Slashdot Mirror
Apple Tells Retailers To Stop Selling Certain Samsung Devices
walterbyrd writes with news that Apple has been sending out letters to carriers and retailers who sell the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the Galaxy Nexus, informing them of a court-mandated ban on sales and warning them against continuing to market the devices. The court order for the patent case on the Galaxy Tab says Samsung and "those acting in concert" with them are enjoined from selling the devices, and Apple has used the letters to point this out. Samsung, of course, disagrees: "Apple’s menacing letters greatly overreach, incorrectly claiming that third-party retailers are subject to the prohibitions of the preliminary injunction, which they clearly are not."
I own a mbp, 2 iPhones, and an iPad... but this is getting annoying. think I'll go buy a
galaxy s3 today.
... and leave the law to the authorities.
Mmmmk?
EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
If you hadn't made such a fuss about the Samsung Tabs they would not be so popular today, Here in Australia they are very hard to find, you have to pre-order it while the ipads sit in the shops. I am not suggesting that they are outselling the ipad, but there is a real demand which, in part, has been created by the market leader. What a weird world we are in today!
Common sense is not so common
It's almost like in this sector, patents are hurting innovation. No wait, that can't be right...
They already did that with that iPhone prototype that was lost in a bar.
All fanboys defending Apple can reply to this thread so we can ignore them.
Just to remind you of how we'll reply to you: 1) Apple are abusing patents; 2) compete on merit; 3) Apple's talent is to identify good ideas, and doesn't do much research of its own anyway, so it should be grateful that most other academics and commercial enterprises aren't so litigious.
Thanks.
Why wouldn't they ? This has always been their way to make business and I don't think it will stop in the future. If it's not illegal to the point where they will only face a slap on the wrist they will do it. I think to their eyes, that if you do that kind of action and you get a slap on the wrist and you get told your a bad boy...then why not. It's worth the risk
The USA, with its abyssmal right wing social and economic policies will mean the USA will fall to second rate status in the world. By then China, Brazil, Korea, India, etc will grow wise to this lame "intellectual property" scam, and the next American Steve Jobs wont stand a chance.
When that day comes, and other countries say it was us who invtented this aggressive international enforcememt of this completely bullshit monopoly maintenance technique, just be happy there is and was an alternative strand of thought on the concept of intellectual property: no.
Then maybe we can fnally rid the world of this abomination. It is not ised to protect small inventors, it is used to enforce anti-market monopolistic practices.
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
They better watch it. Intel's on the hook for practices like that, to the tune of 1b Euros.
Why does Apple need to complain and whine about all these stupid patents? It's already the largest and most profitable technology company, and its cash reserves are insane. Everything it's doing is just like the Microsoft of the 1990's. And Steve Jobs was possibly a bigger asshole than Gates and Ballmer. Except, for some reason, people actually liked Jobs.
....and more Samsung Androids in the streets. Really smart tactics Apple. Obsessive as your former master. In fact, insane. But who cares if shiny is there.
Just one simple promise - I will never buy any Apple product in my life. Sorry, you simply can't have it both ways.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
The weapon of choice between corporate thuggery, bullying competition and inovation.
I feel no sympathy whatsoever for either. Maybe because its a mutual feeling. Afterall, either one only care about getting rich fast and fuck everyone else. They don't even create that many jobs compared to the profits they harvest.
So, both can sue themselves to extinction. Wishfull thought. They'll keep sitting in golden chairs scrimming in court while rolling high and fucking the maid's/poolboy's and the rest of us dreaming in achieving and maintaining some basic moderate desire such as family and a paid house without debts to the bank.
Fuck apple, Fuck samsung and Fuck the courts.
to have software patents totally removed from law? Nice one Apple, keep hammering those nails into the software patents coffin. My understanding is that software is nothing more than algorithms, set theory and logic, discreet maths... it's time this farce is finally brought to it's logical conclusion.
Dump software patents now.
