Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Judge Grants Apple Injunction Against Samsung Galaxy Tab
Bill Dimm writes "Apple scores a win against Samsung over a design patent. U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh issued a ruling granting Apple's request for a preliminary injunction preventing Samsung from selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the United States. She wrote, 'Although Samsung has a right to compete, it does not have a right to compete unfairly by flooding the market with infringing products. ... While Samsung will certainly suffer lost sales from the issuance of an injunction, the hardship to Apple of having to directly compete with Samsung’s infringing products outweighs Samsung’s harm in light of the previous findings by the Court."
Does it really matter at this point?
The Galaxy Tab 10.1 is over a year old at this point and probably not selling in large volume any longer. Other competing Android tablets have already supplanted it in nearly every area and it will probably be replaced by Samsung's next offering in the near future. Unless this ruling also makes it a lot easier for Apple to get an injunction against any of Samsung's future tablet products, I can't see this making a difference at all.
I haven't read the ruling yet, but in several past cases, usually the injunction prevents Samsung from importing additional product. That would mean that inventory already in the US and in the hands of retailers could continue to be sold so long as Apple doesn't pursue legal action against retails, which they won't as many of those retailers also likely sell Apple's products. Given that Samsung will probably have a new tablet out soon, I can't see them even caring if they can't restock supplies of the Galaxy Tab 10.1.
I'd be interested in hearing the full implications from this ruling from someone more versed in the relevant laws. Is this victory as hollow as I think it is, or is there actually some value in this for Apple?
I.e. who's wining? Because customers are surely on the losing side.
No they aren't. Customers benefit from an endless system of appeals, cumbersome and byzantine laws regarding patents, trademarks and copyrights -- it saves them from having to buy a competitor's product, the poor bastards. The free market is dangerous and must be heavily regulated... unless it's labor, in which case we need as little regulation as possible because we have to remain competitive with third world sweat shops.
Everything you buy here is cheaper everywhere else, and it's because you're not working hard enough for your crumbs, Citizen.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I don't need a tablet ... But I almost feel obliged to buy a Galaxy. Out of sheer spite.
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
Especially when they are going after HTC for things like contextual menus. "Oh that's a phone number would you like to call it?" or I see you have two browsers which would you like to open the link in and would you like it to be your default?". It's not like that shit hasn't been around fir years ... oh wait.
"Don't Panic!"
for granting these silly patents.
Whilst the system allows for this sort of shite then companies are DUTY bound to protect the interests of their shareholders over what they see as a perfectly LEGAL asset.
Apple, MicroSoft and a gazillion others are all playing the system. If you want to stop this then
Fix the frigging system.
I'd like to abolish the USPTO and start again but I have no influence as I'm not a US Citizen so what I would like to do is an irrelevance.
Sitting 3K miles away, I do get the impression of Nero fiddling whilst Rome burns as I watch this M.A.D ness going on accross the pond.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
1993 Apple early tablet
2006 Samsung digital photo frame
2010 Apple iPad