
Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 banned from Europe (Apple wins injunction) - amirmc
http://www.thinq.co.uk/2011/8/9/samsung-galaxy-tab-101-banned-europe/
======
ugh
Some more details: [http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/08/preliminary-
injuncti...](http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/08/preliminary-injunction-
granted-by.html)

No patent or trademark is the culprit but rather the design (as in: look) of
the enclosure. Above article does link to this document:
[http://www.scribd.com/doc/61944044/Community-
Design-00018160...](http://www.scribd.com/doc/61944044/Community-
Design-000181607-0001)

That’s called a community design, it’s an EU thing, here is the Wikipedia
article: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_design>

This article deals a bit more with community designs and especially the
concept of the “informed user” that is somewhat central to them:
[http://www.linklaters.com/Publications/Publication1392Newsle...](http://www.linklaters.com/Publications/Publication1392Newsletter/July_2011/Pages/EU_Designs_Informed_User_Defind.aspx)

Here are images of the current iPad: <http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/>

Here are images of the Galaxy Tab 10.1:
[http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxytab/10.1/spec....](http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxytab/10.1/spec.html)

(My personal opinion? It seems absurd to me that you can protect something
vague like this. The Galaxy Tab and the iPad seem sufficiently different to me
as to not cause consumer confusion.)

~~~
arron61
This is ridiculous. They are suing over a rectangular shape and a certain size
/ weight?

So I guess only Apple can make a thin tablet. Any other one will be an
infringement...

Can Ssamsung sue all other TV makers since they are all rectangular, with a
bezel, and is flat? They all look too similar to Samsung TVs!

~~~
siglesias
Are rectangular shape, size and weight the only similarities you can find?
Check out the side by sides: [http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-
samsung-analys...](http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-
analysis/)

I'm sure you could hire a creative team to come up with 100 iterations of
tablets and icons (as I'm sure Apple did) that would look nothing like an
iPad. In light of those 100 the similarities would look more apparent than
ever.

~~~
ugh
This doesn’t seem to be about the software at all, only the look of the
enclosure. (Also: You are linking to an article about phones.)

~~~
siglesias
The assumption is that if Samsung's design heuristic with the iPhone
competitor (as linked to) was to copy, then I see no reason why their
heuristic would be different on the tablet.

As it is, my point regarding the level of similarity between the Tab and iPad
still holds--it's not simply a matter of shape, size, and weight; even if it
were, where does the assumption come from that Apple's form factor for the
iPad was obvious?

~~~
ugh
This lawsuit, however, seems to be only about the general shape. It doesn’t
make much sense to say that the result of a lawsuit about the shape is
justified because of the software or other factors unrelated to the shape.

As for obviousness, let me submit exhibit A, used in 1994: [http://de.memory-
alpha.org/wiki/Datei:Plan_des_Arboretums.jp...](http://de.memory-
alpha.org/wiki/Datei:Plan_des_Arboretums.jpg)

~~~
siglesias
This doesn't resemble an iPad to me, and even if it did the obscurity of the
source nullifies any claim to obviousness. You know, at some level of
abstraction you can show that any two designs are the same, but I think the
level of abstraction you have chosen goes too far and doesn't get at the
essence of the claim.

~~~
ugh
_Shrug_

The Galaxy Tab 10.1 doesn’t resemble an iPad to me. You know, at some level of
abstraction you can show that any two designs are the same, but I think the
level of abstraction you have chosen goes too far.

~~~
siglesias
Let's get one more side by side: <http://cl.ly/3h30350I0c0P0W401N3c>

The obscure device you found is on the left. iPad which is an actual product,
is in the middle. Samsung's Tab is on the right. The iPad and Tab are
practically identical.

The left two are only similar in that they are both rectangular. The bezel
size, color, texture, and material are all different.

You can't argue a:b :: b:c.

~~~
arron61
Can the JooJoo Pad sue Apple for infringements?

The bezel size, color, texture, and material are all the same.

<http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/2009/12/main.jpg>

~~~
mayanksinghal
Damn! They all look the same to me!

