Apple wins in ruling against Samsung on Galaxy sales in US

TheForce

SatelliteGuys Master
Original poster
Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Oct 13, 2003
38,863
14,947
Jacksonville, FL, Earth
[8:15a ET June 28, 2012 (Dow Jones)
GLOBE & MAIL: Apple Gets Win as Judge Halts Galaxy Sales in US

(From Canada's Globe and Mail newspaper, June 28 edition.)

By Dan Levine
Of THE GLOBE AND MAIL

SAN FRANCISCO (Globe and Mail)--A U.S. judge on Tuesday backed Apple Inc.'s (AAPL) request to stop Samsung Electronics (SSNHY, 028050.SE) selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet in the United States, giving the iPhone maker a significant win in the global smartphone and tablet patent wars.
Samsung's Galaxy touchscreen tablets, powered by Google Inc.'s (GOOG) Android operating system, are considered by many industry experts to be the main rival to the iPad, though they are currently a distant second to Apple's device. Microsoft (MSFT) and Google are also preparing tablet offerings.
U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, Calif., had previously denied Apple's bid for an injunction on the tablet and multiple Galaxy smartphones. However, a federal appeals court instructed Judge Koh to reconsider Apple's request on the tablet.
"Although Samsung has a right to compete, it does not have a right to compete unfairly, by flooding the market with infringing products," Judge Koh wrote on Tuesday, adding the order should become effective once Apple posts a $2.6-million bond to protect against damages suffered by Samsung if the injunction is later found to have been wrong.
Apple has waged an international patent war since 2010 as it seeks to limit the growth of Google's Android system, the world's best-selling mobile operating platform. A decisive injunction in one of the U.S. legal cases could strengthen Apple's hand in negotiating cross-licensing deals, where firms agree to let each other use their patented technologies.
Opponents of Apple say the iPhone and iPad maker is using patents too aggressively in its bid to stamp out competition.
"The relief being given to Apple here is extraordinary. Preliminary injunctions are rarely asked for and rarely granted," said Colleen Chien, a professor at Santa Clara Law in Silicon Valley.
"That this was a design patent and copying was alleged distinguish this case from plain-vanilla utility patent cases. Cases involving these kinds of patents are based more on a counterfeiting theory than a competition theory, so I don't expect this case to have ramifications for all smartphone disputes, but rather those involving design patents and the kind of product resemblance we had here."
The injunction against Samsung comes less than a week after Apple suffered a serious setback when a federal judge in Chicago dismissed its patent claims against Google's Motorola Mobility unit. Judge Richard Posner ruled that an injunction barring the sale of Motorola smartphones would harm consumers.

LIKELY APPEAL

Samsung will likely seek to appeal Judge Koh's ruling to a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., which has exclusive jurisdiction over intellectual property disputes.
"Apple sought a preliminary injunction of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1, based on a single design patent that addressed just one aspect of the product's overall design," Samsung said in a statement. "Should Apple continue to make legal claims based on such a generic design patent, design innovation and progress in the industry could be restricted."
The South Korean firm said it would take necessary legal steps, and did not expect the ruling to have a significant impact on its business, as it has a broad range of products. It brought out three tablet models last year alone.
Apple spokeswoman Kristin Huguet reiterated a prior statement from the company, saying Samsung's "blatant copying" is wrong.
Apple sold 13.6-million iPads in January-March to control 63% of the global tablet market, according to research firm Display Search. Samsung sold 1.6-million tablets, giving it 7.5% of the market. The global tablet market is set to nearly double this year to 123.5-million units this year, according to IHS iSuppli.
Microsoft last week introduced its own line of tablet computers, making a major strategic shift for the software giant as it struggles to compete with Apple and re-invent its aging Windows franchise, and Google unveiled a $199 tablet co-branded with Taiwan's Asustek Computer Inc. (ASUUY, 2357.TW) at its developer conference Wednesday.
Samsung, which has various tablet line-ups with different sizes, from 7 inches to 10.1 inches (17.8-25.7 cm), introduced the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in June last year and unveiled an upgraded version, the Galaxy Tab 10.1 II, last month.
The company said the U.S. ruling does not affect the updated Tab 10.1 II, and retailers can also clear their existing Tab 10.1 inventories.
In Seoul, Samsung shares rose 3% in a flat market, rebounding from 4-month lows early this week amid concerns over second-quarter profit growth.