... as long as US is the most powerful military power in the world. Since 2-nd World War oil (and by extension - USD backed by oil) was used as primary mean for US to control other countries and as asource of extraordinary benefits. Any nation trying to contest this state of affairs was pushed back with all possible means ("bringing democracy" included). Now as we've reached peak oil, US grip on the rest of the world will weaken unless they find some other means to maintain it. My bet is that IP in general and GMO's IP in particular is main contender to replace oil as USD collateral. Expect all countries trying to get rid of US-mandated IP laws to be forced back in line with all possible means (with "bringing democracy" included - if necessary).
apple is like a little kid in a sandbox that tattle tails on everyone and cries in the corner like little Bitch! #boycotapple
... and the US says Iran customers not to buy Oil from Iran... and there is no UN resolution on that. So what's news here? It's a whole new World order.
Ya, no. Retailers that have already purchased product and have them in inventory are free to sell those items. Samsung and it's distributors are no longer allowed to sell the devices to retailers or end-users. If a retailer is holding inventory on behalf of Samsung or it's distributors in a form of consignment, then no, they can't sell them.
You see it the way Apple does; that ALL sales must stop and that's not the case. Selling inventory you've already paid for is not working in concert with the manufacturer. Samsung listing your website or store as a place to get the product, is.
Except there is no injunction against the Nexus, just the Tab 10.1 (the old version noone sells anymore). The Nexus was cleared for US sale last week. This is not only overreaching but blatantly fraudulent. Samsung needs to get their lawyers warmed up.
Personally I'd rather have my idiots at home glued to the TV than out doing idiotic things
If you want be her friend, you can't be mine!
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Amusingly, accepting this view of what the "sale" of a device means un-spins Samsung's "sales numbers" as being to actual end-users.
Fuck Apple. I've been thinking about replacing the 3 year old Mac Pro that I use for music production with a new one, but I'm about done with Apple's stormtrooper bullshit.
Seriously. Fuck Apple. You know fads come and go, and nerds and geeks carried Apple through some bad spots. Let's see how long Apple's dominant position in the market lasts when people start to realize that the corporation behind those snappy ads and shiny products are greedy, heavy-handed scum.
I've just decided Apple products are no longer cool. The Apple logo is not cool and owning anything Apple is not cool. Since I was among the first who decided that Apple was cool, decades ago, I feel I have the responsibility now end this thing.
It doesn't matter if I'm the only one. When I see someone with an iPhone or iPad, I'm going to see them as particularly uncool. I will tell them.
Watch and see if it doesn't start a trend. Not because I'm special, but because I'm NOT special. If this is how I feel, it's almost certain that there are lots of other people who feel this way because I am not special. The not-special people who made Apple cool to begin with will be the ones to remove their cool status.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Except for this part: are enjoined from making, using, offering to sell, or selling within the United States
It's black and white. Not ambiguous. Not arguable. You may not like it, and I'm sure that's why the parent was modded down, but it's stated pretty clearly. Apple won the injunction, and it would be foolish of them to not leverage it.
So by your logic, any company can avoid an impending injuction by setting up shell companies, and selling them vast quantities of infringing product prior to an injunction going into effect?
Worth pointing out that this article was written by Florian Mueller of "Top Anti-Android Blogger Florian Mueller is Being Paid by Oracle" fame. He has been proven wrong before, and so we should probably wait for some better reporting on this story. That said, I would say he is right about the ban on Samsung extending to third parties that "act in concert" with Samsung to continue selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1, but he is wrong that the ban applies to really independent third parties who are selling the Tab 10.1 without "acting in concert" with Samsung (i.e. third party importers etc.). To stop those guys, Apple needs to take them to court.
I think that they are actually right about the scope of the injunction. If I remember correctly, the prohibition was against *ANY* sales of the device within the USA, and retailers should have probably returned any devices that they had.
If somebody else has specific information to indicate otherwise, please feel free to correct me.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Who gives a rat's ass? I may go looking for a Samsung. Screw Apple, and screw the judges too. Whatever happened to the concept of free market?
Oooops, my bad. The market is only free if the rich sumbitches agree to make it free.
"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
Except for this part: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, Inc., its officers, directors, partners, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, subsidiaries, and those acting in concert with any of them
Especially considering that there's no ban on Galaxy Nexus. Apple's going the way of 90's era Microsoft, and that's sad.
I don't recall Microsoft using the courts to uphold patents to prevent copycat competition.
