back to article Second win for Apple as Galaxy Nexus sales banned in US

Apple has scored its second legal victory of the week with a court ruling on Friday that effectively bans sales of Samsung's Galaxy Nexus smartphone in the US. Fresh from her ban on Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 earlier in the week, US District Judge Lucy Koh has issued a pre-trial injunction against Samsung over the Android …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Roger Stenning
    FAIL

    Ye gods.

    OK, let's go without a trial, then, not bother with the tedious hearing and examination of evidence, and oh yeah, make a few punitive assumptions as well.

    How the HELL did this moron get appointed to the bench?!

    1. Bob Vistakin
      Devil

      Re: Ye gods.

      It's the hypocrisy which stinks the worst - this is almost at Prescott levels. You can absolutely guarantee there will be no problem when Apple bring out a large, flat, black, rectangular device for watching moving pictures on with sound, powered by a remote, which looks and feels identical to the ones Samsung and a zillion others have been selling for the past 10 years.

    2. LarsG
      Trollface

      Re: Ye gods.

      Calm down Billy Boy this is just pre trial ban. Once the proper hearings have taken place you may find things change. Unless of course the Judge has an iPhone!

      1. g e

        Re: Ye gods.

        Actually, if the judge can be shown to own an pihone, ipad and maybe a mac thing of some sort could that be used to show predujice/bias?

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Calm down Calm down

      Its only a pre-trial injunction, these things happen just in case the other party 'may' suffer financial loss before a ruling is made. It is just precautionary for the courts.

      The outcome may well be different, could even be turned on its head.

      Let's hope it is sorted before the iPhone 5 na iOS 6 rears its head, then even if Samsung etc win if it is after the release of the new iPad mini or iPhone 5 and iOS 6 the nexus and Tab may find themselves yesterday's products and will suffer sales.

      Could this be the reason of this court case?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Calm down Calm down

        > Its only a pre-trial injunction

        When is the trial? The reason I ask is because if the trial was next week then a pre-trial ban wouldn't be an issue. If the trial is in six months (and that would be quick) then the hardware will be "old" by the time any ban is lifted. Apple can use legal manoeuvres to delay any trial, possibly by years, which would make the hardware obsolete when any ban is lifted.

      2. AdamWill

        Re: Calm down Calm down

        The problem is this is another example of how the patent system makes no sense for software and modern electronics. According to the story, the trial is likely to take place after the holidays, so that's 6 months away. A six month sales ban essentially kills a cellphone dead. Who the hell is going to want to buy a Galaxy Nexus at full price in six months? No-one. By that time it's obsolete.

        A six month injunction might be fine for a product with an expected sales lifetime of ten years. If the product's expected sales lifetime is about a year, with half of that at deep discounts, it's ludicrous; the system just doesn't work.

        1. John Molloy

          Re: Calm down Calm down

          Here's the thing.

          Firstly this is not about look and feel. So arguments about Apple making a TV in a few months are irrelevant. There are 4 Patents up for grabs and make no mistake Samsung just got in the way these four patents infringements lie heavily at the feet of Google and Android.

          Also this is the Galaxy Nexus phone that has been banned which was released in November last year and not the new Galaxy SIII which also infringes but has not as yet had an injunction against it.

          The thing is if Apple does win this case then ALL of Android will be culpable.

          It might be simpler for Google to code around this stuff or take features out, like Motorola made Apple remove push emails from iOS5 in Germany.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Calm down Calm down

          Sure it does, it gives Samsung (and anyone else) a massive disincentive to copy directly from a competitor.

          1. AdamWill

            Re: Calm down Calm down

            Or, you know, build something rectangular.

    4. LarsG

      Yep, keeps them out of the market till after Christmas

      Maybe that's the ploy, maybe it's a legitimate claim.

      We shall see next year in March when the trial starts.

      In the mean time......

    5. LarsG
      Thumb Down

      Apple

      Apple will still have to post a $100,000,000 bond to the courtnfornthe injunction that is payable to Samsung should Apple lose the case. but how much would Samsung really lose if the phone is delayed until next year?

      1. Gashead

        Re: Apple

        It was released over 6 months ago and being a Google experience device is probably well beyond the peak for sales.

    6. Alexis Vallance

      Re: Ye gods.

      Evidence is looked at in the injunction application. That's the whole point of an injunction - swift action, based on preliminary evidence and subject to a substantial fee for the Claimant.

    7. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Fansungs spin so fast they make me dizzy

      When Judge Koh is dishing it out to Apple or prosecuting them she's a smart judge of the highest morals. When she sides with Apple she's a moron.

      It all seems very convinient [sic].

    8. Anonymous Coward
      Stop

      Re: Ye gods.

      Throw enough patent claims, some of them might stick because the judge owns an i-thing.

  2. heyrick Silver badge

    Like I said last time...

    ...it's starting to become time to ask if the US market is worth it. Patents are being used to wage a commercial war with scant regard to decent competitive practice. Plus patents are being handed out for things such as rounded corners and slide-to-unlock (gee, those are novel ideas...) seemingly with the idea of "oh well, let 'em fight it out in court". Now, however, it has turned nastier with patents being used to block sales of a product in the country. NOTE WELL: The devices barred have not been proven to infringe upon any patents. If it infringes, fine, punish them for it. But what we are seeing here is a punishment before such legal process has occurred.

    So, yes, non-US companies ought to think long and hard about their position in such a marketplace.

    1. Robert Carnegie Silver badge

      Re: Like I said last time...

      I thought the "black rectangle with rounded corners" thing was a trademark-design issue in the European Union, not the U.S. But it's hard to keep track of this topic.

