Apple blocks rival's tablet from entering Australia

[BlueRaven]

Originally Posted by gregpolk

I can understand the Samsung Galaxy S does somewhat copy the 'vibe' of the iPhone 3G/S in its design style, but how does the Galaxy Tab? Unless you're claiming you can own the rights to having rounded corners on a rectangular device you hold and a black bezel around the screen? They certainly can't claim the tablet form as their own.

+1 this, and +1 the poster of the Mabo courtroom scene.

I'm not an intellectual property lawyer, but it's getting f*kn ridiculous. How far can patenting a concept/vibe /"look'n'feel"/design legally go?

"It's got a 'Home' button bottom centre, that was our idea, see you in court".
"It's got a touchscreen, that was our idea, see you in court".
"It's got rounded corners, that was our idea, see you in court".
.
.
"It's a mobile computing/communications device in a tablet/smartphone form factor, that was our idea, see you in court".

I bloody well hope not.

[aokman]

i dont see a problem with it to be honest lol, the galaxy S was a blatant copy of an iphone and Samsung knew it, it copied everything from the bezel design to the interface screen. They even used a iphone 4 layout for their new TV remotes lol...

This has nothing to do with apple fanboy etc... i just dont understand why its automatically apple that are the bad guys when other big companies copy their designs, what they cant afford to come up with something original? Last time i looked there was no fuss over chinese knockoff companies being chased for doing stuff like this?

that said i cant see much in the tablet that has been copied but maybe its some of the underlying technologies such as gestures etc...

[round]

Originally Posted by elvis

Which is highly ironic, given that they were intended to be used to protect the little guys.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letters_patent

i dont think there has ever been a time that they were intended to protect the little guys.

granting special privileges to the upper classes and now corporations has always been the status quo.

but that is the way it is sold to us today by big corporations that it help innovation.

you can point to many different examples specially in software where there is totally a business case without the need for patients.

look at Linux, if their was no patient system they would be doing a 100x better then they are today, and still offer the same service, Ubuntu has a great business model that doesn't rely on government protection

[stmok]

Samsung releases a statement...
=> http://ausdroid.net/2011/08/02/samsu...federal-court/

Apple Inc. filed a complaint with the Federal Court of Australia involving a Samsung GALAXY Tab 10.1 variant that Samsung Electronics had no plans of selling in Australia. No injunction was issued by the court and the parties in the case reached a mutual agreement which stipulates that the variant in question will not be sold in Australia.

A Samsung GALAXY Tab 10.1 for the Australian market will be released in the near future.

This undertaking does not affect any other Samsung smartphone or tablet available in the Australian market or other countries.

Samsung will continue to actively defend and protect our intellectual property to ensure our continued innovation and growth in the mobile communication business.

...Storm in a teacup.

[BuuBox]

Originally Posted by stmok

...Storm in a teacup.

It was getting reported worldwide. I can't help but find some satisfaction in that as the articles were largely negative towards Apple.

That said, Samsung make Apple look like a small company in many respects, so it's not exactly a David and Goliath battle.

[elvis]

Originally Posted by round

i dont think there has ever been a time that they were intended to protect the little guys.

I disagree. There was a solid period in America's past when they were used for positive reasons, and America saw an explosion of inventors and inventions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...tes_patent_law

There was also a common-sense approach to patents, where the amount of time one had to capitalise on a patent was quite reasonable (e.g.: 14 years). Today we're seeing big business gobbling up patents and trying to extend them to several hundred years.

The difference, of course, was that there were no megacorps back then, and thus nobody to abuse the system. Today it's obvious that the difference in scale between a small business and some of America's biggest corporations means that those with (by comparison) unlimited funds can win legal disputes over patents regardless of whether they are right or wrong.

[round]

Originally Posted by elvis

I disagree. There was a solid period in America's past when they were used for positive reasons, and America saw an explosion of inventors and inventions.

i think the most damning evidence of the effects of patents was the effect of the removal of patents on aircraft after WW1

seeing that america actually created the airplane, and could not build their own craft to take to WW1, and the amount of competition and profitability & innovation in that industry without protections of patents up until the reinstatement in the 1970's

since then we have seen a mega consolidation in the field and stagnant innovation

There was also a common-sense approach to patents, where the amount of time one had to capitalise on a patent was quite reasonable (e.g.: 14 years).

how useful is code after 14 years?

that really is ownership till the death of something in the software field.

personally i just object to the ownership of thought.

[|BeFoRe|]

Apple are only trying to block it, as Samsung will then be able to say they sell the lightest, thinner tablet

There just starting to get a little worries as those new samnsung phones are selling like hot-cakes, And there getting real close to iphone marketshare. And now there releasing that new galaxy tablet Apple are panicking now.

[BlueRaven]

Originally Posted by |BeFoRe|

And there getting real close to iphone marketshare.

I have to disagree with this statement. Dunno which planet you live on, but here on Earth every man & his dog, his wife, plus their three kids all have an iPhone. This is by the evidence of my own eyes, amongst my friends, business associates and clientele.

In comparison, I can name about three people that have a Galaxy, and I obviously move in geek circles where Android has had a pretty quick take-up.

As far as John Q. Public is concerned, if you want a touchscreen smartphone, you go and buy an iPhone. I don't see that changing any time soon, no matter how hard other vendors try. Everyone will keep buying i-this and i-that because everyone else already has i-this and i-that, and so the great juggernaut rolls relentlessly onward crushing all in its path.

