall by allowing the most efficient allocation of land, labor and capital, you have now a system, that forces prices to be higher while simultaneously creating an artificial imbalance of trade, which does not help the world in the long run and eventually will cause a depression in Germany just as well, as capital will leave (and it is leaving), to places with fewer controls.

Government grip on economy forces capital flight, creates monopolies and destroys competition, while causing this, "insignificant" from your point of view action of causing higher prices to end consumers.

So from your POV, having consumers overpay for products they want is insignificant somehow? And that's coming from somebody in a country, that overtaxes the workers to provide insane amounts of welfare to all sorts of people who are not working, because why work? You get almost the same amount of money from welfare as you'd get working in a low paying job, and you'll have to do actual work. And German tax payers are now in a position of having to bail out banks all over Europe, because bankers and government are basically one and the same, so any loss to a banker must be immediately absorbed by the tax payers, and in case of Europe, the tax payers are mostly in Germany (and France), but seriously, I am happy when I am in Switzerland, though that country also subsidizes food production, at least they are not subsidizing an entire continent with tax payer money.

Who do you think suffers from higher food costs, by the way? The rich? ?

Apple != New Microsoft (1)

bhunachchicken (834243) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307166)

When I saw Apple starting to make gains I thought it was fantastic. They were finally able to sell their products to the masses, rather than their fans and those who enjoyed paying a premium for their goods.

When the Apple Stores began to open, I joked to my brother: Hey, look at that - Apple has become the company that Microsoft always wanted to be.

I got that wrong. They're not the new Microsoft - they're much, much worse than that. They've started to throw their weight around like nothing else, seemingly no longer bothered about whom they hurt along the way. The Financial Times has removed their app from the App Store due to the 30% fee for subscribers and I bet that many more will follow suit soon after.

Should Apple go on to create their rumoured Apple TV (an actual TV), there will be no doubt in my mind whatsoever that they will find ways to sue LG, Sony, Samsung, Philips, etc. for having something in their TVs that infringe upon some broard, dumb patent (such as the way the volume meter is shown).

The same would probably also happen to Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo, should Apple also create their own games console. It would probably go somewhere along the lines of: A device used to wirelessly control the input and display of on screen data and transferrence of feedback to the commanding user. Which would basically be any wireless controller used for gaming that supported force feedback...

Tasty.

Re:Apple != New Microsoft (1)

theolein (316044) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307386)

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple wanted to make a TV, BUT, they will face a world of patent lawsuits if they do, because none of the makers of TVs will quickly forget how Apple is currently treating competitors.

Not only that, but all of them will be watching with eagle eyes for any possible way to return the favour to Apple in any way they can.

This Apple behavior has become a mental burden (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307174)

I am vexed, piqued, annoyed, frustrated, exasperated by Apple's behavior! Who do they think they are?

What can a small man really do to effect [positive] change in Apple's conduct?

Re:This Apple behavior has become a mental burden (1)

Akira Norimaki (2266222) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307254)

You can start not buying their products, for instance. Apple doesn't make anything you can't live without.

Re:This Apple behavior has become a mental burden (2)

Johann Lau (1040920) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307360)

You could climb on the shoulders of another small man, hang a large coat over your shoulders and talk in a really deep voice. That might not be enough, but it would be a start.

Re:This Apple behavior has become a mental burden (0)

Relyx (52619) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307448)

I really wish Slashdot had a Like button :)

Re:This Apple behavior has become a mental burden (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307594)

Good afternoon, dear sir or madam.

Since you are new here, I would like to inform you that /. has had a moderation system that predates the "like"funvtionality so prevalent in many new social media web sites.

Re:This Apple behavior has become a mental burden (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307496)

Add the to the "evil-companies"-list together with Sony.
Nothing with the Sony or the Apple-brand finds its way into my home.
Whenever someone contemplates buying something from them, inform them why they shouldn't.

New Apple moto (1, Flamebait)

XooRTheWorld (1246384) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307194)

Apple: Think different, or we will sue you!

On the Engadget Blog... (5, Interesting)

theolein (316044) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307218)

This was posted there last night, and I was pretty surprised at the anger towards Apple in the comments (The comments there have since degenerated into an Apple Fanboi vs. the rest of the world "ur mom" catfight). But the general tone is clear: Apple could not have done more or better marketing for Samsung's devices. Apple is also royally hurting its own sacred brand with these type of actions, as the perception of Apple as the feisty underdog becomes one of an abusive monopoly similar to the way Microsoft has long been perceived.

Re:On the Engadget Blog... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307392)

It's not just the litigation, Apple have completely lost the plot.

Having to copy a large document prior to working on it -- to prevent it being overwritten by Lions autosave is the single most stupid design decision I've ever come across.

Then there's the attempted repackaging of iMovie as an upgrade to a leading NLE solution. Avid MC sales are up 30% and Adobe premiere sales are up too, Apple no longer have an NLE suitable for professional workflow.

The discontinuation of the server line... let's stop because this list goes on and on.

What if it were you? (1)

Wingsy (761354) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307264)

First of all, you really do need to read beyond the title of some of these patents in question. When you see "Animated graphical user interface for a display screen or portion thereof" as a patent title, some people go "OMG, Apple is trying to patent the GUI for a phone!" And while some aspects of such a patent make you think that it is so obvious that it is totally unpatentable, well, the courts will decide that if, repeat if, they are presented with prior art. And so far, those patents haven't been thrown out. So until then, all Apple-haters can do is bitch & moan about the patent system or the court system. No, it ain't perfect but it's all we got and everyone is playing by the same rules.