Sale in this context refers to Samsung selling the device.
Samsung cannot sell the device direct. Samsung can no longer sell the device to retailers.
We are not Samsung's customers.
So by your logic, any company can avoid an impending injuction by setting up shell companies, and selling them vast quantities of infringing product prior to an injunction going into effect?
If the shell companies are acting in concert with Samsung, then no.
Did the injunction specifically refer to that? From what I remember, the injunction used language to the effect of "barring all U.S. Galaxy Tab sales", and was not directed at any particular entity.... just general prohibition against sale of the device anywhere within the the US. I would hope that if somebody knows otherwise, they can refer me to the specific text of the ruling that indicates it.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
This fight is about patents. Patents and Copyright are both branches of intellectual property rights, but they are NOT the same.
Please join me in a complete boycott of apple and anything apple associates with or produces.FIGHT THE APPLE! VIVE LA FRANCE
The prohibition is against *sales*, not against purchasing. If you do purchase one within the USA, then you have not violated the injunction, but I believe the one who sold it to you would have.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
It's Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, Inc., its officers, directors, partners, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, subsidiaries, and those acting in concert with any of them who are banned from selling, importing, making and using gTabs in US.
"Using" part is funny, will Apple next conduct searches at Samsung's officers, directors, employees etc. homes to enforce the injunction in full? "He's taking the Tab from his desk drawer... He's turning it on! Team Bravo, move out!"
But aren't retailers that sell the device "acting in concert" with them?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Except for this part: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, Inc., its officers, directors, partners, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, subsidiaries, and those acting in concert with any of them
Especially considering that there's no ban on Galaxy Nexus. Apple's going the way of 90's era Microsoft, and that's sad.
Retailers are considered partners.
I have a Samsung Galaxy tablet that I'm planning to sell on Kijiji. Am I prohibited from doing this?
No, they are not. Not for any legal purpose.
If it cannot be proved any ownership relation between the two, yes.
That's okay - the Patents that Apple is using to get this injunction are invalid, and it's been proved in the EU, just show the same prior art used in the EU and Apple can start crying. If not, then start looking at the bank accounts of the judges cuz they've clearly been bought off (my opinion, so go fuck yourselves paid-for judges as I'm entitled to express myself and if you won't take clear prior-art as proof, you must have an ulterior motive not to).
The letters regarding the Nexus went out before the ban was lifted, meaning no one is at fault there. They would be wasting their money.
Except there is no injunction against the Nexus, just the Tab 10.1
Except there was http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/06/30/028234/sale-of-galaxy-nexus-banned-in-the-us.
Unfortunately, it appears as if some of the countries you've mentioned are suffering from even more regressive political and economic policies. Take for instance, Korea. Samsung dominates Korea in a manner that would put shame any claims that Microsoft or Apple are monopolies. China's government and private sector partnerships make US defense contractors seem like angels. And note how the income disparity between China's billionaires and the peasant poor is greater than that of the US.
But aren't retailers that sell the device "acting in concert" with them?
I'f I buy 1000 widgets from you, then 1 month later turn around and sell those widgets in my store, how am I acting in concert with you? Our transaction ended completely as soon as I handed you the money and you handed me the widgets.
So what Samsung has a 10.1n which is diffrent and not affected. Right?
Not unless you're owned by Samsung.
Are you sure about that? Most significantly, as long as the retailer is permitted to return their inventory for a refund, I'm not sure how it can be argued that they *AREN'T* acting in concert with them.
A return policy, after all, is a type of contract between the buyer and seller... in absence of any such return policy, however, yeah... I'd agree that they aren't acting in concert with Samsung.
I have no appreciation at all for what Apple is doing here, but based on the how the injunction is worded, I'm pretty sure that they are legally right here, and retailers probably should have returned their inventory to Samsung, since they would be prohibited from selling them. When Samsung wins this case (and I'm confident that they will, actually), they'll claim the $96 million that Apple posted to get the injunction, which is the amount the court deemed sufficient.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
As long as we have an arrangement where you can return any unsold widgets back to me for a refund, I'm not sure how you would *NOT* be acting in concert with me. If I did not stipulate such a return policy with you, however, then yeah... we wouldn't be acting in concert.
