Slashdot Mirror
UK Judge: Galaxy Tab "Not Cool" Enough To Infringe iPad
zacharye writes "U.K. Judge Colin Birss has ruled that Samsung can continue selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the region because the Android tablet is 'not as cool' as the iPad and therefore is unlikely to be confused with Apple's slate. Samsung's Galaxy line of tablets 'do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design,' Judge Birss said. 'They are not as cool.'"
Because that ruling really is for teh lulz. This quote is likely to become an internet meme all on its own, with thousands of pictures of cats sitting on Samsung tablets and half-witted captions about "keepn warrm on mah galaxy bcuz itz not cool"
John
That was a pretty sick burn on the judge's part.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." Feynman
The rule is fine, but the logic used is horrible. Instead of pointing out how obviously screwed up the patent system is, we see this: A special case exception based on an opinion, which is most obviously not law and can not be translated in to law!
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Ow! Talk about a back-handed compliment. Think not being cool will hurt sales?
"The iPad is not as HIP! Maaaan"
-- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
Come'on when was the last time you've ever heard the words "not as cool" coming from a bunch of silly looking serious magistrates (with those funky white hairpieces).
It's a funny image.
If you want a device that has no controls except the touch screen itself, you are going to wind up with a screen surrounded by a narrow frame. The only choice is color, and black has been a safe bet as a trendy color for decades.
So the usual question: what else should a tablet look like?
Design patents aren't.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
but they are cool enough.
It would be interesting to get one, but not by paying UK prices.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
So, when Apple inevitably appeals the decision, can we take that as a de facto statement that they do not, in fact, find their own products to be "cool" or posses "understated and extreme simplicity" in their designs?
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
News sources report a mad rush of hipsters trying to buy a Galaxy Tab before it becomes cool.
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
There are those who still insist Apples are inherently better for graphics, which really isn't true anymore.
I loved the concept of Android, but used an iPhone for the past 3 years. Android has really come a long way in that time. It should be noted that most iOS 5 features existed in Android first. The notion that Android isn't as cool, slick or intuitive as iOS was once true, but no longer is.
I made the switch to a Galaxy S III and it actually exceeded my expectations. The OS is very intuitive, slick and looks really good. The surprising thing is I think the typography is better, which is an area where Apple normally excels. Roboto is just a great looking scalable font.
I find great features every day that I didn't even know about. For example, I set an alarm on my phone to take a nap. It slowly woke me up with soft music like a zen alarm clock.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
See the "Cool Bikes" episode... he thinks he's the judge of Galactic Cool Court...
As someone who hopes that the fragmented android market can compete with apple's patent war...
We'll take this victory.. a sour victory... but we'll take it.
Besides, I like other formats besides mp4.
Now the judge should go for the jugular and rule that Apple can't ever sue anybody again because of form based on the 'coolness factor'. The judge should cite Fonzie as prior art.
You can't handle the truth.
...I'm not sure if the judge should be moderated +1,000,000 Funny of -1,000,000 Flamebait. Either way, this oughta be good.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
I wish apple would get on with innovating and stop all this nonsense.
How about taking the rounded corners option or rounded rectangle. Anyone can easily draw a rounded rectangle in a drawing app for the last, what, 15 years? Apple is blowing smoke out their asses.
-SaNo
Imagining a judge almost like the one in the Regular Show episode "Cool Bikes"
Go to any Apple store, and you'll find that it is full of people talking to the so-called Geniuses.
While it's nice that Apple has the so-called Geniuses, the fact that they exist, and are always busy, strongly indicates that the notion that Apple products are intuitive and easy to use is false.
I remember back when my boss's wife got an iphone. She couldn't figure out how to use it, and I had to spend an hour with her showing her how to use it.
Who uses a tablet from ten feet away?
At least according to Wikipedia, a design patent covers the ornamental aspects of a design and not the functional ones. I wonder which parts of apples iPad design are purely ornamental. Is there anything I can take away from the design without sacrificing functionality?
Or is either the Wikipedia entry or my understanding of the English language incorrect?
So Apple has the rights to "cool." Is that patent, trademark, or copyright? Or does the UK has some other category where a "registered design" means something important?
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
""Samsung had requested this voluntary trial in September 2011, in order to oppose Apple's ongoing efforts to reduce consumer choice and innovation in the tablet market through their excessive legal claims and arguments. Apple has insisted that the three Samsung tablet products infringe several features of Apple's design right, such as 'slightly rounded corners,' 'a flat transparent surface without any ornamentation,' and 'a thin profile.' "However, the High Court dismissed Apple's arguments by referring to approximately 50 examples of prior art, or designs that were previously created or patented, from before 2004. These include the Knight Ridder (1994), the Ozolin (2004), and HP's TC1000 (2003). The court found numerous Apple design features to lack originality, and numerous identical design features to have been visible in a wide range of earlier tablet designs from before 2004."