[dephilile]

Originally Posted by <BlueRaven>

I have to disagree with this statement. Dunno which planet you live on, but here on Earth every man & his dog, his wife, plus their three kids all have an iPhone. This is by the evidence of my own eyes, amongst my friends, business associates and clientele.

Every man and his dog might have an iPhone at the moment, but a lot of the people I know with iPhones are looking at replacing them with something else.

There is also this evidence.
http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/2...ily_newsletter

There is a lot of room for growth in the smart phone market, but it looks pretty bad when apple is not growing anywhere near as quickly as samsung.

"In the second quarter, Samsung achieved 500 per cent year on year growth in smartphone shipments. Apple saw 142 per cent growth. Samsung shipped approximately 19 million smartphones, whilst Apple shipped 1.3 million more. If Samsung keeps this pace up, when the next quarterly results emerge it will have overtaken Apple with plenty of breathing space between the two as well."

[aetae79]

Originally Posted by <BlueRaven>

I have to disagree with this statement. Dunno which planet you live on, but here on Earth every man & his dog, his wife, plus their three kids all have an iPhone. This is by the evidence of my own eyes, amongst my friends, business associates and clientele.

In comparison, I can name about three people that have a Galaxy, and I obviously move in geek circles where Android has had a pretty quick take-up.

As far as John Q. Public is concerned, if you want a touchscreen smartphone, you go and buy an iPhone. I don't see that changing any time soon, no matter how hard other vendors try. Everyone will keep buying i-this and i-that because everyone else already has i-this and i-that, and so the great juggernaut rolls relentlessly onward crushing all in its path.

dont know which planet u live in but i think u r totally lost.. i guess there are alot more out there than what your eyes can see (i myself is an iphone owner )
heres a global numbers of phones and smartphones
apple accounts 18.5% and samsung accounts 17.5%..
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...to-decline.ars

[BlueRaven]

Interesting links, thanks.

I retract my statement obviously, didn't realise that the Galaxy has been so successful for Samsung. In my defence, being asked "will it work with my iPhone" dozens of times per week perhaps artificially inflated my idea of Apple's market share. My apologies.

I just seem to see the damn things everywhere, but I guess one person's experience is no real indication of global trends.

I personally own a Nokia N97, and wish I didn't because it's possibly the most frustrating and clunky touchscreen I've ever used. Which makes Nokia's enormous share seem crazy, but I guess they are still riding the coat-tails of their pre-smartphone success?

[|BeFoRe|]

This is interesting. Apple really don't want Samsung to build hype up with Advertisement's etc.

Lawyers for the two parties adjourned for negotiations, and emerged with an agreement that would see Samsung provide Apple Australia with three of the units which would appear in the Australian market, seven days before the product's intended release date. The agreement also saw Samsung agree not to promote, market, generate interest in or ship the device before the order of the court or the resolution of the case, freezing its plans for an Australian release.

3) Until the expiration of the seven-day period, referred to in paragraph two above, without any admission of liability, respondents or any of their servants or agents will not:
a) advertise,
b) seek expression of interest from consumers in relation to,
c) sell,
d) authorise or facilitate the advertisement by third parties of,
e) otherwise supply to consumers,

the device referred to [Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1] in paragraph two above.
Samsung later issued a statement saying that despite the litigation, Australian consumers could expect to see a Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the near future, adding that the tablet that Apple is complaining about — the US version — is the wrong one.

http://www.cnet.com.au/samsung-promi...-339319729.htm

Samsung really don't need to worry about spending much $ on advertisement's etc now, because Apple is doing a fine job with all the publicity there making with this whole Apple V Samsung patent / temper tantrum thing going on.

[Zee]

Originally Posted by aokman

i dont see a problem with it to be honest lol, the galaxy S was a blatant copy of an iphone and Samsung knew it, it copied everything from the bezel design to the interface screen. They even used a iphone 4 layout for their new TV remotes lol...

This has nothing to do with apple fanboy etc... i just dont understand why its automatically apple that are the bad guys when other big companies copy their designs, what they cant afford to come up with something original? Last time i looked there was no fuss over chinese knockoff companies being chased for doing stuff like this?

that said i cant see much in the tablet that has been copied but maybe its some of the underlying technologies such as gestures etc...

The Samsung Galaxy S and SII look nothing like iPhones. Maybe at a quick glance, if you're not paying attention...

The Samsung Galaxy Ace, on the other hand...

And remember, LG released a touch screen phone with "iPhone" form factor about a month before the iPhone was released... Perhaps Apple copied LG?

Z...

[aetae79]

Originally Posted by <BlueRaven>

Interesting links, thanks.

I retract my statement obviously, didn't realise that the Galaxy has been so successful for Samsung. In my defence, being asked "will it work with my iPhone" dozens of times per week perhaps artificially inflated my idea of Apple's market share. My apologies.

I just seem to see the damn things everywhere, but I guess one person's experience is no real indication of global trends.

I personally own a Nokia N97, and wish I didn't because it's possibly the most frustrating and clunky touchscreen I've ever used. Which makes Nokia's enormous share seem crazy, but I guess they are still riding the coat-tails of their pre-smartphone success?

No need for an apology iphones more easily noticed than other phones.
I guess samsung was smart to quickly move into smartphone market and nibble up all nokia, rims share with apple. (they are big company and No1 or the top producer of LCD, AMOLED screens, flash memories, smartphone APs etc so they can quickly put together highly spec phones)
ive read that nokia's smartphones are mostly strong in emerging markets but they are also loosing grounds to ZTE and others there