------
Pewpewarrows
Ever develop a modal window? Arrange a timeline of messages according to date
received? Arrange icons or shortcuts in a grid-like structure?

Congratulations, you've violated an Apple patent. Other fun tidbits from their
collection:

* A mobile device with rounded corners

* Having a picture of a phone as a phone icon

* Having a picture of a gear for a settings icon

* Interactive widgets

~~~
Steko
Thanks for helping spread massive ignorance about how design patents (etc.)
work.

If you make a phone with a distinctive design and patent that design, you list
out the _many_ features that comprise that design. You do _not_ have a patent
on every single one of those features. If someone copies a few of many
features they certainly don't violate your patent. OTOH if they copy almost
all of them they almost certainly do.

Where that line is varies and I don't know if Samsung is over the line but
it's pretty clear that they are way closer to the line then any other major
manufacturer.

And as for who this benefits, I'd suggest that HTC, Motorola and other Android
vendors will benefit just as much or moreso then Apple.

~~~
Pewpewarrows
I suggest you actually go read through Apple's patents before arguing about
them. They didn't file a design patent for the entire device. Instead, as you
browse through their collection, you see page after page of patents for tiny
features like those I listed. A type of modal window, for example:

[http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=dLnlAAAAEBAJ&dq=7...](http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=dLnlAAAAEBAJ&dq=7,853,891)

I literally laughed as I read through some of them, because I've definitely
unknowingly violated many. It's impossible not to step on the toes of overly
broad software patents.

~~~
fpgeek
Your comment is even more impressive because you (and/or Hacker News) violated
an Apple patent in your comment above. See Apple's lawsuit against HTC -
matching text patterns and turning them into clickable actions is patented by
Apple.

~~~
Pewpewarrows
Wow, I must have missed that while browsing through them. Excellent find.

~~~
fpgeek
As a happy user of HTC Android phones, I've been following the HTC case with
some interest. After HTC's setback at the ITC, I decided to take a look at the
patents in question and was appalled. Since then, I've been banging this
particular drum every time these lawsuits come up because it is a perfect
example of exactly how broken everything is.

------
blinkingled
As a recent Tab 10.1 owner I am not sure there are enough design similarities
with the iPad to warrant a ban.

However this may be a wake up call for Samsung - it is hard not to see their
products as being influenced by Apple without any uniqueness to balance the
experience. Motorola's product experience for example has a certain Motorola
culture in it and doesn't feel anything like Apple. Likewise for HTC.

This may not justify Apple suing them - but in my mind being a copy without
it's own unique traits is the worst thing that could happen to a brand.
(Everyone copies but successful brands retain their uniqueness.)

~~~
RobAtticus
I have to agree, but I may be basing it off the first iPad. I was a bit
stunned on the plane when I saw how much thinner my tab was than this girl's
iPad. I thought they'd be more similar. I was a bit jealous of her monopoly
game app though.

~~~
blinkingled
Yeah, I kinda like the uniform thinness of the Tab even compared to iPad2. And
also the uniqueness that comes with it when traveling - wow there are iPads
and Kindles everywhere these days :)

------
MrHobbes
It seems to me that there are only so many ways to design a thin, tablet-like
device. How different would Samsung have needed to make its tablet so as not
to have been affected by this to begin with?

I don't really know much of the background surrounding "community design
rights", but I really think that this is a slippery slope to head down.

Competitors should do battle in the free market - not in the court systems.

Let consumers sort out which is the better product. They have no problems
doing this without the aid of an injunction.

This stifling of competition via the court system is just another avenue to
stagnate progress within the electronics industry.

------
raganwald
_Sadly for Samsung, Apple's injunction is going to severely harm the company's
financial outlook. The device is now blocked across Europe, Australia, and
Apple is currently attempting to block the import of all Galaxy devices into
the US._

It is sad for Samsung that sales of the Tab are being blocked while the court
case is settled, but were they really expecting so many sales that this will
“severely harm the company's financial outlook?” I don’t see the Tab as a bet-
the-company move for Samsung, this is probably more of an embarassment and
inconvenience than a fatal blow.

