Apple Loses One vs Samsung Down Under

Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Register.

News
50.25% (Neutral)
Member Topic Starter

2011-11-26T09:51:27Z

The Patent Wars continue unabated. This round is an uneven legal result for Apple; it just won a patent infringement case against handset maker HTC but may lose an appeal by Samsung in Australia.

In the former case, the U.S. International Trade Commission found that Apple did not violate S3 Graphics’ (a subsidiary of HTC) image compression technology. In that special poetry only found in legal notices, the ITC delivered its verdict with the document title, “Notice of final commission determination of no violation and termination of the investigation.”

However, things aren’t going as smoothly for Apple down under. Although the company successfully convinced an Australian court to ban sales of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 last month until the patent mess between Apple and Samsung was settled, an appeals court isn’t satisfied with the first judge’s ruling.

According to a Bloomberg report, Federal Court Justice Lindsay Foster believes that the original judge in the case (Federal Court Justice Annabelle Bennett) was a little too fair toward Apple and not fair enough toward Samsung. The logic put forth here is that Apple has a weak patent case and therefore not an especially strong chance of winning its suit against Samsung, which Bennett was supposed to take into consideration when imposing an [censored]ction and, in Foster’s estimation, failed to do properly.

The court is expected to make a decision this coming week about lifting the ban or not.

or Register a new forum account

LLeCompte
50.25% (Neutral)
Member

2011-11-26T12:49:43Z

I'm glad this is getting cleared up. The gaxaly tab doesn't even look like the ipad, plus apple is trying to say that they have a patient on a rectangle. The whole war itself needs to stop.

TPerez
50.25% (Neutral)
Member

2011-11-26T13:17:19Z

I'm glad to see someone in the legal community is seeing through Apple's weak attempts at stifling its competition. It's my understanding that a case may be (slightly) strong enough to take to trial but for an [censored]ction to be approved, the standard is higher. Tablets can only appear so different. It's what's inside that counts. In the past few years, I've seen laptops that look similar to macbooks when they're closed. I don't recall Apple suing those companies. Once one opens the PC laptop, and fires up Windows, anyone can see the difference. I'm sure it's the same with the Galaxy Tab.

Something that just hit me... Does Apple believe consumers are STUPID and can't tell the difference in tablets?

gazd1
50.25% (Neutral)
Member

2011-11-26T14:58:43Z

Good to see something different than the apple way of thinking. Also I hope that there is no exchange of money under the bench so to speak to help out apple or either way to tell the truth.

gloriad1
50.25% (Neutral)
Member

2011-11-27T12:02:59Z

Well! You never know. Maybe this could be the start of Apple losing several more court cases.

gloriad1
50.25% (Neutral)
Member

2011-11-27T13:04:57Z

I bet ya, gazd1 that you came to this here news article post to purve on the good looking brunette.[H]

omegadraco
50.25% (Neutral)
Member

2011-11-27T14:13:41Z

In all honesty Apple should have to pay damages to Samsung if it is proven that they did not infringe on Apples patents. Think about losing a months worth of sales.

jonation
50.25% (Neutral)
Member

2011-11-29T11:50:09Z

why cant any of this just be a UI pattern just as much as drag n drop? who patented the radio button?

RTietjens
50.25% (Neutral)
Member

2011-11-29T14:10:18Z

@TPerez: Apple believes that anyone who is likely to buy an Apple product is stupid, and therefor might not be able to tell the difference between the tablets (or between s[censored] polish and dung, for that matter).

I should think fact would be self-evident: Their entire Marketing strategy is based on selling shiny objects to ignorant savages at exorbitant prices.

Der Meister
98% (Exalted)
Advanced Member

2011-11-29T14:34:26Z

#10

RTietjens wrote:
I should think fact would be self-evident: Their entire Marketing strategy is based on selling shiny objects to ignorant savages at exorbitant prices.

+1 to you

Important Information:

The HotHardware Forums uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Subscribe to HH News Alerts!	Preview
Email Address