A US court has rejected Apple's bid to get an early ban on Samsung products in the country. The iPhone-maker was looking for a preliminary injunction against the Korean firm's products based on patent infringements. To succeed in winning a ban, Apple needed to show that it would be harmed more by Samsung continuing to sell …
Don't Apple just appeal
the same as they did in Australia and stall Samsung until the appeal is heard, which makes them miss the Christmas period? Or have the US lawyers missed a source of income that their Aussie counterparts spotted?
The difference here is that no Injunction was granted, so stalling for time with an appeal wouldn't stop Samsung selling anything unlike in Australia, where the ban was imposed and now they are stalling to stop that ban from being lifted.
The thing is
America's judges aren't as bent as Australia's and they probably don't own shares in Apple either.
First Australia, then the US...
...how long before European courts follow suit?
Of course, it's possible that having had a few court cases already, Samsung now know the exact specifications / design features that Apple are moaning about, so can pre-prepare a robust defence (including in some cases finding examples of prior art to debunk the granting of the patent(s) in the first place!)
Or could it be that the courts are aware at Apples previous attempts to submit doctored evidence and without photoshopped images Apple are finding it more difficult to deceive the courts.
The same judge who saw the evidence also held the two very real tablets in her hand and showed them to Samsung's lawyers, who couldn't tell which one was which.
If you're far enough away that you can't see one of them has Samsung emblazoned on both sides, they have different UIs, are different dimensions and made of different materials on the reverse, then they do look vaguely similar.
My wife can't tell most modern hatchbacks apart. Doesn't mean they are the same.
Does your wife work as lawyer for a hatchback maker? No?
How's your post relevant then?
Re: AC 16:20
I bet you couldn't tell the difference between similar Honda and Yamaha motorbikes if I showed them to you. But to me they're obviously different.
The US version (and a few others) - for some reason I won't venture guessing - don't have the Samsung logo.
Also, the Galaxy Tab doesn't have a white square in a depresse, iPhone black circle. In fact, the Galaxy Tab has no circle or square painted on the face to indicate portraits or landscapes up or down. The radii are different, too, last time I walked by and touched and held them.
Apple must think their iPad users are pretty damned dumb or stupid or indiscriminant to fire up a GT and BELIEVE it is an iPad or pick up an iPAD and think "Wait, I want the Galax....."
FACT: Only utter fucking idiots could not tell them apart. Those idiots include:
- A couple of Samsung's lawyers.
- Apple's entire customer base (Apple obviously think that their customers are thick as shit. That's why they took Samsung to court - to prevent the iFans from accidentally buying the 'wrong' tablet).
It's easy to tell them apart. The Samsung is the one dripping oil.
How do you "pre-prepare" something?
Here's one I made earlier, earlier before I knew I wanted it!
"Does your wife work as lawyer for a hatchback maker? No? How's your post relevant then?"
Because the suggestion is that if someone not necessarily well versed in the subject thinks two things look similar then they must be the same and further that one is a copy of the other. This is clearly bullshit. They are trying to suggest that the age old 'man in the street' test is applicable to IP patents. IP patents are flaky enough as they are but this is frankly laughable.
Utterly Butterly says...
I can't believe it's not an iPad.....
Anyone else fed up with this bull? Why don't these companies just let the buyers decide.
Or have the CEO's strip naked and wrestle in a pool of olive oil...I just don't give a frack about Apple anymore.
My recollection differs: I recall reading that the Judge held up the devices and that the *Apple* lawyer could not tell the difference, but the Samsung lawyer picked the correct one after a few seconds looking at it.
Now, according to a previous story, the law says an informed person should be able to tell them apart. However, there was nothing about how long they could spend looking at the two devices. Also, at what distance? That was missing from the previous story.
Interesting analysis here...
Sue Apple for damages
Why doesn't Samsung counter sue for damages? All those lost sales need recompense. That is the headline I want to see.
The case isn't over yet. I'm sure they will if/when it gets proven, not until then.
Samsung likes painting themselves as the underdog but they're hardly saints when it comes to litigation. Have a read of this for enlightenment:
"South Korean electronics giant's libel suit against a British columnist"
Surprise surprise, the American company finds in favour of the..... oh erm South Korean company?
So much for the "biased" US patent system then.
They failed to find in favour of Apple, but they likewise did not find in favour of Samsung.
A finding in favour of Samsung would have been to have the case tossed.
But the judge said
Apple's design patent appeared to have been anticipated by previous tablets, such as a 1994 Fidler/Knight Ridder device and an HP device.
An HP device? Oh! The shame...
What I found particularly funny...
...is some of the design alternatives that Apple proposed as part of this legal farce. According to Apple's crack(pot) legal team, tablets and phones don't *have* to be rectangular - hell, they don't even need to be square shaped! It would seem that Samsung could've saved themselves a world of bother if they had just made the Galaxy tablet triangular, or circular, or trapezoidal even. Just anything but Apple's patented rectangle with rounded corners, for which no prior art clearly exists.
Maybe Apple should try to get it banned as an environmental hazard
- Review Is it an iPad? Is it a MacBook Air? No, it's a Surface Pro 3
- Microsoft refuses to nip 'Windows 9' unzip lip slip
- Tesla: YES – We'll build a network of free Superchargers in Oz
- US Copyright Office rules that monkeys CAN'T claim copyright over their selfies
- True fact: 1 in 4 Brits are now TERRORISTS