  3. DryBones
    FAIL

    What utter tripe. They have a patent on minimalism? Black rectangle versus black rectangle... Of course the Samsung lawyer couldn't tell them apart, they haven't got enough distinctive features. The uniqueness test applied to only a part of a product is total fail.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Yes, you CAN patent minimalism if it's novel and practical. If you don't believe, believe that one of the most lucrative patents in US history was for a single piece of metal wire: the "Gem" paper clip.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Charles 9

        No, the patent was for the paper clip that happened to be made from a single piece of wire.

        If the patent was just for a single piece of wire then bicycle spokes, springs, staples and many other things that are manufactured from a single piece or wire would be infringing.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
          Unhappy

          Re: Charles 9

          "If the patent was just for a single piece of wire then bicycle spokes, springs, staples and many other things that are manufactured from a single piece or wire would be infringing."

          With the massively broad definitions used in modern patents, that's the sort of scenario we are now looking at.

      2. DryBones
        Facepalm

        My my. Let me see....

        * I believe it's "novel and non-obvious", not practical.

        * Black is a color. Colors cannot be patented, though it's possible the specific chemical composition of a material with that color might be.

        * Location of controls is not patentable, or at least should fail hard for being too broad. So no requirement for them to be on the front, can be on the sides where lots of stuff (tvs!) have them.

        * Standard geometric shapes are not patentable, so the rounded rectangle can't be patented. Also, according to http://www.uiandus.com/blog/2009/7/26/realizations-of-rounded-rectangles.html , Jobs took his inspiration for the shape for OSX's rounded rectangle interface from stuff already in existence, such as the "No Parking" sign. So prior art there anyway.

        * Screen in the middle - Form factors are pretty standardized, borrowed from existing monitor

        The point of all that? Mostly me being utterly gobsmacked at the fact that the US patent system can be used to force a company to put some sort of pointless tat on their design, and/or prevent them from simplifying its appearance/construction.

  4. Dave 126 Silver badge

    What the IP in question?

    Some sites are under the impression that the patent in question in this case is something to do with Siri voice search, not the look of the Nexus... Can anyone clarify this?

    1. David 138
      Thumb Down

      Re: What the IP in question?

      I heard it was to do with swipe to unlock. It's another crappy american patent that apple are using to hurt competition. Why the nexus? They must be embarrassed about their poor showing at their mobile show compared to android. Apple had innovation once in 2005 now they are just patent trolls.

    2. Steve Todd

      Re: What the IP in question?

      It's a heuristic search algorithm http://www.google.com/patents/US8086604

      1. DryBones
        WTF?

        Re: What the IP in question?

        Following the link, it appears that there are multiple examples of prior art and prior patents. So essentially this is a "... on a phone" patent. This, plus the fact that Google's search engine predates the filing of this patent by almost 10 years (yes I know it's evolved, but that's essentially what they're trying to target and that doesn't wash) makes me wonder if this wasn't granted just so the injunction could be reversed once funded, casually sweeping nearly $100M onto Samsung's balance sheet in under a week.

        1. Steve Todd
          Stop

          I find myself spectacularly disappointed

          in the quality of some of the posts here.

          Firstly there are those who blame the judge or the legal system. For the most part they are doing exactly what they are supposed to do - settling commercial disputes based on evidence and the law. Sometimes they come down in favour of one side, sometimes the other. If a particular decision comes down against your side of choice that doesn't imply bias, mostly it implies that you're not in possession of the full facts and/or bias of your own.

          Secondly the patent system. While it is far from perfect, it doesn't let you do things like take an existing invention, slap the words "on a mobile device" on the end and call it your own. There has to be an inventive step of your own that makes it work on a mobile device (it's actually ONLY that bit that's covered, the previous inventor(s) own the prior bits). A patent that references many others doesn't make it invalid, it just limits what is being claimed. It is saying "we acknowledge this prior art, we are doing something patentable above any beyond what it covers".

          Next bothering to check the detail of a patent. The number of commenters who don't bother to check what it patented, or who scan it only briefly and come up with a ridiculously simplified view of what's covered. This patent is a prime example. It actually covers how to take the results from multiple search sources and, using heuristic methods, filter and order them to give the most likely results first.

          Finally failing to realise that most patents can be worked around. Companies can find other ways of solving a problem (some actually better than the patented method). Many of the best invention of the past were work-arounds for other people's patents, so no, they don't stifle invention, quite the opposite.

        2. LDS Silver badge

          Re: What the IP in question?

          If it is this one, PalmOS phones did it at least since 2003. In my Handspring Treo 270 you did a search and it searched all the phone databases. The problem is people and maybe judge think that Apple invented the smartphone, but they didn't.

          1. proinnsias

            Re: What the IP in question?

            And yet, Apple's own Newton was doing similar in 1987 - with "soups" which stored the data from the applications - you could search across the entire device ... #justsayin

    3. King Jack Silver badge

      Re: What the IP in question?

      It's to do with unified search from a simple UI. You type your query into a box, which then goes on to search multiple places for your results.

      Sounds like how all searches are performed to me. Where did I leave my keys? On the table? No. In the bowl? no. In the front door? Yes. Time for Apple to sue me for searching.

      1. Franklin
        Joke

        Re: What the IP in question?

        "Sounds like how all searches are performed to me. Where did I leave my keys? On the table? No. In the bowl? no. In the front door? Yes. Time for Apple to sue me for searching."

        You may be doing a unified search, but I doubt you have a simple UI...

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Just think of it, if Apple succeeds in banning all tablets/smartphones, they won't have to invent a new product in 1000 years. If someone else invents a new product, a US Judge will say that it is banned because it hurts Apple sales. With no competition, why invent?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Don't be silly dear, Apple isn't banning all cellphones. Just the ones that copied them.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Don't be silly dear, Apple isn't banning all cellphones. Just the ones that copied are better than them. How else can they compete?

