Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Spanish Firm Wins Tablet Case Against Apple

Posted by samzenpus on from the and-the-sue-goes-on dept.

pmontra writes "A Spanish company has won a legal case against Apple and will be able to sell an Android tablet that Apple had claimed infringes on the iPad patent. It is now seeking damages from Apple for a temporary seizure of its products by Spanish customs. Furthermore they are pursuing an antitrust complaint against Apple, alleging abusive anticompetitive behavior."

14 of 151 comments (clear)

  1. All I can say is by Rexdude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Excellent!.

    --
    "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
    1. Re:All I can say is by siddesu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And all I can add is:

      • there should be stiff penalties for frivolous lawsuits and
      • here's one more piece of solid proof that "IP" is mostly used to stiffle competition and innovation, not to promote it.
    2. Re:All I can say is by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Informative

      there should be stiff penalties for frivolous lawsuits and

      There are, if you can prove that its frivolous and/or using the court systems as an anti-competitive hammer. If the court really decides that youre a nuisance, they can nail you pretty hard.

    3. Re:All I can say is by Sique · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are. If a company is requesting the (temporary) ban on importing or selling a competitor's product, it has to feet the bill if it doesn't prevail in court. Basicly Apple has (from a legal point of view) bought all the potential shipping of the competing product for the time being.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    4. Re:All I can say is by JAlexoi · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, they don't have to buy anything. They have to pay for the lost sales. I just hope that the German lawsuit falls through for Apple and they actually have to pay a lot. Samsung is no NT-K in volumes and price is comparable to iPad.

    5. Re:All I can say is by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 4, Informative
      Too bad that this is mostly bullshit: http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/11/translation-and-explanation-of-spanish.html

      Based on what the document says, I think the implications of this case for Apple's enforcement of its design-related rights are probably much less wide-ranging than it initially appeared. It seems that even in Spain Apple could still assert its iPad design-related rights under civil law. Also, the nature of Apple's involvement may have been limited to that of an initial complainant (who according to nt-k also filed an indictment) as opposed to that of a party litigating a case all the way through. That's what my sources say, and it's possible.

      IOW Apple didn't lose the case because they weren't really involved.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
  2. Live by the sword, die by the sword by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We can only hope a few more judgements like these get the whole industry to settle down and allow a little more leeway in advancing tablet design.

    If lots of smaller companies like this start fighting back now that they see they can win, the cost of legal action all over the globe will hopefully make so little financial sense Apple will stop suing others, and with them desisting the other companies can back away too.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Live by the sword, die by the sword by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately Apple has almost unlimited cash reserves and the stakes are very high, so I doubt they will relent. If they can kill or cripple all competing products it will have huge financial ramifications for years, and not just for tablets by all future devices they can patent. Pumping a few hundred million into open warfare via the courts is easily justifiable.

      The best solution would be for the EU to revise patent law to prevent its abuse. For that to happen some big EU companies will have to be attacked with clearly ridiculous patents, e.g. Airbus falling foul of a Boeing patent on "cylindrical flying machine with forward facing observation glass" or being forced to replace "rounded rectangular rubber rolling devices" with sled skis.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  3. Pro-tip: Read the retraction before posting... by IrrepressibleMonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The third article has an update stating that Apple didn't litigate this case, but MAY have been behind the original complaint. Surely we need something a bit more substantial than this before we break out the standard pro/anti-Apple rhetoric?

    1. Re:Pro-tip: Read the retraction before posting... by X.25 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The third article has an update stating that Apple didn't litigate this case, but MAY have been behind the original complaint. Surely we need something a bit more substantial than this before we break out the standard pro/anti-Apple rhetoric?

      Of course, Apple was not behind this. It was my dog.

      Because he's known to sue everyone (using retarded design patent claims), and he is gaining a lot from this.

      Bad dog.

  4. Re:About time ... by slydder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't have a problem with the fact that Apple defends its IP.

    I do have a problem with HOW they defend their IP.

    Do misunderstand me here. I am NOT an Apple fan. I have a lot of friends that love their iThings and I am happy for them. That said, I wouldn't let them use my computer either. It's a good thing the iThings are available for those not Technically savvy.

    But I do want the option to be able to purchase something that is NOT an iThing and also has the ability to allow me to do what "I" want to do, however I want to do it.

    Whether patents are good or not is a non-issue. Of course they are good. As long as they are based on common sense. And as the entire world can see this is NOT the case and thus needs to be addressed.

    Also think 1 second (if you can) what the mobile phone / smartphone sector looked like BEFORE the iPhone and AFTER the iPhone.

    And when did the E70 come out? hmmm. the E75? don't know about you but the only thing that the iphone brought with it was marketing.

    --
    IT Admins Group: Where you decide the content
  5. Here's the link to a non PAYWALLED news source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.totaltele.com/view.aspx?ID=468916

  6. Actually, the case hasn't been dismissed... by BlueScreenO'Life · · Score: 4, Informative
    ...but suspended, awaiting further evidence.

    Sobreseimiento (as in the original report) != dismissal

    Just nitpicking, though. I don't think there is a case.

  7. Frivolous patents and lawsuits by waterbear · · Score: 5, Interesting

    >> "there should be stiff penalties for frivolous lawsuits"

    > There are, if you can prove that its frivolous and/or using the court systems as an anti-competitive hammer. If the court really decides that youre a nuisance, they can nail you pretty hard.

    But it's so costly and difficult to run that particular legal marathon, hardly anybody has ever completed the course. (Really, has anybody _ever_ actually completed it?)

    The problem is more fundamental: "The grant of invalid patents is a serious evil insomuch as it tends to the restraint of trade and to the embarrassment of honest traders and inventors..."
    That was the Fry Committee in 1901, recognizing that fundamental truth. The same applies, of course, to other forms of IP as well, not only patents. But which policymakers and legislators in power remember that now?

    -wb-