Retailers can, typically, return unsold product back to the distributor.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Ya
The word is Ja. Ja?
Wrong. Retailers are almost always independent parties who are simply reselling a product. The transaction with the OEM is already completed and any business has been tidied up. Once I have the product, I am free to sell it independently unless I have an injunction placed against me directly.
Return policy in this case falls under as an extension of Uniform Commercial Code, and while it may be listed in the contract, the primary body of the contract has most likely already been executed.
All glory to the hypno-Jobs...
Except there is no injunction against the Nexus, just the Tab 10.1
Except there was http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/06/30/028234/sale-of-galaxy-nexus-banned-in-the-us.
Keyword: was. Your slashdot article is dated June 30. This engadget article is dated July 6. So, as GP said, there is no ban on the Nexus.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/06/samsung-gets-temporary-stay-on-galaxy-nexus-ban/
:(){
Google is going to start flexing it's patent muscle and sue Apple out of existence in the wireless market. When you look at the purchase of Motorola Mobility that was the ONLY reason Google bought it, a trove of thousands of patents relating to mobile telephony. Because remember, the first player in cellular was Motorola.
and what will it be like when the chaebol and the CPC start wielding intellectual property law internationally?
it will exactly as you describe, now pointed at weaker countries and trading partners, with the same brutality
so then you agree with me on the absurdity and evil of intellectual property law, right?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
http://www.damnocrazy.com/4/apple-sends-cops-seize-galaxy-nexus-tab-bought-after-ban
Don't kid yourself. These actions by Apple drive up prices, kill innovation, and limit choice.
And they're legitimate, sales-tax collecting retailers. Otherwise a judge is going to stop it.
Manufacturer sells to retailer. Retailer sells to you. You dont like it but you know I will so you sell to me. Obviously your sale to me is "in concert" with the manufacturer because you could have returned it, right? right? oh, no? Even though you have an implied legal contract with the manufacturer (as defined and mandated to exist by law regardless of what you may or may not have signed), you arent their partner?
Stop being a ridiculous fanboy. Logic isnt hard. Try fucking using some.
"His name was James Damore."
That is what Apple advocates keep screaming.
Ya don't say.
Retailers can, typically, return unsold product back to the distributor.
Depends on how big you are. If you have a sign on your front door that happens to say WalMart or BestBuy then you're good. Otherwise, prepare to get laughed at.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
First of all, I do not argue that any third party sales are "in concert" with the manufacturer. only that *I*, not my sales, could be said to be "in concert" with the manufacturer if I have any sort of arrangement with the manufacturer to return any unsold items to them for a refund.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
If there's no opportunity for returning unsold product back to the distributor, then I'd fully agree that the distributor and the retailer are not acting "in concert" with eachother. Even if the retailer offers a return policy themselves, note that A having a contract with B and B having a similar contract with C does not imply that A has a contract with C. So third parties are safe, as are any independent sales.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
The prohibition is against *sales*, not against purchasing. If you do purchase one within the USA, then you have not violated the injunction, but I believe the one who sold it to you would have.
They didn't really sell me the phone, I got it for free because I signed up for the 3 year wireless contract.
Except for the part were it forbids Samsung to do that. If a store has already purchased inventory they are free to sell what they've got. Just like if I had one I'd still be free to sell it to someone else.
I wouldn't buy your crap if it was the last...
Oh wait. I would buy your crap if it was the last choice, but not if there was a single other choice.
July 14, 2012: Samsung’s request for expedited Galaxy Nexus hearing accepted, Apple groups them with “pirates, thieves and counterfeiters”
http://phandroid.com/2012/07/14/samsungs-request-for-expedited-galaxy-nexus-hearing-accepted-apple-groups-them-with-pirates-thieves-and-counterfeiters/
Please list US computer devices which are entirely developed in the USA. Thank you.
Fuck you Apple!
This has been trending for some time.
At least it does not look that way to me. Or were you responding to somebody else?
