

Apple wins EU-wide ban on Galaxy Tab 7.7; Tab 10.1N not covered - mootothemax
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/07/apple-wins-eu-wide-ban-on-galaxy-tab-7-7-tab-10-1n-not-covered/

======
ajross
I await the apologetics from the "It's an extremely narrow design patent" camp
who claimed that this would never apply to a device even slightly different,
physically, from an iPad. Sigh.

Obviously the action itself isn't a big deal in isolation, being against a
device that isn't selling much anyway. But it's time to admit to ourselves
that Apple is simply a bad actor, and it's only a matter of time before they
hurt something for real.

~~~
gioele
> a device that isn't selling much anyway.

In EU, Samsung Galaxy Tabs (either 10 or 7) are the only non-iPad tablets I've
seen in the hands of not technical people. Most phone carriers offer cheaper
mobile data plans bundled with a Galaxy Tab. I have no data at hand, but I'm
pretty sure that they are the only non-Apple tablets with a 2-digit percentage
of the current EU market.

They are also much appreciated by people that call them "iPads", the kind of
people who mostly use the Facebook app, the camera app and, seldom, the
browser.

------
SODaniel
I am really getting seriously disappointed in Apple. I don't care at all about
their excuse that 'we are just buying patents to fight patent trolls' anymore.
Obviously, they are patent trolls themselves and should be treated as just
that.

Pathetic of a close to trillion dollar company to stave off competition by
throwing lawyers and BS patents around.

~~~
shadowfiend
I'm not a fan of how Apple is going about this, but.

To me, a patent troll is a company that holds a patent and wields it
aggressively _without producing anything_ , and that's the way I've generally
seen the term used. Clearly Apple doesn't fit this definition, as they are
both making and selling tons of devices that use these patents.

In fact, there's nothing you can really say that indicates Apple is misusing
patents. They are, unfortunately, using patents exactly the way patents are
meant to be used. Patents are _meant_ to stifle innovation in a direction
that's already been taken. It's their purpose: exclusive rights for however
many years in exchange for public disclosure. The only critique that I think
can be made of Apple's use of patents at this point is that they're using them
at all (which is a perfectly valid critique, mind you).

~~~
mibbitier
The issue is, you should never be granted obvious patents like "swipe to
unlock".

Mobile phones / tablets are fairly trivial by now. Computer, touchscreen,
software. It's not rocket science. Nothing there should really be patentable
IMHO.

~~~
creesp
The thing is that it just isn't that obvious. Not one cell before Apple's
iPhone had swipe to unlock. Not one cell had touchscreen that works without
stylus.

Same thing with tablets. Sure, Microsoft started making them long time ago but
using styluses on the same GUI was not that practical. That's why they never
entered mainstream market. iPhones and then iPads brought new GUI for whom you
didn't have to use styluses and you didn't have tiny unclickable icons.
Everything is made for touching from the ground up.

Sorry for going off topic.

~~~
ctz

      Not one cell had touchscreen that works without stylus.
    

Incorrect: LG Prada.

For me, pointing to one or two features of the iPhone as proof of it being
innovative misses the target. I regard Apple products as innovative and
successful principally because they are consistently usable, designed well,
marketed well and technically innovative at the same time. Apple's competitors
rarely hit all those targets in a given product.

(Likewise, sorry for off-topicness!)

------
steelaz
Here is comparison between original (banned) 10.1 and new 10.1N model that
court deemed sufficiently different from iPad - <http://i.imgur.com/NhlGO.jpg>
(top one is 10.1N).

~~~
rplnt
I'm positively surprised that such slight change is OK. If this is how things
work I don't really have problem with bogus apple design patents. Such us for
Air that could hurt one or two manufacturers but not others. And even those
two can avoid it with just a few cosmetic changes (so not a huge economic
impact).

People were afraid that it's much more dangerous.

~~~
ajross
It got the device _banned from the market_ , how is that not "dangerous". It's
not like you can ask the court ahead of time. Manufacturers are forced to go
to production, enter the market and roll the dice awaiting lawsuits. You think
Apple would have just said "gray is OK" if you asked them ahead of time? (
_edit: and just to point out the inanity, I got the distinction wrong . Gray
is not OK, the lighter one is the infringing model. I guess it's something
else._ )

And note that it's not just any "slight change" that works. Shrinking it by
30% did not, for example.