~~~
tjogin
Yeah, I have a feeling this is going to be worse for _Apple_ than it is for
Samsung.

Like you said, Samsung's tablets aren't really selling that well (more were
_returned_ last month than sold, I heard), so it's not going to be a
significant blow to them, financially.

Now Samsung's failure in the tablet space is going to be big bad Apple's
bullying fault, and Samsung will play the role of the martyr. Samsung were
failing anyways, but now it's Apple's fault.

The only way Apple wins here is if this prevents other players from imitating
them.

~~~
Pewpewarrows
Those reports weren't about Samsung Tablets. They were about Logitech Revues,
and they turned out to be wrong to begin with.

~~~
tjogin
You may be right about that specific report, but the same seems to be true for
Samsung's tablets. Nobody are selling tablets, other than Apple.

~~~
Pewpewarrows
Pulling data out of thin air, while fun, does not make for an intelligent
conversation.

------
drieddust
This clearly shows how afraid Apple is of Android devices.

They do not have any shame in denying a developer his application on false
grounds and then copying it over a few iterations later. [http://www.pocket-
lint.com/news/40465/apple-allegedly-copies...](http://www.pocket-
lint.com/news/40465/apple-allegedly-copies-wi-fi-sync)

They want to copy notification system from Android. At the same time they want
to sue Android for copying context menu.

Now they want to sue other devices because they are rectangular in shape. If
this is Apple then I will prefer an Apple free world.

~~~
megablast
No it does not. This is a normal part of business. Why people feel the need to
associate 'being afraid of' and 'suing someone' is just strange and biased.

------
cageface
It seems Apple now feels entitled to dictate the limits of choice not only
within its own ecosystem but also without. This news comes in the same week
that I finally try Android coding and find it much less scary than many people
maintain and much more logical than iOS in many ways. Maybe this kind of
bullying will tip the balance for me.

According to Nielsen's most recent survey, _50%_ of the people buying Android
phones are doing it out of _active dislike_ of Apple as a company. Expect this
number to grow as the public sees more products blocked like this.

[http://www.buzzom.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Android-
vs-...](http://www.buzzom.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Android-vs-
iPhone.jpg)

------
arron61
I think JooJoo (aka CrunchPad) should sue Apple for design infringements.
Clearly it came out before the iPad (JooJoo 2009, iPad 2010). When I see an
iPad, I think of the JooJoo pad. It is rectangular; it has a bezel; and it's
thin!

Clearly these are all traits only for Apple and an iPad to use. Clearly Apple
copied these traits just like how Android copied everything of iPhone.

<http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/2009/12/main.jpg>

 _sarcastic rant_

------
51Cards
To me this smells of a couple possibilities. This is the first tablet to my
knowledge that Apple has gone after in this way, though it seems the scope is
wide enough they could have used it against several others in the market.
Makes me wonder if this is the first product that Apple is somewhat worried
about? Why this one and why now? The added interest is that Samsung, being a
major parts supplier for Apple's products is being singled out despite this.

I don't know what it would mean fiscally for Samsung but I would think they
have some leverage in the "Well, if you want to be that way about it"
department. Apple may stop getting priority consideration for parts orders
over other companies. Also Samsung's product range is wide enough they could
easily pull the same move against several of Apple's other products like
monitors.

~~~
AllenKids
Samsung already sued Apple in more countries than Apple did to it. Pissing
contest and such.

HTC's tablet is also under ITC's investigation, initiated by Apple.

Except the A5 SOC nothing Samsung makes for Apple is unique enough. And TSMC
is actively testing mass producing Apple's IC.

BTW: Apple's utility model of essentially a giant iPod touch is ridiculously
hilarious.