        There, fixed it for you

    2. Steve Todd
      Stop

      1000 years?

      At the very most patents last for 25 years. That's the whole point of a patent. The deal is that a company provides full details of how an invention works in exchange for a limited time, government backed monopoly in the use and/or licensing of the invention. The data detectors patent that Apple has used against HTC has only 4 more years of life for example.

      1. Tim Bates

        Re: 1000 years?

        "At the very most patents last for 25 years. That's the whole point of a patent. The deal is that a company provides full details of how an invention works in exchange for a limited time, "

        And there is one problem when it's applied to technology/software... When the steam engine was invented, 25 years was well beyond the time an invention would be used. Steam train locomotives for example started becoming common in the 1830's, and were still being built over 100 years later.

        Software on the other hand. Well, when was the last time you used some software older than around 5 years (excluding Windows XP)? Now try and pick something that was more than 25 years old....

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: 1000 years?

          Tetris - 1984

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: software concepts more than 25 years old...

          Are you having a laugh? Everything we use today is based on concepts that are at least that old.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Happy birthday iPhone

    Hope you had a nice gift

    Oh :) You did: A planeload of justice.

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Trollface

      Re: Happy birthday iPhone

      A planeload of justice?

      Must be Agent Orange!

  7. n4blue
    Coat

    doesn't bode well for the new Nexus 7

    It won't be long now before Apple bring out a 7" iPad and sue Google for copying it.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: doesn't bode well for the new Nexus 7

      Nope they already have the patents for the 7 incher but just havent used them in anger yet!

      1. Mr_Bungle
        Coat

        Re: doesn't bode well for the new Nexus 7

        Using a 7 incher in anger will get you on the sex offenders register.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Not any more

    There once was a time when I considered purchasing an Apple product. That will never happen again. Fortunately I don't live in the US, so I am free to purchase superior products.

    1. Chris Miller

      The long arm of the law

      I assume you don't live in Germany or the Netherlands, either? Apple lawyers - coming to a courtroom near you.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Not any more

      Cutting your nose off to spite your face, now thats clever.

      1. VinceH Silver badge

        Re: Not any more

        " Cutting your nose off to spite your face, now thats clever."

        He's only doing that if he thinks Apple's products are superior, but from what he said he doesn't - and he's not alone.

  9. Rich Woods

    Don't think Samsung will be too upset...

    Samsung produced the Galaxy Nexus on behalf of Google, primarily as a developer device. In that role it has already served its purpose. It is not Samsung's flagship product, that role has been taken by the Galaxy S3. The main result of this is increasingly bad PR for Apple as more people start to believe that they are competing in the courtroom because they are no longer capable of competing in the open market. The whole thing is a joke, imagine if cars, hi-fis or TVs had such ridiculous patent encumbrance. Apple appear to be the biggest comedians of them all.

    1. ThomH Silver badge

      Re: Don't think Samsung will be too upset...

      There's a precedent of sorts; Edison managed to collect sufficiently many patents for film equipment that he was able to force a ridiculous array of rules on the nascent industry, including permissible running times, subjects that could be covered and a bunch more. The net effect? American filmmakers moved to Hollywood, about as far as they could get from Edison, and ignored him.

      I guess skipping the US would be analogous here.

      1. Alan Brown Silver badge

        Re: Don't think Samsung will be too upset...

        "Edison managed to collect sufficiently many patents for film equipment "

        Mostly IP which was stolen from european filmmakers (the lumiere brothers, etc)

    2. Voland's right hand Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: Don't think Samsung will be too upset...

      Cars, HiFis and TVs _HAVE_ that ridiculous level of patent encumberance. A single modern car diesel engine has anywhere between a few hundred and a few thousand patents protecting it. It is rather unsurprising that there are a handful of sources for them nowdays. Even those have to cross-license a lot of IPR to be able to produce them.

      The reason why you do not often hear about silly lawsuits is because all big players:

      1. Always do FTO (freedom to operate) analysis before entering a market and quite often do fto just for new products. The standard IT industry practice of "ignore patents during development" is an absolute No-No there. You will get fired if you try to develop a new car without checking for IPR first. In IT you are likely to get fired if you do the opposite - actually check for IPR when developing.

      2. Have portfolios in their main product areas sufficiently big for a mutual self-assured destruction.

      3. There are very few patents by organizations which fail to monetize them so end up selling them to trolls. The up-front cost of R&D is very high so anything it produces is monetized. It is impossible for the car, Hi-Fi and TV industry to produce the car, TV, HiFi equivalents of the designs for the iPhonesque touchscreen UI, patent them and sit on that for 10 years doing totally nothing (no comment why).

      1. Dave 126 Silver badge

        Re: Don't think Samsung will be too upset...

        >designs for the iPhonesque touchscreen UI, patent them and sit on that for 10 years doing totally nothing (no comment why).

        It invented by a small company who made multi-touch keyboards and trackpads before Apple bought them. I guess Apple were waiting for battery and mobile CPU technology to get to where it needed it to be - even then, the first iPhone had to forgo 3G in order to get an acceptable battery life.

        1. Voland's right hand Silver badge
          Devil

          Re: Don't think Samsung will be too upset...

          Quote: "It invented by a small company who made multi-touch keyboards and trackpads before Apple bought them. "

          That is where Apple got the tech, it is not where it got the IPR. Most of the IPR is from one well known place where a lot of stuff got invented and none of it got implemented. I am tempted to say why, but I will not.

          Hint - look at the original assignees of the patents used by Apple to sue people over touchscreen stuff.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Don't think Samsung will be too upset...

      Of course Samsung are upset, they just got barred from making frankly misleading iPad photocopies this week. This now is warning shot.

      They're getting bitten for copying Apple and they don't like it one bit. Their business model relies on that.

      1. Random Handle

        Re: Don't think Samsung will be too upset...

        >Their business model relies on that.

        Not all that much really, profit from US sales of the Nexus is a drop in the ocean compared to what Samsung make from iPad and iPhone.

  10. Nya
    WTF?

    Justice?!

    "Apple has made a clear showing that, in the absence of a preliminary injunction, it is likely to lose substantial market share in the smartphone market and to lose substantial downstream sales of future smartphone purchases and tag-along products," Judge Koh said in Friday's ruling.

    So let's get this straight, Apple can get anything banned from sale in the US, delay a court case into the new year so the busiest sales periods are missed, just by saying whatever product which hasn't been found to be, or even looked at yet could damage sales?! Screw the patent system, this is guilty before before being proven innocent. Really shows how the US justice system is utter screwed in favour of a US company!

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Justice?!

      "Really shows how the US justice system is utter screwed in favour of a US company!"

      And Apple are upset that the Chinese justice system isn't working in their favour for some odd reason :-)

    2. Chad H.

      Re: Justice?!

      Except it isn't being tilted in favour of a US company. Any company with a patent in dispute can ask for the same, with similar reasoning.

      The injunction isn't there to punish samsung - let me stress that again - it isn't there to punish samsung. It is there to limit potential damages if their opponents are found to be acting illegally. Without it, if this case was won by apple, the loser would not only gave a ban (and many angry customers who need repairs or replacements) but a huge damages bill, payable to cuppertino, to boot.

      This really isn't anything that iFans or Fandroids (who are just as bad) to claim the moral high ground over. If the situation was reversed, you can be assured their opponents would do the same.

    3. Franklin

      Re: Justice?!

      "So let's get this straight, Apple can get anything banned from sale in the US, delay a court case into the new year so the busiest sales periods are missed, just by saying whatever product which hasn't been found to be, or even looked at yet could damage sales?! Screw the patent system, this is guilty before before being proven innocent. Really shows how the US justice system is utter screwed in favour of a US company!"

      No.

      It makes great flame material in Internet comments, of course, but the reality is a bit more complicated than that.

      In order to get a preliminary injunction in an intellectual property case, you have to show considerable evidence that you are likely to win the case. You ALSO have to put up a bond that will be given to the other party to compensate them for their financial losses if you DON'T win the case.

      If Apple loses at trial, Samsung will get a nice, hefty wad of cash to make up for the projected lost sales, as well as court costs, attorney's fees, and so on.

  11. Stuart Grout

    Justice

    The good old US of A shows once again that it has the best justice that money can buy.

    Fortunately I will not buy any more Apple hardware (only got an old 2nd gen ipod) and will now close down my iTunes account as I've already ripped everything I've bought to a more usable format.

    Goodbye and good riddance to Apple, rotten to the core.

    1. Chad H.

      Re: Justice

      Can you honestly say, hand on heart, that any other company would not demand an injunction?

  12. Barrie Shepherd

    Just Culture?

    Would it not be more appropriate for the Courts to ban the sales of both companies until the patent war has been settled? That way there is no advantage /disadvantage to whoever may eventually loose.

    1. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge

      Re: Just Culture?

      But that would give their competitors an unfair advantage. So the fairest solution would be to ban the sale of all cell phones.

  13. Miffo

    Evidence for loss of sales?

    How can Apple claim that they'll lose significant sales when they are dominating the market (certainly in tablets) to such an extent. These Samsung products have already been out for some time and I can't see Apple sweating much. If the Galaxy Nexus was going to make a big impact then it would have done so by now.

    1. cyke1

      Re: Evidence for loss of sales?

      Accually from q1 2011 to q1 this year they lost the smartphone market share lead and its funny how apple has only been suing 1 company to keep their phone's outta the market? Sure you can go on to guess who has taken over the top spot in smartphone market share. Just show's how scared apple is cause they know they are totally screwed after Steve died

  14. jarjarbinks

    Someone explain to me how the Nexus looks anything like the iphone?

    I am really confused.. while I can't stand Apple at all any more for the ongoing ridiculous lawsuits.. I can *almost* accept the Tablet 10.1" cause it does look very close to the ipad. But the Galaxy Nexus does NOT look like the iphone at all. In fact, there are a LOT more phones that look almost identical to the iphone before the Galaxy Nexus does. I don't understand how a 16:9 4.65" screen size device with a countoured body can be considered identical in appearns to the much smaller/less curvy iphone.

    So please.. can someone for the love of all that is Holy explain how the hell this is possible? Let's put all fanbois aside (both sides) and be fair and honest. Yes, the Samsung Tablet 10.1" looks very close to an ipad. But the Nexus Galaxy.. come on? Are they going to ban the S2 and S3 now too? What about the hundreds of other manufacturers.. I mean.. why can they ban one phone from one company here right now and it doesnt hold up anywhere else for any other manufacturer? Shoot, Samsungs Fascinate looks FAR more like the iphone than the Nexus does.

    1. Dave 126 Silver badge

      Re: Someone explain to me how the Nexus looks anything like the iphone?

      I can't, because it doesn't.

      "Friday's ruling centers on U.S. Patent 8,086,604, which covers a user interface for conveniently retrieving information from a computer system. The patent was filed by Apple in 2004."

      (Google search 'Galaxy Nexus' and filter by 'News': the pcworld.com story carries links to the patents in question. Confusion is understandable because there are several devices and patents being slung about)

    2. Arctic fox
      Headmaster

      Re: Someone explain to me how the Nexus looks anything like the iphone?