Apple sent takedown letters to retailers selling Galaxy Nexus and Galaxy Tab 10.1
By Adi Robertson on July 13, 2012 03:31 pm
http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/13/3157505/apple-retailer-galaxy-nexus-tab-10-1-takedown-order
no they just threaten to do so then buy you out if you refuse to pay them and call their bluff. just look at the nook case. or they fund other people and have them do it for them see nokia suing android manufacturers, and sco (funded by Microsoft) suing the Linux community.
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
only that *I*, not my sales, could be said to be "in concert" with the manufacturer if I have any sort of arrangement with the manufacturer to return any unsold items to them for a refund.
You seem to have missed the point. You already do have an arrangement with both the manufacturer and the retailer to return items that you purchased. Whenever Mark-T .. lowly consumer .. buys anything, he enters into a legal contract with both the retailer and manufacturer, because the law states quite clearly that Mark T has entered such a contract.
In fact, everyone in Mark-T's household also enters a contract (his wife, for instance) when Mark-T purchases something, even if they did not approve of the purchase. If Mark-T should not be available to execute the terms of the contract, other members of his household may do so.
Its called the Uniform Commercial Code, and nearly everyone in the country is bound by it.
"His name was James Damore."
Or pwned by Apple.
I have no contract with the manufacturer unless the manufacturer is offering me a return policy.
Return policies are a wise PR move, they encourage more confidence in the products offered, but they are not required by any laws in all jurisdictions. Where they are, there would be no implied contract, since the return policy is a consequence of the law and not an arrangement made between purchaser and seller.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
If you want to go into fantasy land. How would the asian tigers react to protectionist measures from the US? Maybe ban Apple from ALL purchases? Oops, Apple out of business because Asia is essential to the tech industry? Maybe block US sales? US on its knees because it suddenly notices that its military hardware is all based on Asian parts?
Pure fantasy of course, but so is yours I am afraid, these things don't happen in real life because Apple is a very small player in the real men's world and Apple would most certainly NOT be told by anyone that if they were to try such a move, things wouldn't go very bad for them. Or do YOU really think the powers that be want a real trade war? Don't think for a second that the trade wars you read about are real. They are just very carefully negotiated deals to give each side some headlines while neither side is really hurt. If this wasn't the case, those trade disputes wouldn't drag on for decade after decade.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Apple...the NEW version of the MPAA-RIAA Apple has just about reached the end of its "fame" I think even fanbois are about fed up with them.
Yeah...keep telling yourself that, as they stuff the cost of the phone into your contract.
No, there is no restrictions for you doing that. You would have to work together with Samsung in some fashion - e.g. importing them from them from Korea .- in order to be impacted by that ban.
Apple's rise to prominence is because they managed to become a fashion company. Normally consumer electronics is quite price sensitive. You don't become the biggest charging premium pricing, consumers just won't have it, even if you are offering something that justifies the cost. However fashion doesn't work like that, expensive is ok, even good. People will pay more to be fashionable.
Well that's what Apple did starting with the iPod. They didn't invent MP3 players, you could get them long before the iPod, however few people did. Like walkmen and so on only some people were interested. However Apple made them not a tech device, but a fashion accessory. You were cool if you owned one, complete with the white earbuds, cord hanging out in front to show you had one. Suddenly Shure and Etymotic had demand for white earbuds, something nobody had ever wanted before (because people wanted better sound but still the status symbol). People didn't buy MP3 players, they bought iPods because it was the fashionable thing.
This continues. People buy Apple because they think it is cool to do. Some people buy it for other reasons, as some people have bought Apple in the past, but the majority buy it to be one of the "in crowd". We just saw this at work, one of the secretaries just had to have an iMac for her new computer. She could not give a coherent reason, particularly since all the software she needs is for Windows (sometimes Windows exclusively). Indeed it has Fusion on it and she basically uses Windows exclusively with it. But she had to have a Mac. The real reason was, of course, because the Mac is "cool" and a PC is not. There was no technical reason or business case for it (and indeed reasons not to do it) it was all about fashion.
Apple is in a world of hurt the day that ends. When that day will be, who knows? It could be tomorrow, it could be in 500 years. However when it happens their profitability will take a massive hit. People will stop buying their devices not for any good reason, but just because they are no longer the cool thing to own.
no they just threaten to do so then buy you out if you refuse to pay them and call their bluff.