~~~
fpgeek
Samsung is a very big producer of flash memory. While that isn't unique, if
Apple has to fill their large requirements from other suppliers, those
suppliers may decide to charge more (or have to charge more given other
demands on their production capacity) if they know Apple doesn't have Samsung
as an option...

~~~
AllenKids
On the other hand Apple is the single biggest buyer of NAND Flash in the
world, if Apple goes elsewhere, Samsung's foundry would find it really hard to
fill the capacity.() IIRC, since Japan Tsunami everybody's been scrambling
securing components but the demand was relatively soft, e.g. Qualcomm ends its
recent quarter with 59 days worth of inventory. So now everything is cheap
including NAND Flash, as a matter of fact Apple in its financial outlook for
Q4(fiscal) stated a buyer's market for multiple key component will positively
affect Apple's GM.

<http://digitimes.com/print/a20110801PD204.html>

------
Tichy
I was undecided between getting a Galaxy Tab or an iPad. Now I definitely
won't get an iPad.

------
ck2
When the biggest/most lawyers prevents who moves technology forward and
prevents price competition, we all lose.

<http://i.imgur.com/aLGOQ.jpg>

~~~
mendocino
> <http://i.imgur.com/aLGOQ.jpg>

Please, not this again.

<http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php>

[http://androidcommunity.com/who-was-really-first-apple-vs-
sa...](http://androidcommunity.com/who-was-really-first-apple-vs-samsung-
story-truly-debunked-20110420/)

------
technoslut
I've always though that Samsung borrows heavily from Apple but the Galaxy Tab
seems like a real stretch. There is enough of a difference between the two
products where a customer shouldn't get confused.

~~~
Perceval
I think Apple is getting angry about its partners taking what they've learned
from Apple and using it to compete directly against them. From the article:

 _The injunction comes as the latest blow in a tit-for-tat legal war between
the two companies, who have otherwise enjoyed a solid working relationship:
Samsung produces many of the components used in both the iPhone and the iPad,
the design of which it stands accused of copying._

This is the same type of dynamic that led to the falling out between Steve
Jobs and Eric Schmidt, when Schmidt, as a board member of Apple, used his
inside knowledge of iOS to radically change Android's UI and functionality to
compete directly against Apple.

Likewise, this reminds us of Steve Jobs showing Bill Gates the Mac GUI, and
then finding out that Gates used that knowledge to revamp the Windows UI to
directly compete against the Mac.

Apple has a problem in that it seemingly cannot partner with anyone without
those companies then turning around and using their knowledge of Apple's
software and design to compete directly against them in the same space.

~~~
nfriedly
I thought Steve Jobs and Bill Gates both stole their GUI's from Xerox (?)

~~~
sireat
There is certainly some substance to this argument:
[http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&s...](http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=A_Rich_Neighbor_Named_Xerox.txt)

------
levesque
To me this sounds a bit scary. Is the Galaxy Tab really that similar to the
IPad? What about the Xoom? If the Galaxy is banned, why should the Xoom/Asus
Transformer be excluded?

~~~
ecspike
No, it's not really that similar. It's gamesmanship from Apple.

People have thought my really chunky viewsonic g-tablet was an ipad:
<http://www.viewsonic.com/gtablet/> and it is no where close.

~~~
GHFigs
_People have thought my really chunky viewsonic g-tablet was an ipad_

That would suggest that Apple is correct, wouldn't it?