      The situation may possibly become rather more richly ironic and costly for Apple than they are expecting. It is frankly impossible to judge what kind of impact in the tablet-pc market that Win8 and/or Win RT may or may not have. However, if either MS with it's Surface offerings and/or MS' OEMs actually produce something the public want then the net result of Apple's behaviour may be to create space for Redmond in the tablet market which might otherwise not have been there without Apple's legal assault on the Android os in general and that operating system's leading OEM, Samsung, in particular. Apple may in fact end up being badly damaged in the war with their "auld enemy" by virtue of their patent trolling attacks on Mountain View. History is after all littered with examples of the workings of the Law of Unintended Consequences.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Someone explain to me how the Nexus looks anything like the iphone?

        Not a very logical post, actually. C-

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @ Arctic Fox

        It's = IT IS

        How can you not get that into your thick skull?

        Other illiterate cretins also take note.

  15. etabeta
    FAIL

    Apple worse than a patent troll

    I will NEVER purchase ANYTHING made by Apple because of their antics. Another reason is that you cannot even replace a battery!!

    1. Travis Hayler
      FAIL

      Re: Apple worse than a patent troll

      Can't replace a battery? Try using a screwdriver...

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Apple worse than a patent troll

      ... and guess what, no one gives a shit about your indignation, and the vast majority of purchasers of APPL products don't give a toss about this matter.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Advise to manufacturers: Ignore the US market

    Why do most journalists seem to assume that US law applies world wide.

    Leave the US alone to their judicial nightmare.

    Americans no longer innovate

    Americans no longer produce.

    American industry and business owners are decimating the US middle-class so they wont even be an interesting market for much longer.

    Just build and sell the stuff that the rest of the world wants. Ignore the US market and their broken IP and USPTO patent regime.

  17. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Stalling tactic

      Cool theory, except this case predates any Jelly Bean announcement.

    2. Dave 126 Silver badge

      Re: Stalling tactic

      Er, it seems to be Android handset manufacturers who often delay the latest releases of Android.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Pint

    Samsung had this coming

    They were being huge jerks, blatantly - and badly - copying what Apple did feature by feature, except where it didn't suit them like their addiction to plastic. This is a company that changes Android's standard characteristics - like text wrap in the browser, icons and buttons - to match iOS's. At one point Samsung even hired the same child actress for their ads!. Just doesn't get more shameless, really.

    Then, instead of toning it down they went around and mocked Apple - the same company they've been copying all along. All the while Apple was pumping billions into Samsung Electronics as their biggest customer (well, in great decline now).

    Finally, still not satisfied with that they went ahead and used FRAND standard patents to attempt injunctions against Apple products - getting investigated by the FTC and EU commissions in the process.

    The patent might be a technicality but they had to pin them on something. A bit like catching Al Capone for tax evasion.

    I don't want an actual injunction, but it would be good for everyone if Samsung finally got the message and moved on to to doing things differently.

    1. Dave 126 Silver badge

      Re: Samsung had this coming

      Maybe they have:

      'New Samsung chief: I want SOFTWARE'

      http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06/19/samsung_better_software/

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Samsung had this coming

      You want Samsung to stop copying? Then you had better get Apple to stop lifting ideas wholesale and then claiming them as theirs. It's only fair but then Apple wouldn't have anything to sell they haven't come up with anything of their own in years

    3. Philip Lewis
      Thumb Up

      Re: Samsung had this coming

      A rare, rational and succinct comment. So rare on The Reg' these days, sadly.

    4. Philip Lewis
      Go

      Re: Samsung had this coming

      Samsung cannot win, in the long run. Samsung's solution to "missing the boat" in the phone and tablet market was to copy the mindshare leader and darling of the MSM, blatantly and attack the market. They deserve everything they get.

      And what they will get is this, and pointed out on these forums by more than one over the past year or more. APPL will simply source their hardware components from alternative sources. Samsung is not the only capable supplier of electronic componentry. APPL has plety of alternatives and they will exercise that option. Personally I doubt whether Samsung can sell enough tablets or phones to compensate for the revenue (and perhaps profit) generated by supplying to APPL. I wonder what iSuppli has to say?

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Samsung had this coming

      At one point Samsung even hired the same child actress for their ads!

      Jezus Christ, so that's it, appear in a crApple advert and you career is over!!!! You can ever act again unless its in another crApple ad. That really says a lot about the mentality of the fanbois.

      Sad really when you think about, but the one good thing is that all fanbois are eventually going to disappear up their own ass holes.

  19. This post has been deleted by its author

  20. John LS
    WTF?

    In Other News

    Ford, GM and Chrysler group together and gain an injunction against BMW Mercedes and Jaguar for supply cars with 4 wheels

    1. Chad H.
      Facepalm

      Re: In Other News

      Ford GM and Chrysler lost as most of the defendants claimed Prior art, except mercedes Benz, who shows the patent with Karl Benz's name on it, long expired.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: In Other News

      "Ford, GM and Chrysler group together and gain an injunction against BMW Mercedes and Jaguar for supply cars with 4 wheels"

      …and were they granted a patent for cars with four wheels, they would be perfectly within their rights to do so.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: In Other News

        especially since Ford, GM, Chrysler also made covered wagons, also known as prairie schooners.

        Nobody ever put 4 wheels on a wagon until they did.....

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Meh

    Is going after the gigantic and horrible Galaxy Nexus the best Apple can do? I thought Apple had good taste in design.

    Meanwhile Samsung's best ever phone, the Galaxy Ace Hugo Boss edition, is still out there for all to buy.