Difference is they ask you to pay it. Apple doesn't, they just ask you to curl up and die right away.
Hey guys, remember when some of you thought Apple was the good guys? That was real cute, you guys. When do we get an Apple borg icon?
But aren't retailers that sell the device "acting in concert" with them?
LOL, how is that acting in concert?
Samsung got their money for the phones, what you do with them is no concern to them. The transaction is finished.
Afaik, other than in jurisdictions that impose regional law-mandated return policies, a return policy is at the discretion of the seller, barring certain specific issues such as the item not being fit for sale. If a seller offers a return for refund policy and you buy something from them, then you have entered an implied contract with them that terminates only when the seller determines that you can no longer return the purchase for a refund, for whatever reason (typically explicitly outlined in the return policy).
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Samsung's lawyers are warmed up- and when the first shipment of iPhone5s reaches customs they will pounce.
Wonder when Apple is going to send over hire goons (thugs) to get their point across?
Be seeing you...
July 14, 2012: Samsung’s request for expedited Galaxy Nexus hearing accepted, Apple groups them with “pirates, thieves and counterfeiters”
No "cocksmoking teabaggers"?
Also, fixed the damn link for you:http://phandroid.com/2012/07/14/samsungs-request-for-expedited-galaxy-nexus-hearing-accepted-apple-groups-them-with-pirates-thieves-and-counterfeiters/
Your post and declaration has actually touched a nerve.
People, above and beyond anything else, evidently really really care about their 'coolness quotient'.
Humans are fucking retards. Humans are not Cool.
If the herd is stupid and easily fooled, (which it is), and if 'coolness' can be defined as being that which is respected by the herd, then being cool is anything but desirable. Except by dull-witted ruminants.
So.., who thought Apple was ever 'cool' in the first place?
Exactly.
Except there is no injunction against the Nexus, just the Tab 10.1
Except there was http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/06/30/028234/sale-of-galaxy-nexus-banned-in-the-us.
Keyword: was. Your slashdot article is dated June 30. This engadget article is dated July 6. So, as GP said, there is no ban on the Nexus.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/06/samsung-gets-temporary-stay-on-galaxy-nexus-ban/
So you want to play the dating game? If you had even read the first paragraph of TFA, you could have learned that the letters were send when the injunction was still in full force. And even ignoring that: the injunction still does exist, it's just stayed.
Samsung's lawyers are warmed up- and when the first shipment of iPhone5s reaches customs they will pounce.
Because Apple copied the design they copied from Apple?
Even if committed to doing so, it is very likely that retailers haven't yet paid for the merchandise in inventory. Sometimes retailers have the right to return unsold goods, depending on the specific agreements in place. I suspect that some contract terms may be under a NDA, but perhaps some upper management from major retails chains can provide (post!) specifics as to the terms for Samsung distribution? There are many possible terms to contracts. The current issue is something that retailers might be able to treat similarly to the situation of a wide-scale manufacturing defect that requires returns. Without knowing the terms, we're only speculating about whether retailers must still pay for what they have received.
When HP withdrew their tablets, many actually came back from the retail channel. Had the retailers sold them and had to pay at the previously contracted price, the retailers would have likely suffered large losses from selling at the announced deeply cut prices.
Those interested in these products could look on the bright side, perhaps have some hope for them to appear with different firmware, or Apple to lose the case. Then not only would the products reappear unaltered, but Samsung would be paid damages from the bond Apple posted.
I think most people here have pretty strong feelings about censorship or manipulation of the news. I'd hope that moderators avoid using the system as a way to vote their opinions, and try to stick with promoting the insightful/informative and demoting the disruptive. We're all only human, so sometimes it takes some effort to resist temptation to warp the process by treating it as voting. That degrades the quality of the site.
But, since it's "not cool", and I own one anyway, doesn't that make me "cool" again? Kinda like those hipster faggots and their instagram app, fuck me, how uncool is that? But its cool 'cause it looks shitty. See?
that Braun would sue Apple for ripping off their designs from the 60's that appear in most of Apple's "innovated" products.
http://gizmodo.com/343641/1960s-braun-products-hold-the-secrets-to-apples-future