Anyway, put yourself in the position of having come up with some clever way of making a part of your newly designed phone stand out from the rest. It may even have some basic component of prior art but the way you've done it is different enough to be noticeable. And people notice it and like it, and your phone starts selling like hot cakes. Are you saying that you should be forced to give that away for nothing?

Trying to prevent someone from using what you've done isn't stifling innovation, it's encouraging it. It's an incentive to come up with something better. Take a look at Samsung's "Before iPhone/iPad" and "After iPhone/iPad" products here. Where's the innovation?
http://maypalo.com/2011/08/22/samsung-before-after-iphone-ipad-picture/ [maypalo.com]

Re:What if it were you? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307352)

As posted above:

good artists copy, great artists steal. And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas

Source: Steve Jobs himself http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU [youtube.com]

That notification menu in iOS 5 looks awfully familiar BTW.

Re:What if it were you? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307534)

As a previous poster pointed out, Samsungs digital picture from from 2006 : http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/samsung-digital-picture-frame-stores-pics-movies-music

It's a fucking iPAD!

Re:What if it were you? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307566)

And while some aspects of such a patent make you think that it is so obvious that it is totally unpatentable, well, the courts will decide that if, repeat if, they are presented with prior art.

Interestingly, prior art is not a defense in Germany. That's why the wide majority of patent enforcement suits are brought to the German court in Düsseldorf, which is well known for its patentee friendly rulings.

Before this court, patents are even enforceable when the alleged patent violater can prove that he did not use the patent, but built everything on prior art.

Sick of dirty tricks (1)

Teknikal69 (1769274) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307276)

I just find it sickening I think the only reason it's Samsung being targeted and not the others is that they were the first to make devices both thinner more powerful and with better screens than anything Apple has brought to the table. As for Apple claiming foul over design similaritys it's their own fault for being so minimalistic and there were a few almost Identical looking tablets before the iPad was on the scene.

I think it's obvious this isn't even about design it's about not wanting competition on a level playing field.

Apple has outdone itself (0)

Artem Tashkinov (764309) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307282)

Now, according [fudzilla.com] to Apple's lawyers, if you ever worked for Apple, then your subsequent inventions for other companies may also very well belong to Apple:

In amongst the ITC court papers in the recent HTC versus Apple spat is an argument which claims that Andy Rubin got inspiration for Android framework while working at Apple, hence infringing an Apple API patent.

This means that Android started at Apple, just by virtue of the fact that one of its former employees happened to have invented it. If this logic was applied, it would mean that it did not matter where an employee worked in their life all their inventions would be legally owned by the first company they worked for.

Re:Apple has outdone itself (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 3 years ago | (#37307328)

Now, according [fudzilla.com] to Apple's lawyers, if you ever worked for Apple, then your subsequent inventions for other companies may also very well belong to Apple:

As so often happens, you are either accidentally or on purpose misrepresenting what is actually happen. In a patent dispute, some company said that Andy Rubin had nothing whatsoever to do with Apple's patent, and Apple then showed that the same Andy Rubin worked directly under the two people who actually received the patent at that time.

In a patent dispute, _if_ there is infringement then it can be important for the amount of damages whether the infringement was intentional or by accident. If Andy Rubin worked under the two inventors at the time the invention was made, then surely this is relevant. And if Andy Rubin himself took out a patent that had this invention as prior art, and didn't mention the prior art, then the fact that he worked for them would also be relevant.

Re:Apple has outdone itself (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307506)

Actually he was working on the same team that developed the realtime API, which is the patent in question, while employed at Apple.

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/technology/apple-cites-039andy-rubin039-anglelawsuit-against-htc_582662.html [moneycontrol.com]

"Android and Mr. Rubin's relevant background does not start, as HTC would like the Commission to believe, with his work at General Magic or Danger in the mid-1990s. In reality, as the evidence revealed at the hearing, Mr. Rubin began his career at Apple in the early 1990s and worked as a low-level engineer specifically reporting to the inventors of the '263 [realtime API] patent at the exact time their invention was being conceived and developed. [...] It is thus no wonder that the infringing Android platform used the claimed subsystem approach of the '263 patent that allows for flexibility of design and enables the platform to be "highly customizable and expandable" as HTC touts. [...] While Mr. Rubin's inspiration for the Android framework may not be directly relevant to the pending petitions for review, that HTC felt compelled to distort this history is illustrative of the liberties it takes in attacking the ALJ's [initial determination] and the substantial evidence supporting the ALJ's findings."

A fact that HTC happened to leave out of it's evidence when they claimed that Andy Rubin started his career at General Magic. I think anyone, including you, can see the significance of such. Perhaps that is why you left all of the relevant facts out of your statement?

Re:Apple has outdone itself (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37307574)

It's a valid sw+hw patent if they concieved it first. While not disputing their innovation, it's usually a kind of patent that gets used in FRAND type of licensing (in non-Apple world). While Nokia, Motorola etc. were contributing to a common patent pool for licensing, Apple kept it as a weapon for getting injuctions - the tactics was probably prepared already before the launch of the iPhone, as they knew competition would catch-up sooner or later..
It is clear that Apple isn't interested in cross-licensing, but in declaring Android-based phones illegal in the US (especially if Larry's acquisition of Sun and subsequent patent trolling is a proxy tactic by Apple?).
Also I will consider them responsible of destroying FRAND type licensing balance in mobile communication industry - don't expect anyone to commit a relevant hardware patent to a FRAND pool again, they become almost useless against patent trolling.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?