back to article Galaxy Tab Oz ban ruling due next week

The Australian court's ruling on Apple's injunction request against the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the country is now expected next week. Federal Court Justice Annabelle Bennett had made no promises on the decision but said she would try to get it out as soon as possible. However Friday passed in Australia with no word on her …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. LarsG

    I just

    DO NOT CARE. These companies are turning into squabbling children in a car on a long journey. After a bit, we will all shout, 'for gods sake shut up'.

  2. Jean-Paul

    Announcing what?

    Announcing healthy estimated earnings. Wow I can estimate lots of healthy things, what a lot of twaddle.

  3. Winkypop Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    Just bought a Samsung 24" HD monitor


    Bring on the Galaxy Tab 10.2 or whatever.

  4. Robert E A Harvey

    At least

    Someone knows how to spell 'bated breath'

  5. Anonymous Coward

    'bated breath'

    See title. Thank God there are still some journalists with a command of English out there. It's an odd port in the storm, but I'll put in at el Reg if you can avoid jarring journalistic gems like the headline, "Decapitated heads found in Mexico City" (the heads had their heads cut off?!), articles regularly using the phrases "could of" and "should of" rather than "could have" and "should have", and, as a non-style-but-still-egregious runner up, an article describing CFC-charged inhalers as releasing chemicals which "deplete the atmoshpere". Better stock up on canned air.

    Oh, and to those who wish to point the inevitable spelling or grammar fault in this 1 a.m. BlackBerry post, as if it belies hypocrisy, I would like to point out that I'm an entrepreneur, Jim, not a writer. Writing professionally is a specialty, and not an easy one. If you aren't a writer by trade, hey, what's the odd confusion between head and body? But if you write for fucking CNN - get your house in order, people! For Chrissakes, where are your heads at?

  6. adfh
    Thumb Down

    Someone remind me again...

    ... how a patent lasting 20 years granted to one of the world's biggest companies fosters competition and innovation again?

    Where a company isn't going to license its tech to other people on reasonable terms and is clearly a dominant market leader, where is the benefit on continuing their monopoly for 20 years... especially on things like process and software (where the implementation is covered separately by copyright anyway)?

    Original copyrights (something to do with Queen Anne from memory in the UK) lasted somewhere in the order of 12 years from what I understand. Now we have life of author + whatever extension to the Mickey Mouse Act happens in the US and, it follows, companies with copyright treaties with the US...

    IP (intellectual property) rules need to be rebalanced to reflect the quickening pace of development and the monopolies currently exploiting the system for all its worth.

  7. sT0rNG b4R3 duRiD

    Two things...

    1. Evil Apple.

    2. Evil lawyers that even let this issue this far.

    All about the $$$. Steve would have been proud, would he?

  8. nichobe

    RE: 'bated breath'

    @David W. I think you may be forgetting that writers write for their audience. Alas the audience may not even notice a head and body mix up or even care.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I expect the judge is wondering whether she should just bang both their heads together

    1. TeeCee Gold badge

      Or just humming and hahing over exactly what the penalty to Apple for vexatious litigation should be......

  10. cs94njw

    Hang on. Are any law companies on the Stock exchange? Can I buy shares?

    Sounds like they'd be worth more than Apple/Samsung.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019