Slashdot Mirror
Australian Federal Court Ends Ban On Samsung Galaxy Tab Sales
New submitter Dedokta writes "The Australian Federal Court has overturned the injunction placed on the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and ordered Apple to pay court costs. Apple has applied for an appeal with the Supreme Court, but Samsung is now free to sell the Galaxy Tab within Australia. Samsung is not off the hook yet, however; the full case to see if they have indeed infringed upon Apple patents is still to be heard early next year."
good.
What the courts really need to do is charge the party bringing the suit for _all_ costs to the other party. Real money might discourage patent trolls like Apple.
Apple have sought leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia, Australia's highest court. So it's like the Supreme Court in the US - there are no appeals beyond that, and they get to pick and choose what cases they take, so there is little certainty Apple will get anywhere appealing now.
(The Supreme Court usage in the summary is misleading to Australians because Supreme Courts here are State-based courts.)
This is a good ruling I think. You could readily buy the 10.1 here online (ebay etc) and have it shipped to you - cheaper than you'd pay a local retailer too. If there is merit to Apple's case they'll be able to get damages down the line for the patent infringement.
--Q
Apple managed to get a stay in the lifting of the ban until 4pm Friday, to give them enough time to get an urgent High Court hearing, so the way isn't clear for Samsung just yet.
Except for the inevitable: win. The patent system, and to a lesser extent intellectual property as a whole, is causing severe problems in several industries worldwide. Technology it seems is suffering more than any other, and it's obvious why; with emerging markets such as smartphones and tablets there's everything to play for. Ecosystems haven't had time to settle down or seize the consumer yet, hardware is rapidly advancing and the field in general is in a state of flux. If you can gain dominance now and maintain it for as long as it takes for the market to settle down then you'll effectively monopolise it for the long-term, just as Microsoft managed with Windows and IE. The stakes are considerably higher too. Mobiles are growing so much faster than either the desktop or notebook markets and mobiles are so much more deeply ingrained into the average consumer's everyday life that quite frankly the potential for growth, both in profit and mindshare, is huge. With all this, it's scarcely surprising that companies are playing dirty. I only hope that this is the beginning of a backlash against Apple; when one company is a clear winner, that makes the consumer as much into the loser as any competitor.
The court also ruled that consumers are allowed to take a single bite into an apple so long as they bite from the bottom.
By the way, I'm posting from a samsung, and was just on an apple at work.... reminds me of the OWS photo demonstrating how people cannot function in modern society with the dichotomy of "support the oligopolies or be dysfunctional".. The photo where people protesting corporations had corporate products.... We are so screwed.
Also, I find it interesting that in Australia, their supreme court takes cases like this. That could just be me being american though :/
The supreme court is the highest court in each state, but below the federal court (I.E. Supreme Court of Western Australia or Supreme Court of Victoria). But the submitter had it wrong, this case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia who normally deals with corporate issues, trade practices, Industrial Relations and the like.
Apple have made an appeal to the High Court of Australia which is the highest court in Australia. The High Court has no mandate to automatically hear cases, so if the High Court feel's Apple is wasting their time any appeal will be denied.
What's important about this victory is that the evidence was heard by 3 Justices, not just one as was the case with the first injunction hearing and it was found by the three Justices that the original injunction was in error. The case still stands, Apple is still suing Samsung over alleged patent infringement, this hearing was only over the injunction. But this gives us an indication that there is some sanity in the Australian court system.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
> The supreme court is the highest court in each state
This is only sort of true (at least in NSW, but I assume elsewhere too?).
You can appeal a decision of the NSW Supreme Court to the NSW Court of Appeal. However, the Court of Appeal is a branch of the Supreme Court in the they're established.
Many corporate issues, trade practices and IR cases are also heard in State courts. It depends on the case in point .. (the NSW Dept of Fair Trading for instance, brings its cases in NSW. Many companies sue each other over contractual disputes in the state courts etc.)
--Q
Just to be more of a pedant, Supreme Courts aren't really below the Federal Court. You can't appeal a decision of a Supreme Court to the Federal Court. They're different jurisdictions.
--Q
Quick update on this: http://www.news.com.au/technology/tablets/samsung-wins-australian-appeal-case-in-apple-tablet-war/story-fn6vigfp-1226210226842 They can't actually start selling yet, and apple are trying to overturn the overturned decision. And why would you get a Galaxy tab, especially now that the Transformer is out and about
Possibly, but I think the one good thing that came from this for Samsung is the free publicity. Geeks all know about the Transformer Prime, but average consumers don't and probably won't find out about it for ages because Asus don't really advertise much.
Meanwhile Samsung has been all over the papers and mainstream news sites and it has been obvious to a lot of them that Apple is frightened that the Galaxy might be better than an iPad if the comments on the (very pro Apple) Fairfax news are anything to go by. The whole episode has created a bit of an anti Apple backlash and I wouldn't be surprised if it plays out to Samsung's advantage in the medium term.
I don't therefore I'm not.