    It may never get Android 4.0, let alone 4.1, but who cares, it goes amazingly well with a nice couture suit.

    1. Philip Lewis
      Meh

      Re: Meh

      It does indeed look spiffy.

      On a different note, why is that Samsung phones have the camera lens identically located on the device as the iPhone does? Just wondering what the design decision is based upon.

  22. DEAD4EVER
    WTF?

    oh you cant be serious

    OK seriously when are people going to learn that apple and the name apple for this computer company is just a over priced over hyped rip off, i mean its a joke ill never touch apple ever. give me a android phone anyday cause Steve jobs isn't around to save apple this time eh.

  23. alan buxey
    Mushroom

    Bad week for Samsung's lawyers ?

    no, Bad week for consumers.

    Apple is using legal tactics to keep itself in a position which it acheived because no other

    companies blocked their entrance...its called an Open Market. they are now sticking it to the other companies. If there were legitimate patents (ie ones that arent obvious, arent prior arent and are really cool and novel ways of doing things) then yes, they would have a case. ...talking of cases, I cant believe it will be next year when the case goes to court, the phones will all be old generation by then, Apple will have used this legal method to basically block any free competition.

    as others have said, I expect Apple to start taking litigation against these same companies the moment

    they launch a TV screen...probably along the lines of claiming all rights to high resolution screens

    or a screen which has a motion detector built into it in a certain way.

    my next phone is Android, my next tablet is Android - where I can choose which model and which manufacturer I like.

    1. Philip Lewis
      FAIL

      Re: Bad week for Samsung's lawyers ?

      Completely ignorant bilge. That is all.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @ alan buxey

      What Philip said above, but also: from where have you got this crazy style of breaking up sentences over multiple lines with no punctuation?

      Take it from me, it does not help your point to be understood. Further, when asking a question, one normally indicates such by the use of a question mark, as demonstrated above.

      Finally, the fact that you aren't intelligent enough to write your own name with capital letters does not do wonders for your credibility.

  24. Jason Hindle

    I don't get this?

    Hasn't the phone been on sale for eight months already? It's so out of date, it uses a full size SIM card instead of a Micro SIM. It would be more of a competitive concern had the S3 been banned. Unless you're Apple, it's actually a very fast moving market so I don't see what Apple gains competitively here.

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    after searching, I find that one of the main patents that the phone is banned for is to do with searching in multiple sources from a single interface.....

    I remember when I first started to use the internet, I had some difficulty searching because the internet crawlers for the search engines weren't as good as the ones employed today. So I used a program that would search multiple search engines for me. If I remember correctly, one was called Dog Pile and another was called Web Ferret (not sure if I spelled them correctly).

    can those programs be considered as prior art?

    1. Tom 35 Silver badge

      No

      It's the US, you just have to add "on a mobile device" to the description and it's a new idea.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      " searching in multiple sources from a single interface"

      "So I used a program that would search multiple search engines"

      This is the patent in question:

      http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,086,604.PN.&OS=PN/8,086,604&RS=PN/8,086,604

      Notice the 'input by a user' clause - so it's for searching data that the user has entered themselves (such as their contacts, documents, calendar items).

      However note also the reference to patent:

      http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F5404295

      …which is dated 1995. Dogpile was started in 1996, Webferret.com is dated 2002.

      So in answer to your question, 'no'.

  26. Charlie Clark Silver badge
    Thumb Down

    Factual error

    Google too aren't going to be happy with the ruling either. It had high hopes for the handset and handed out 6,000 of them at this week's I/O developer's conference as a platform for people to design applications around.

    Google was handing out the Nexus 7, a different device produced by Asus and not Samsung, at the conference and not covered by this court case.

    No one likes to be shut out of a market but historically the US market for mobile phones has been distinct. In the years where Nokia reigned supreme, it had only a paltry market share in the US. Initially, sales of the I-Phone in the US did allow Apple to kick start the app and content eco-system but now the US market is neither numerically nor financially as important as it was a few years ago as the effects of commodifying the hardware and focussing on software ripple through the industry.

    1. Crosser
      FAIL

      Re: Factual error

      Actually I'm afraid you're wrong. A colleague of mine is returning from the I/O developers conference with a Nexus 7, a Galaxy Nexus (with 4.1) and a Nexus Q. They were given all three products.

    2. jowlymonster

      Re: Factual error

      Actually, delegates were given a Nexus 7, a Galaxy Nexus AND one of those ball-media-streamer Q doohickeys.

  27. Anony-mouse

    Just ordered a Nexus yesterday.

    I don't know how this ban is being enforced, if it is at all. I just ordered a HSPA+ unlocked Nexus yesterday to put on Straight Talk's service so I can dump Verizon and Google didn't have any problem taking my money for the order. And they are still actively taking orders as of this morning too (at least it looks like it).

    Apple can simply kiss my ass. I wish Samsung would cut the bastards off on SoC supply if this is enforced. Since they fab Crapple's chip supply, dry them up and sell the excess wafers to someone else.

    I'll be seriously pissed if my phone doesn't ship out in the next day or 2 because of this patent trolling crap from Crapple.

  28. Gil Grissum
    Pint

    It's just a delay tactic while Cook looks for the mojo to gain the charisma to make a keynote address interesting. Apple needs to be innovating instead of making their legal department bully the rest of the industry. This nonsense makes me want to sell my iPhone 4S and get an Android.

  29. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    How's this for an idea - Samsung should stop infringing / 'slavishly' copying Apple's products then this would not happen.

  30. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    All these people whinging about how unfair Apple are - would you act differently in their position to protect the time and money you had spent developing this stuff. I'll answer it for you = no. Hypocrites.

