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.'"

Comments

Is the judge a member of Anon?

[plover]

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"

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[thej1nx]

Are you kidding? This is hilarious!! It puts Apple in the classic catch-22 position. Either they now seriously argue that Android tablets are "every bit as cool" as its IPAD devices... or they agree with the Judge and abandon their law suit. That just might be one shrewd Judge! Either way, Apple's options suck right now!

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[erroneus]

I think it's a ruling that lots of people should be happy with... theoretically. It certainly does call Apple on its case that "it might be mistaken for..." Clearly, the judge sees the two devices as different enough not to be mistaken for the other and that's at the core of what their [current] suit is about.

Now, that's not to say they won't turn around and sue for some other idiotic thing, but at least that's one less thing they can sue about... in the UK. Good thing the judges tend to pay attention to what the others rule and take those ruling into consideration.

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[PylonHead]

Honestly, I went the other way on this one.

Samsung has just had their product ruled demonstrably inferior by a court of law. Not exactly a marketing message they want celebrate.

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[AmiMoJo]

I bothered to RTFA and the cool part isn't really what he was saying, just some throw-away soundbite. The decision was because Samsung products look substantially different to Apple products. To quote:

The judge found that Samsungâ(TM)s products were distinctive because they were thinner and had âoeunusual detailsâ on the back.

In other words they are a different, slimmer form factor and have a Samsung logo on the back. That is a double win for Samsung because it shows a judge isn't fooled by Apple's rather weak similarities argument and that Samsung's products are officially and legally declared thinner than Apple's (assuming you care, hipsters seem to).

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[plover]

Odd, I'm responding on my iPad right now and don't have any readability problems with Slashdot.

Are you sure you're not using a Galaxy instead of an iPad? I hear they're not as cool, maybe that's the problem?

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[spazdor]

Or they can proudly declare that their product is for people who care about functionality and features rather than 'cool'.

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[koyangi]

Let me help you guys out here. I am a sales engineer, so I am close enough to marketing to know how to spin this. I can see a Galaxy commerical going like this:

An old judge is his chambers using some sort of app designed for the buggy whip enthusiast on his iPad. He exclaims how "cool" this is.

Now we cut to a hot young chick snow-sking down a mountain in a bikini and using her Galaxy to find the nearest nightclub with Google Maps and posting pictures to Facebook to arrange a "gathering" that evening. She exclaims how "hot" that is.

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[Hognoxious]

I know it's fun to imagine Apple painted into a rounded corner

FTFY.

P.S. You now owe Apple 27 trillion dollars.

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think not being cool makes you inferior, you were either a bullied or the bullied in school. Each tablet has its merits, the judge simply dealt with it in a hilarious reverse peer pressure sort of way.

Apple: The Galaxy Tab is totally trying to copy our style. Make them stop!
Judge: Nah, it's not as cool as you guys by far. I mean, you guys are cool right? Cause if you weren't, I could totally see Galaxy Tabs as being the cool guys.
Apple: Um, naw bro, we're cool... But they suck, so we didn't want them tainting our style is all...
Judge: That's what I thought. Stay cool, dudes.
Apple: Aiight, peace J-dawg.
[beat]
Samsung: ...Are they gone?
Judge: Yeah. I don't think they know what just happened.
Samsung: I mean, I guess. You didn't have to rule us uncool though.
Judge: ...Why's that?
Samsung: Part of who we are is that our customers like to make up their own minds about our products, not just be told what their opinio....
Judge: Exactly.
Samsung: Judge, you're the best.

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[hierophanta]

let me have a go at spinning the verdict - the Samsung Galaxy Tab is LEGALLY hotter than the Ipad.

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[91degrees]

It's demonstrably less cool. Not demonstrably inferior.

The thing is, there's no argument that Apple products are inherently stylish. Anyone who thinks "cool" matters will go for the iPad.

Nobody chooses Android over Apple because it's cooler. They do so because they like the apps, or because they believe in slightly less closed platforms, or because they prefer the way it works, or because they see the iPad as hipsterish (where being "cool" is actually harmful).