They might be cool (after all, the target market values form over function) but they aren't original!
No, the logic is excellent. You think it's bad logic because the judge is using it to make a silly argument. Sure, it's a silly argument but the logic is fine, because the logic isn't there for the purpose of supporting a good argument. It's designed to be a "straight man" line and set up a certain funny response, which it does well. Given the purpose of the statement, the logic is sound.
Judge: "Samsung's tablet isn't as cool as Apple's."
Apple: "Yes it is!"
It's like a variation on the old "They said you weren't fit to sleep with the pigs, but I stuck up for you and said you were" joke. I realize serious money and freedom are on the line here, but maybe just this once it's for the best that all that stuff takes a back seat to comedic concerns. I mean, let's think about what's really important to us all.
That IPad they show in TFA is SO COOL!!
Privacy is terrorism.
As the Galaxy Tab can't double as a hand/lap warmer it's obviously completely unrelated product, aimed at a different demographic.
Luckily I stopped using Apple products when they became evil. I don't need any tablet, but if I were to buy one, it would be a Samsung Galaxy. Why? Because I switched from Mac to Linux a few years ago and can write programs for Android on my computer without having to buy an insanely expensive Apple laptop with eye-hurting glare screen first.
Oh, right... There's no such thing as a Samsung fanboi.
I think the headline should have been "Placing Apple fanboy judge in case backfires on Apple" :-P
Judge says that only simple people use Apple products. Anything more than one button at a time confuses them.
What? I said I was trolling...
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
Never thought I'd see Slashdot seriously link to an Onion article and- what? Really?
...the President was totally being more cooler than faggy Apple by shooting two machine guns free-hand into the ceiling of Da House of Reprezentin'
When you buy Kleenex or Band-Aids, or Scotch Tape, I think you are aware that you are not getting those brands if you just buy tissue, bandages or cellophane tape.
In this case, even if the two devices were identical, what would it matter? Confusing the product you see in use would be free advertizing for Apple, would it not? I mean, when YOU went out to buy a tablet to be cool, you would go shopping for one of those "iPad" things, right?
There should only be a legal case if a competing tablet's PACKAGING were deceptive. Buying a table is not like picking an apple off a pile of fruit (no pun intended). Nobody is going to "accidentally" purchase a "SAMSUNG GALAXY TAB" when they meant to get an "Apple iPad". Even monkey's can tell the difference in those groups of letters.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
What da faq guys. what does these law people know about tech except fking patent laws. He's not related to this field, he may be super,intelligent cool and all but not in tech field. Any way half good for Samsung.
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/46416/samsung-statement-apple-court-ruling-britain
I take it the fanbois had to all rally together to play down the whole prior art thing;
shill A: oh god apple got bitch slapped with 'unoriginality' and prior art!
shill B: meh, just write that the judge said the Galaxy tab wasn't cool enough and theyll lap it up like the bitches they are.
If the "not cool" legal argument holds up, they can break any patents they like.
"Your honor, it might look like we've broken thousands of valid patents, but come on - this tablet is clearly a piece of shit!"
I just realized in that last post I effectively am arguing IN FAVOR of allowing intellectual property, and disallowing anyone competing by making a similar product in a different way. But if Samsung can't make something that looks and acts like an iPad but which operates in a different way, then any software that does the same job should be considered infringing on whatever software there was before that, and any tool that does a job should be considered as infringing any tool that existed previously that did basically the same job, as a pair of Vice-Grips would be considered to infringe upon the IP of the makers of the original pair of pliers.
But at the same time, if you don't let anyone benefit from a new idea or research before letting other people just copy it, how will you incentivize coming up with new ideas? If you just depend on people coming up with ideas and sharing them out of a spirit of goodness, you will be excluding people who have to work full-time to make ends meet from innovating, because they'll be too busy doing their actual jobs, which will reduce the pace of innovation and invention to a crawl. If patents and IP had not existed, if, for example, other companies had been able to manufacture Edison's light bulb, and sell it on the market the week after they got one and reverse engineered it, without having to pay royalties, etc., we would NOT have flying cars today. Oh, wait...
But seriously, who can argue that we haven't benefited as a society, immensely from the existence of patents, historically? Would we have computers? Would Bell Labs have bothered if they knew that as soon as they started releasing semi-conductors, they'd have to compete with other companies that didn't have to invest in the time and effort to figure out how to make a transistor, they'd only have to spend the time and effort at reverse engineering one? And as a corollary, if we decide to pay inventors not by the invention, but a standard salary, how should we decide how much we pay each one? If I'm an inventor, would I work harder, and come up with better ideas if my income depended on it, or would I crank out one decent idea per year, and spend the rest of the time fishing, scratching my ass, or posting philosophical quandaries on slashdot? It's tough to say.