~~~
m_eiman
… or maybe they could come up with their own designs instead of copying what
others are already doing? If their design is so like another company's design
that they're not 100% sure that it's allowed, that's a sign that maybe a tweak
or two is in order.

~~~
ori_b
There isn't really much you can do with a tablet design. There isn't room for
variety. Sharp edges are uncomfortable, so you round them. You need to hold
the thing, so you need a frame. The screens come rectangular from the factory,
so you make it rectangular. Apple's design patent seems to cover any
reasonably comfortable tablet designs.

Perhaps, just to differentiate, for the next iteration they could go with a
sea urchin inspired design and put spikes all over the back. I'm sure that
would make a great tablet. Or they could use a design that makes sense, and
risk getting sued again.

If changing the size dramatically, using a different aspect ratio, and having
different styling isn't enough, what is?

~~~
runako
>> There isn't really much you can do with a tablet design. There isn't room
for variety.

Edit below: clarifying that the _whole product_ is the consideration. Also,
they all look like a blackberry a few miles away; the point is what do they
look like to the user.

So you'd have trouble distinguishing among the Microsoft Surface Tablet, the
Kindle Fire, and the iPad? How about when they are on?

~~~
ori_b
At what distance? From across the room, they'd all look pretty much the same
to me, outside of size:

[http://geekntech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Surface-
tabl...](http://geekntech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Surface-tablet-the-
verge.jpeg)

[http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/08/galaxy...](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/08/galaxy-
tab-7.7-product-image-lead-1314834951.jpg)

[http://www.eweek.com/images/stories/slideshows/ipad_security...](http://www.eweek.com/images/stories/slideshows/ipad_security_enterprise/ipad02.jpg)

[http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/4ec2a063eab8eae47e0...](http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/4ec2a063eab8eae47e000033/kindle-
fire-app-library.jpg)

~~~
runako
If one of those had a keyboard, that might help it stand out...

~~~
ori_b
Ah. Gotcha. Here's an iPad with a keyboard. [http://www.warepin.com/wp-
content/uploads/2012/04/ipad-keybo...](http://www.warepin.com/wp-
content/uploads/2012/04/ipad-keyboard-case.jpg)

Ok, I'm not entirely serious with that. The thing is that the keyboard is an
accessory for the surface, and the styling of all the tablets is quite
similar. (I was actually surprised by how similar when I looked up the
images). If shipping an accessory is enough to prevent design patent
infringement...

------
soapdog
I am the only one that is really tired of all those silly disputes between
apple and samsung? I think apple is being so silly in all these that to
protest I purchased an samsung tablet.

~~~
SODaniel
I am just 'done' with Apple. Getting the Google Nexus and retiring my iPad.

------
mrich
I wonder what the Apple execs are thinking.

1) "Steve wanted to nuke them, this is what he wanted! LETS KEEP DOING IT FOR
STEVE!"

2) "Damn, we don't know whether we should release product A or product B.
Neither of them are really polished and nobody cares anymore now that Steve is
gone. Let's go to plan C which always works: sue the competition!"

Either way, I fear Apple is going to end up in the same state as they ended up
without Steve last time.

------
veidr
News flash from 2022:

"Cauliflower wins APAC-wide ban on Broccoli; Broccolini not covered"

------
postfuturist
This makes Apple look rather pathetic. Can't they just spend the energy to
improve the product? The correct response to competition is to be better, not
appeal to the law to stifle competition. I think the term here is "patent
weasel".

------
ma2xd
And the patent abuse continues...

------
mark_l_watson
That sucks. I have been a long time Apple supporter and I am disappointed in
them. That said, Samsung should play the game and make their stuff look
different.

I just got a Samsung Galaxy S III phone: fantastic device (1280 x 720 pixel
screen). Really awesome :-) I find myself using it instead of my iPad
(although the iPad is great for web browsing and Netflix).

------
pasbesoin
I suppose the following deserves downvotes in the HN context, but man, I'm
just fucking tired of all this BS.

Patents are granted, ultimately, by "the people" (U.S. context, at least) to
promote productive activity.

At this point, "the people" should rise up and tell this army of lawyers and
designers that, ok, you can't have your patents anymore. (Now go do something
useful.)

Reality is that property, including IP, is a social contract, not some divine
absolute.

\--

Star Trek... (whatever number the movies are up to).

The team comes back from the future, to invalidate countless destructive
patents by presenting a "pad" mockup from the set of "The Next Generation".

Counter-point: They are promptly stripped of their "future-ware" by lawyers
(and the DOJ, of course, who does the actual stripping in full battle armor)
who point out that there's now a patent on "pants having two legs " that will
most certainly be extended ad infinitum into their timeframe.

Side plot: What happened to the whales' residuals?