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[pclminion]

No. A sales engineer is an engineer with unusually good people skills, who comes along with business people on sales trips and provides technical backup, while managing not to commit any of the classical faux pas which are typical of most other engineers (such as calling the customer an idiot when they are bein an idiot).

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[johnlcallaway]

I buy products based on price and usability, not 'cool'. Unlike all the iDrones out there that rush out when the newest and 'coolest' item shows up. Sure, they spend more and keep Apple in business.

Meanwhile, Samsung (and other Android devices) continues to grow their user base creating several different devices that just work. Between the wife and I we have Samsung SII, a Samsung Note, and a Samsung tablet. All have worked great and provided us more choices than 'black or white' or 'how much non-upgradable memory do you want with that'.

In fact, my daughter just switched to an HTC android phone after having an Apple phone for years, and likes it better.

Keep your 'cool', it might attract a few customers that can afford it. I'll take basic usability for a lower overall cost.

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[Raenex]

while managing not to commit any of the classical faux pas which are typical of most other engineers (such as calling the customer an idiot when they are bein an idiot).

Or more likely, telling the customer the unadulterated truth about the product.

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[Kartu]

Android is only SLIGHTLY less closed than iStuff, seriously?!??!

Re:Is the judge a member of Anon?

[Phelan]

The ones without a filter are called former sales engineers.

If you ever see a SE with an amazing resume but 3 or 4 recent 1-2 year stints on there? Those tend to be the ones whose filter broke mid career. I love those. They are a fantastic resource for competition research... it's like a waterfall of delicious negativity.

Horrible Logic

[s.petry]

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!

Re:Horrible Logic

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a perfectly valid ruling in light of the ridiculous design patent. OMG we invented rounded corners!!!

Re:Horrible Logic

[tomhath]

The logic is perfect. Apple is defending the coolness of its design as unique and patentable. Judge tossed it right back in Apple's face by saying Samsung's design isn't so cool that it infringes.

Re:Horrible Logic

[FireFury03]

I kind of see it the other way around; the logic of "Samsung's device is sufficiently different from Apple's device as to not risk customer confusion" is sound, but the way the judge went about positing it ('Aw man, this Samsung thing isn't as hip and cool and trendy as the iPad my GGD got me for Kwanzaa") is a bit 3rd grade.

I don't quite understand this... Whilst I agree that pretty much no iDevice is going to be confused with an Android device...

The Galaxy tablets “do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design,”

Both devices are basically a screen with almost no external buttons, plain black frame around the screen, rectangular... I'm not sure how you can get more simple. The only way I can see the iPad being simpler and more understated than the Tab is because it only has 1 button on the front instead of 4, but whilst this is visually simpler, being usably simpler is debatable (I for one find Android devices easier to use than iDevices precisely because there are these buttons that always do the same thing and are always in the same place - note, this isn't a "foo is better than bar" comment, it is simply pointing out that "less buttons == simpler" is very very debatable.

Once you get to the software itself, on the surface iOS and Android are pretty similar - a matrix of application launcher icons, so I'm not sure you can draw any "foor is simpler than bar" conclusions here either.

The judge found that Samsung’s products were distinctive because they were thinner and had “unusual details” on the back.

Apple seem to think that thinner == cooler, with products such as the MacBook Air, so I'm not sure this comment is going to sit well with them.

On the other hand, I have no idea where the "unusual details" thing came from - the back of both devices looks quite similar, except for the fact that one of them has an apple logo and the other has a samsung logo (i.e. other than the logos, they are pretty plain except for the regulatory info that they both have) Compare: http://blog.actioncreations.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/galaxyTabBack.jpg http://mobodojo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/ipad_back.jpg

So on the whole, these devices are different enough to tell apart (as much as any reasonably plain appliance can be told apart - for example, most TVs look pretty similar to each other but this doesn't seem to end with the TV manufacturers suing each other), but the way the judge has gone about deciding this seems... odd.