~~~
technoslut
It would also mean that any tablet would be considered infringing on the
design of the iPad.

~~~
GHFigs
Only if you think the entire design space has been explored. Sure, there's
only so many ways you can package the same commodity components, but I don't
think it's impossible to design a tablet that's distinguishable from an iPad
from more than a few feet away (or in advertising). Compare an HP TouchPad or
Nook Color to the Galaxy Tab models.

------
yason
This is fucked as usual.

Making a "copy" (or a real 1:1 copy, for that matter) itself doesn't add any
value. Creating a design is an effort that is valuable itself (somebody might
pay the designer) but copying a finished design or creating not-so-derivative
works is an infinitesimally small effort. And no effort means no value. A copy
of a design is worthless.

Conversely, Samsung still has to _actually manufacture_ their tablets: that's
a undisputable effort spent and that does create value. Sure their tablets
might look same-ish (there aren't that many fundamental designs for a tablet
computer) but they haven't created any value in their design. At best Apple
should just be flattered to see competitors imitating their looks; however, in
no sensible world Apple shouldn't have a say what other companies or people
can spend their time and effort in.

Design is not property: there's no "intellectual property". Every time we try
to treat mental works as property we fail majestetically, but then try to
cough it up and cry for even stricter copyright restrictions.

------
sharmajai
I am waiting for Gruber's justification for this. I am sure he will be able to
cook something up as he always does.

On the other hand, I think this is one of those things, which have brought
down Apple time and time again in the past, from the pinnacles of success to
being competitively obsolete, mainly due to its inability to adapt to the
changing market dynamics.

------
digamber_kamat
Good part is that Galaxy Tab might get a bit cheaper in other parts :P

------
tluyben2
It's by a German judge and it doesn't go for the Netherlands (tomorrow is the
case in the Dutch court). Why would a German judge get to say this for the
entire EU I wonder though?

~~~
ugh
Because the goal of the EU is to create a common market. A EU-wide judiciary
is consequently necessary to enforce certain laws (especially those that
regulate the common market).

~~~
tluyben2
Yes, that's the goal. Doesn't really work so far for a lot of things, among
which this kind of stuff. So do you know facts about this or was this a guess
based on 'united europe' propaganda? Serious question; I am curious! I have
never heard of anything like that and the Dutch press is saying that they
don't have clue why a German judge ruling would govern the rest of EU and if
it does, why not NL.

~~~
ugh
No guess, that's just how it is. Preliminary injunctions about community
designs apply EU wide. Apple asked in their request for the injunction
(German, [http://www.scribd.com/doc/61993811/10-08-04-Apple-Motion-
for...](http://www.scribd.com/doc/61993811/10-08-04-Apple-Motion-for-EU-Wide-
Prel-Inj-Galaxy-Tab-10-1)) to exclude the Netherlands from the injunction.
Apple is suing Samsung separatly in the Netherlands.

The press you are reading seems to be exceedingly bad at its job.

~~~
tluyben2
Apparently. Thanks!

------
guard-of-terra
If something like that would happen in Russia, surely people would say "I
wonder how much did Apply pay to make it happen".

But now, considering USA and Europe... How much did Apple /what/ to make it
happen?

P.S. Meanwhile you can still buy one in Russia, and is the ban stays I think
those would go really cheap.

------
cpeterso
In 2010, Apple bought $5.7B of components from Samsung. The 2011 estimate is
$7.8B. I doubt Samsung would stop selling components to Apple, but are there
other manufacturers that could delivery compatible parts for Apple's iOS
devices if Samsung did?

~~~
kenjackson
A lot of companies exist that make various components. BUT few with the
quality and volume of Samsung.

Apple is often supply-side constrained. So they could cut Samsung out the mix,
but this just makes Apple more vulnerable to supply shortages.

Furthermore, by selecting their way out of one of the biggest screen, CPU, and
memory manufacturers in the world and probably having to fund new factories
for smaller manufacturers -- this volume is open up to other companies. The
end result is cheaper components for Samsung mobile, HTC, Sony, LG, etc...

------
trezor
When you buy an Apple-product, no matter how shiny and polished it seems right
there and then, you support this shit. Your newly acquired, polished Apple-
product just made your hands dirty.

------
cwp
I'm deeply ambivalent about this. We'd all be better off if tech companies
competed with engineers instead of lawyers. Nevertheless, there's just no
getting around the fact that the Galaxy Tab is a pretty direct knock-off of
the iPad. Are we supposed to get all upset because Samsung's right to ride on
Apple's coat-tails has been violated?