  31. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "It may never get Android 4.0, let alone 4.1, but who cares, it goes amazingly well with a nice couture suit."

    Android - built in obsolescence - basically these phones are good for 12-18 months whereas at least your iPhone is still getting updates after 4 years+.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Yeah, but crawling like a 1 legged dog when it does get them. Also, bet the original iPad owners are excited about the iOS update - oh wait...

  32. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Samsung copies Apple - bad Apple. If Apple copied Samsung it would also be bad Apple. Apple are only doing what any other company would do in the same position - protect it's IP. Roll back about 4-5 years and a Nokia N95 was considered pretty much a top-end phone. iPhone comes out and now almost every phone is a full screen touchscreen - even if you do not buy an iPhone you are benefitting from them massively moving the market for phones and mobile data forward.

    Same applies for tablets. If it were not for Apple you would probably not be using an iPad, Fire, Tab or whatever else. I'm not saying they invented tablets but they certainly revolutionised both phones and tablets as we know them now.

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Stop

      It's "protect its IP", not "protect it's IP"

      And Apple is not actually "protecting its IP" (that childish concept from the IP moaning industry again). As is evident from the patent in discussion here, it's just locking out competition by co-opting state power.

      Btw, why do you think I'm using an iPad, Fire, Tab or whatever else?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        FAIL

        Re: It's "protect its IP", not "protect it's IP"

        "As is evident from the patent in discussion here, it's just locking out competition by co-opting state power."

        So how do you explain that they are only blocking the devices that look like their products / infringe their patents and not all competing products?

        You can't because you are talking crap.

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Enough. It's an international trade issue now, let's face it. Let's have it dealt with by grownups, Block Apple at customs by government edict, and tax them into oblivion.

  34. graeme leggett Silver badge

    Bad day for ?

    "Bad day for Samsung's lawyers"?

    Why? Are they not getting paid?

  35. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge
    Pirate

    Perhaps MGM should sue Apple for copying their tablet design from 2001: A Space Odyssey. Prior art and all, the copyright coverage of that design will last a lot longer than some patents.

    1. Chad H.

      True

      But copyright coverage is weaker.

      I can write a story about an orphan adopted by his aunt and uncle who goes to a magical boarding school, and there isn't thing one JK Rowling can do about it.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      FAIL

      "Perhaps MGM should sue Apple for copying their tablet design from 2001"

      Had MGM been granted a PATENT (*not* copyright) on a WORKING DEVICE which Apple copied, they would have a case.

      As it happens, they didn't.

  36. nsld
    FAIL

    Not sure what all the fuss is about

    The Nexus is nothing special, its the S2 and the S3 which make the iphone look like an obselete brick.

    More than anything this is a waste of corporate resources and money, all that will happen is they will develop a work around approach and the injunction will get dropped.

    Litigating against your competitors doesnt make your own product any better.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Not sure what all the fuss is about

      The Nexus is considerably superior to the S2 in many ways. It also supports NFC which the S2 does not.

  37. damien c

    What A Joke

    I find it really annoying and funny at the same time that a judge would ban the sale of a product without the product being found, to infringe on any of the patents etc and only ban it for 1 of the companies within the court case.

    I really think that until this is resolved then both parties products should be banned from being sold, because as I see it apple are gaining sales because people have really no other option because the best tablets around the same price range are banned from sale, because apple know if they don't stop them being sold most people would rather buy a samsung tablet than a ipad.

    I would love to see the person who decided to portray the use a tablet styled device in 2001: A Space Odyssey take, every company to court over the fact that they own the copyrights to such a device regardless of the fact of whether it worked or not.

    All this sueing people over the way "it looks & feels" is complete nonsense, I mean what is next are apple going to sue the creaters of the eye pads that are used for covering your eyes after a operation or something, because eye pad sounds the same as ipad.

    1. Riccardo Spagni
      Facepalm

      Re: What A Joke

      Why why WHY are there so many ignorant morons commenting on El Reg these days? Samsung has infringed on a patent that covers Apple's "Spotlight" search. For those saying that Dogpile or Google has prior art, you clearly don't know what you're talking about. There are several sources of data on iOS, including emails, text messages, application names, etc. Just as Spotlight on OS X searches through more than just file names, Spotlight on iOS searches through those multiple sources. It is not an aggregator, which would be compiling the results of multiple disparate searches, but rather it is searching those multiple data streams and then producing a segregated output of the results. In the honorable Judge Koh's opinion, there is a violation of the patent on the part of Samsung. Apple only get the injunction once they've paid a $95 million bond, that they will forfeit if they lose the trial. I think the $95 million Samsung could potentially make if they win is more than the profit that the Galaxy Nexus would've made over its lifetime. Either way, this is a pretty clear infringement, and I find myself siding with Apple in this instance.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What A Joke

        In what sense is that different enough from the prior art to amount to something both original and non-obvious?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        That's interesting

        I got the Nexus shortly after launch but I didn't even notice it had such a feature!

  38. mike acker

    marketing muscle

    marketing in the courts

    apple is a RICO and that should come up in court

  39. Brandon 2

    worse than the judge owning an i-thing

    Would the judge not have to recuse herself if she owned an i-thing? or worse, i-stock? Forgive me, as an angry american, I think every politician and judge is in some way in bed with the stock market (read "throw them all out").

    1. sisk Silver badge

      Re: worse than the judge owning an i-thing

      There's nothing wrong with American courts and politics that can't be solved by getting rid of all the politicians, judges, and lawyers.

  40. sisk Silver badge

    Inappropriate

    What the hell is this judge thinking? Preliminary injunctions are supposed to only happen if the product in question stands to do more damage to the plaintiff by being on the market than the defendant stands to loose from the injunction. There is no way in hell that Apple stands to loose more from any patents that the Nexus may infringe than Samsung stands to loose by being locked out of the market with it.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @ sisk

      sisk, it might give your opinions a little more credibility if you learned how to spell the word 'lose'.

  41. mego
    Devil

    Bloody Merkins

    So Apple can fail to license the 3G technology they conveniently stole - and it's FRAND so cheap as chips if done before a complaint has to be raised. But whoa these Android boys are up to sh*z because they use a touchscreen (invented in the 70's),

    Never mind the fact that both devices are clearly different: shiz, one even says Samsung right up on the grill. Not only that, but one is clearly a rectangle while the other is almost a square.

    Lastly, asking a lawyer to tell you the difference between two devices when clearly they have some bias (even if it's bias in their favour) is so stupid it beggars belief that she even pulled that rubbish.

    As for the Apple Fanboi's crowing that "oh you thought she was great when Android won"... not so fast. There is no "winner" here. No matter what happens, one product will die and the other will survive. Back in "the day", stopping a product for six months might hurt a little. Might cause some ruffled feathers. Today, that's how long the device is likely to be sold over.

    I vote Samsung and other Android manufacturers stop selling in the US: the network is a shambles and in typical Merkin attitude is out of spec for the rest of the world. It's more expensive to support them especially when stupidity seems to win over sensibility in this case. Take Android away from them. See how the public copes with just Apple there to "look after them". I give it a year tops before Apple unveils Master Plan One.

    Spawn of Steve indeed.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Bloody Merkins

      "So Apple can fail to license the 3G technology they conveniently stole"

      If Motorola are not willing to license 3G or other 'essential' technologies, then perhaps they should not have signed up for FRAND.

      As it happens, any company that requires the use of such essential patents must be granted a license to use them. It is not possible legally for Apple (or any company who can pay the 'reasonable fee') to 'fail to license' an essential patent covered by FRAND such as 3G, so you are talking crap.

      1. BenR
        Stop

        Re: Bloody Merkins

        "As it happens, any company that requires the use of such essential patents must be granted a license to use them. It is not possible legally for Apple (or any company who can pay the 'reasonable fee') to 'fail to license' an essential patent covered by FRAND such as 3G, so you are talking crap."

        Surely it is possible, if they don't pay the reasonable fee? However in the case to which you are referring, memory suggests that the argument was over the definition of what does and does not constitute 'reasonable'. If Motorola are seeking to get the same terms from Apple as they give to everyone else and Apple refuse to pay because they want to pay less, even for a FRAND patent, then they have not legally licensed that patent.

        If Motorola, on the other hand, are seeking to charge Apple more than they charge everyone else, then Motorola are in the wrong and Apple should quite rightly refuse to pay it, and would have a substantial leg upon which to stand when they go to court.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Bloody Merkins

          "Surely it is possible, if they don't pay the reasonable fee? However in the case to which you are referring, memory suggests that the argument was over the definition of what does and does not constitute 'reasonable'. If Motorola are seeking to get the same terms from Apple as they give to everyone else and Apple refuse to pay because they want to pay less, even for a FRAND patent, then they have not legally licensed that patent."

          Of course, however the likes of Apple and Microsoft have deep pockets. The FTC are investigating Motorola Mobility for abuse of the FRAND agreements, and of course guess who owns Motorola Mobility.

          http://www.itproportal.com/2012/07/02/ftc-to-investigate-motorola-over-patent-abuses/

          http://www.itproportal.com/2012/04/03/european-commission-begins-investigation-into-motorola-patent-lawsuits/

          …so really it's Google trying to screw over Apple and Microsoft for access to 'essential' patents, but of course as it's not Apple on the accusing end that's just fine isn't it.

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Bloody Merkins

        " If Apple refuses to pay the fair and reasonable licensing fee then they are infringing on the FRAND patent"

        And if the fee is not fair or reasonable? Who is at fault then?

  42. DownUndaRob
    FAIL

    In all fairness

    The 'learned' judge should also ban the sale of the iPhone so as to create a level playing field, and also encourages both sides to conclude the legal action in a timely manner. As it stands Apple can now drag its pathetic, tantrum stamping feet, as long as it wants.

  43. Hans 1 Silver badge
    Boffin

    Apple vs the world

    Here you have the guyz over at apple who have managed to merge all these existing technologies (accelerometer, touch interface, dock, swipe - a UNIQUE experience at the time) into a phone and tab only to be copied by world and dog. I cannot tell most modern phones from one another, they all look the same. Even when they put their brand on there, they still look the same. Before Apple entered the market, all phones had nasty keyboards, reduced keyboards (where you had to press the 1 key seven times to get a 1!!!!!) or styluses, tiny screens with ridiculous resolutions etc. I have an old Fujitsu Siemens tablet, it looks like 1970's crap (grey, buttons all around) but was manufactured in 2005!!!

    Copying the looks of a Ferrari and putting the Ford logo on it doesn't make it "legal"!

    Apple revolutionized the phone/tab market so much that we had iphone killers come up and plummet for years until they copied the phone 1:1.

    Besides, I would like to see a new design, I am tired of the iphone looks, come on Google, Samsung et al, bring out a new design if you dare, oh wait, you can't ... just waiting for the new apple design ...

    1. MikeS

      Re: Apple vs the world

      >Besides, I would like to see a new design, I am tired of the iphone looks, come on Google, Samsung et al, bring out a new design if you dare, oh wait, you can't ... just waiting for the new apple design ...

      have you actually seen the Samsung Nexus phone, it looks nothing like the iphone, so perhaps you should buy one of those (that's asssuming you are not in the USA of course)

  44. This post has been deleted by its author

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019