Slashdot Mirror
Apple Can't Block US Sales of Samsung Devices
An anonymous reader snips this good news (for Samsung fans) from Edible Apple "In April of 2011, Apple kicked off what would soon become a global and complex series of litigation disputes when it sued Samsung in the U.S. claiming that its line of Galaxy smartphones and tablets infringed upon Apple's intellectual property and were nothing more than 'slavish' copies. As part of its suit, Apple requested a preliminary injunction that would bar Samsung from selling said products in the U.S. This past Friday, Judge Lucy Koh denied Apple's motion for a preliminary injunction."
No judgement, but a denial of a preliminary injunction that would presumably prevent Samsung from "further irreparably damaging Apple's Brand, image, copyright and patents".
Apple's contention within the case is that Samsung is misappropriating Apple's intellectual property, namely patents related to the design of the iPhone devices, user interface designs, icons, images, and methods of operation.
Samsung's contention is that "there are only so many ways to build a smartphone", and that the elements that Apple is complaining about are either "too broad" or are obvious, and thereby not enforceable.
The judge in this particular case has decided that Apple had not presented sufficient evidence in pre-trial proceedings that would show that Apple would be irreparably damaged through Samsung continuing to sell the products in question within the United States.
Thirty four characters live here.
Plain and simple.
"Oh my god, their tablet is like ours! Ban it!"
Phone Arena:
Apple gives Samsung advice on non-patent infringing designs
In order to disprove Samsung’s claim, Apple needed to provide alternate design options to prove that Samsung did, in fact, blatantly copy Apple’s design. Some samples from these suggestions include:
Smartphones:
* Front surface that isn't black.
* Overall shape that isn't rectangular, or doesn't have rounded corners.
* Display screens that aren't centered on the front face and have substantial lateral borders.
* Non-horizontal speaker slots.
* Front surfaces with substantial adornment.
* No front bezel at all.
Tablets:
* Overall shape that isn't rectangular, or doesn't have rounded corners.
* Thick frames rather than a thin rim around the front surface.
* Front surface that isn't entirely flat.
* Profiles that aren't thin.
* Cluttered appearance.
They also have a great depiction of what such a tablet may look like
Apple is scared to death, because they know Samsung is making a better product.
Apple can control its sheeple users, but they have no right to control other companies or the right to block buyers from the competition.
When will Apple be called out for doing all the horrible shit people think Microsoft does?
Maybe you didn't read all of the article either. The judge felt that Apple's patent was invalid. Meaning, the judge didn't "agree with Apple on almost all points, except the one . . . "
Nice spin though.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
What a bunch of horseshit. It would be come immediately clear how stupid those guidelines were if Apple ang Samsung were both car designers squabbling over a car model. I mean, you don't see Bentley suing Chrysler.
When you're pimping a Chrysler, people know it's a Chrysler. Despite the similarities, there's no way in hell anybody with half a brain would confuse a Chrysler with a Bentley. And Bentley, being classy, is aware of that and that suing Chrysler would be a very tacky and un-classy move.
Apple could learn a few things from that little case study, but they want to be tacky and don't have enough faith in consumers to be able to distinguish the two.
Oh, I just clicked preview and saw that you're now at +5 funny and I've been trolled. I may be too dumb to get sarcasm, but I'm still not dumb enough to confuse a Galaxy with an iPad.
this is how Hitler was allowed to invade the Sudetenland, annex Austria, and crash those planes into the Trade Towers.
>do they make ceiling fans or something?
They do make fans. And per ROK specifications, they come with timers.
Because, you know, fan death is a leading killer of Koreans.
--
BMO
That's because I was in a hurry and couldn't readily find a picture of an older, boxier Bentley. Here are the obvious similarities:
- The headlights are recessed from the Grille. Think of the center grille section as kind of a "nose" between the "eyes."
- The fender areas are tightly "wrapped" around the wheel wells and there is a small distance between the top of the wheel and the hood. Also note that both vehicles have big, spoked rims and small street-tires, all contributing to both models' "low-slung" appearance.
- On both vehicles, the angle of the front windshield is larger than the angle of the back windshield, and the roof itself is sloping downward toward the rear.
- Both vehicles are black with silver trim, and are generally intended to evoke a luxury appearance. Chrysler is obviously paying homage to Bentley.
- An obvious difference between the two pics I provided is that the Chrysler's grille extends to the bottom, and there are fog lights on its bumper. However, using this bentley pic as a reference, once again there is more similarity.
- While we're talking about the fronts, take into consideration the logos of the Bentley and the Chrysler here. Both logos are encapsulated in an oval, adorned with wings, and located on the top center of the grille.
I was saying earlier that Apple should appreciate that others are paying homage to them instead of trying to stop their shipments. It is apparent to anybody with half a brain which is which, especially when the GUIs are visible.
If Apple still wanted to stop Samsung, they could have at least compared the radius of the corners rather than just saying, "rounded corners," for example.
Looks like you've got Samsung's lawyers beat, then: Even Samsungâ(TM)s Lawyers Can't Tell the Difference Between Its Tablet and an iPad
You act like that's Samsung's problem.
I wonder if they (or Apple's lawyers) could tell this apart from the front of the Galaxy Tab... because if not, Apple has a serious problem, because that's a Samsung Digital Photo Frame from 2006, predating the iPad by 4 years.
Now, the back looks nothing like a Galaxy Tab, but that's not likely to be the part the court was showing when asking the question.
Here's a tip: If you rip off someone's design, don't sue the person you ripped off for ripping off said design in a different product.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011