Re:Horrible Logic

[Solandri]

Apple seem to think that thinner == cooler, with products such as the MacBook Air, so I'm not sure this comment is going to sit well with them.

You're trying to find logical consistency where there is none. The resolution/dpi on the first and second gen iPad was the worst of any tablet (aside from $99 Chinese knockoffs) but it was the thinnest tablet. Hence Apple fans insisted the thinness was cool and the resolution was "good enough". By the time the third gen iPad rolled out, it was no longer the thinnest tablet, but had the highest resolution/dpi. And Apple fans felt the high resolution was cool and the thinness was "good enough".

It's a classic case of starting with a predetermined conclusion ("Apple products are cooler than the rest"), and cherry picking the features which support that conclusion. You'll find no logical consistency in it. It's the same misguided reasoning which comes up with "show me a competing product with the same or better features" as an argument of superiority. That argument works for nearly any product because most products have at least one feature at which they're best in class. The Samsung tablet is the thinnest so there is no competing product with "the same or better features". The cheap $99 tablet is the cheapest, so there is no competing product with "the same or better features". Rather than truly ask themselves which product has the best feature set, they subconsciously rephrase the question so that the only answer is the one they want - an Apple product. Completely oblivious to the fact that they've reworded the question to the point where it's meaningless.

That's almost worth losing the judgement

[wisebabo]

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.

The usual question:

[bradley13]

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.

Re:The usual question:

[Overzeetop]

Samsung's own lawyers were idiots. From a distance, the only distinguishing feature of the face of a tablet when it is off is the aspect ratio or gross size, and the lawyers clearly didn't realize that the Samsung has a longer aspect ratio.

Here's a question: if rounded corners is a unique design feature, is the radius defined as an absolute number or a ratio of one of the sides? Wo what accuracy is the radius "within the patent?" If a sharp cornered tablet were given a patent for design, would then there only be two licence holders for all tablets in the world - round (Apple) and angular (say, Motorola) - for the next 20+ years?

To compare, it is nearly impossible to distinguish smart phones of similar size and color from a distance. Apple's signature "band" of metal is one of the few things that stands out on all-screen phones. Sure, they all have their small differences, but they are - like tablets - rectangles with eased corners. A good lawyer would have pointed out that fact, not fallen for the trap.

Catch-22

[CanHasDIY]

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 according to Bloomberg. “They are not as cool.”

Apple has 21 days to appeal the judge’s ruling.

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?

Re:Catch-22

[Rei]

There's an old joke in the writing community about how if you're going to write a (real) man into a book as a character and are afraid that he might sue for libel, write him in with a tiny penis. Because the men who would sue and claim, "yes, your honor, I'm the guy with the tiny penis in this book" are few and far between.

Michael Crichton kind of went overboard with this one, though.

And in related news

[cellocgw]

News sources report a mad rush of hipsters trying to buy a Galaxy Tab before it becomes cool.

Re:And in related news

[GameboyRMH]

I had one before it was uncool. *flips scarf*

Apple is good for graphics

[Enderandrew]

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.

Design right?

[phriedom]

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?

Read the whole decision

[jbernardo]

""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!

This is a judge

[Fujisawa Sensei]

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.

He could only apply it incorrectly...

[Kupfernigk]

This is English law. We don't have "trade dress", we have "passing off". Apple would basically have to show that either Samsung were misrepresenting their tablet as being either an Apple tablet, or their product was designed to be so similar that the buying public would be confused.

Apple is a widely recognised trade mark, so if it says "Samsung" on the back the chance of confusion is minimal.

Confusing...

[Kupfernigk]

You keep using US terminology. This is England and we have the law of England and Wales. We don't have State law. Common law is NOT the practical implementation of legislative law: we have Statute Law and this overrides Common Law where it is applicable. The judge is not setting any kind of precedent because he is applying the Common Law on passing off, and he has made no extension to it; he has just said "For these two reasons (the manufacturer is identified and the design is not as obsessively minimalistic) this is not an attempt at passing off".

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.