The market's ability to reward innovation is LOST if we don't allow for the artificial scarcity caused by patent and IP protection. This judge in the "UK" is helping make that happen with this nonsensical "ruling". If this is used as a precedent, then where are we? In 20 years, will we be the ones China can't stand because every time they come up with a good idea, we just rip it off and make it here cheaper, because we don't have to discover or invent, we just have to get our paws on one instance of something and reverse-engineer it? Will we as a nation go from being one full of engineers and thinkers to one of reverse-engineers and apes? (By ape, I mean one who copies, or "apes" something, not the taxonomical category.)
It's kinda important.
How uncomfortable was it for Samsung after the 3rd hour of the judge riffing on how uncool they were...haha
Yeah. That old, trusted argument of confusing patens and copyrights.
Rethinking email
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So you're telling me that you're going to accept a judges opinion on what's cool?
I'm friends with a few judges and retired judges, nice guys, but I'm not taking advice on what's cool from them.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
Apple's not cool anymore.
With their domination of the tablet market, the fanatical following of their phones, and the dominance of the portable music devices, not to mention their obsession with being cool; these factors can only lead me to one conclusion: Apple is not cool anymore.
Simply because its not cool to be part of the herd. And The Cult of the Fruit is one big herd.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
Apple is a widely recognised trade mark, so if it says "Samsung" on the back the chance of confusion is minimal.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
'do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design,' Judge Birss said. 'They are not as cool.'
He went on to say,
'Mmmm it feels so warm against my thigh. Mmmmm the Tab's vibrating motor does not... mmmmm... provide the same strength and vigor. MMmmmm Oh Gawd, that retina display! The sleek cool aluminum sliding across my finger tips! Oh! Oh! MMMMmmmm!'
He concluded his summary with these remarks,
'Uh uh uh uh...Mmmmm...iPad...iPad...iPad...!'
Most "Passing off" is subjective; I am reminded of the Chrysler that has been made to look like a Bentley. When asked if they would sue Chrysler for passing off, the Bentley spokesman is said to have replied "Nobody who might actually buy one of our cars would be fooled for an instant." This is a very similar example.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Can you say Brit Twit 10 times real fast?
Is the "coolness" a defining factor of what makes Harry Potter what it is?
Apple's trouble is when even a judge is calling their device "cool", and every metrosexual media employee has been indoctrinated into loving their devices, then they cease to be truly cool because they're just another lame fashion accessory. Too "cool" to be cool.
Cool is an elusive concept. Apple and their billion dollar marketing team are trying too hard to hold onto it. When a product becomes 100% mainstream and run of the mill it's become reality TV. So last decade.
The Galaxy Tab is the underdog and underdogs can be cool.
Your ad here.
So I'm guessing Apple is suing Samsung to make their gadget more cool?
They were feeling great about it actually, because being called uncool by a judge gives them legitimate cred for actually being cooler than apple.
My guess is they were breaking out The Macallan 25 after that ruling.
This just in, Apple requests courts to stop the sale of the HumanCentiPad
Have gnu, will travel.
Good news, everyone! I just broke out the Cool-O-Meter and iPad reads over 40 Megafonzies, while the Galaxy Tab registers a lower reading than Zoidberg.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
I hate much of this patent-bullshit and I also hate many of these radical patent haters, but this is just too good.
Not cool enough. Well, Apple should make a commercial out of this and rest its case otherwise. Mission accomplished.
Well?
To get the Galaxy Tab banned would they now have to prove that the Tab is cool enough to be confused with an iPad? Not that I think any tablet is particularly cool to be honest, they're all oversized media consumption devices. I prefer the older HP windows running tablets that were actual fully capable computers, but at the the time the price point was not consumer level at all... and as much as I can't stand Microsoft products (if I weren't a heavy PC gamer I wouldn't be using Windows) the Surface Pro might actually be a tablet I'd consider.
When will IP apologists give it up?
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
It means he uses buffer overflows and other exploits that Sumerian goddesses merely dabbled in, not to merely DoS other systems, but to get those systems to execute code which performs "buy x."
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I'll have you know that I am very cool. I listen to hip-hop.
This reminds me of when they banned K.C. Munchkin back in the day... they did it because he was so much cooler than Pac-Man.... especially Atari 2600 Pac-Man, which made little children cry.
"MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
Only in the world of patent litigation is being less "cool" considered an asset, rather than a liability.