(END) Dow Jones Newswires
 
Last edited:
Yeah... Apple has REALLY been suffering due to the Samsung Tab series... I hope this gets thrown out in appeal. Seems like Apple's business plan post Steve Jobs hasn't been to succeed via innovation but rather to patent troll and squash out competition via stupid technicalities.
 
Nah this lawsuit was in play long before Steve died.
True but it seems like every week I read something about Apple trying to enforce some BS patent and claiming damages because apparently if they do it first, no one else can do ANYTHING like it. I mean really, you're going to patent "Swipe to Unlock?" I understand protecting your craft, but Apple seems to take it to extreme levels, and it's hard to claim you're really being damaged when you have more cash on hand than half the countries in the European Union.
 
True but it seems like every week I read something about Apple trying to enforce some BS patent and claiming damages because apparently if they do it first, no one else can do ANYTHING like it. I mean really, you're going to patent "Swipe to Unlock?" I understand protecting your craft, but Apple seems to take it to extreme levels, and it's hard to claim you're really being damaged when you have more cash on hand than half the countries in the European Union.

Let me start with: "I will spend every last dime til my dieing day to fight Google in the courts for stealing our technology"... Quote from Steve Jobs. As an Apple stock holder, I'm glad we now have Cook who won't spend every last dime on tort. :)

If you have a budget to protect your IP, then fine. Whether you are granted that protection is based on the decision of the USPTM office. There are no limits under the law that prevents you from applying for everything you create. Welcome to America, my friend!

It's not hard to make a claim you are being damaged by theft regardless of how rich you are. Stealing from the wealthy is still stealing. If I rob a bank, is that less wrong than robbing a convenience store?
 
...
It's not hard to make a claim you are being damaged by theft regardless of how rich you are. Stealing from the wealthy is still stealing. If I rob a bank, is that less wrong than robbing a convenience store?
As I understand it, no, it's more wrong. Bank robbery is a federal offense. But yes, they're morally equivalent.
 
And this is a moral debate on IP protection vs. market share, obviously.

This does not prevent anyone from coming along and making an original device that is better and more popular than the ipad or any of it's unique parts.
 
couple of things I haven't seen discussed tried yet but I consider to be relevant points:

first, this in junction covers 1 specific model first 10.1 inch galaxy tablet. it doesn't cover the multitude of other samsung tablets.

second, apple had to put some amount of money into an escrow account to pay samsung for lost profits in the event that this injunction is overruled.

there are several interesting cases that have have been in the spotlight lately.

oracle versus google, this 1 with apple and samsung and the megaupload case. c net (i think) had an article today reporting that the case may be falling apart and that law enforcement in new zealand may have gone too far in giving the fbi cloned discs without sufficient evidence for doing so.

even if there is a lower court ruling, things could change movin up the appeals ladder.


Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk 2
 
Now Apple is banning the Galaxy Nexus..
Apple lands preliminary ban against Samsung Galaxy Nexus in the US (update: search patent the key) -- Engadget
This is ridiculous. True patent trolling and anti competitive nature. Let's get our rival's flagship phone banned right after it has a price drop and a new OS announced.

These actions by Apple prove what I've always said: Steve Jobs' brilliance was only eclipsed by his ability to be a complete a**hole when it came to business. Somehow I can't help but think that perhaps what happened to him was karma coming back to bite him in the ass. Lord knows he has enough blood on his hands that Cook is just now finally starting to clean up (Foxconn anyone?)
 
These actions by Apple prove what I've always said: Steve Jobs' brilliance was only eclipsed by his ability to be a complete a**hole when it came to business. Somehow I can't help but think that perhaps what happened to him was karma coming back to bite him in the ass. Lord knows he has enough blood on his hands that Cook is just now finally starting to clean up (Foxconn anyone?)

You should read the Biography and then you would understand Steve's nature was most likely exacerbated by his use drugs. Probably his use of personality altering mind drugs also had something to do with his cancer too.

As an investor, I have more faith in Cook's leadership than Jobs. As an investor, Steve's passing was a good thing for Apple unleashing its ability to grow even bigger and create even better products. I figure the staff at Apple will produce one paradigm shifting new concept product once every 3-4 years just like when Steve was there. We're about ready for one again as the ipad becomes 3-4 years old. While many Apple fanboys worshiped Steve's creativity, they didn't understand that it was Steve's people who originated the new product concepts. Steve called these ideas "sh*t" one week and the next week called people in for a meeting to tell them "his" great new idea which was what he called "sh*t" the week before when a staff member gave him the idea. He would have no recollection of the prior weeks' discussion from the idea's source. Read the Biography.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts