backtop


Print 103 comment(s) - last by testerguy.. on Jul 13 at 2:56 AM

Ban is rejected, judges say no one is mistaking Samsung's tablets for Apple ones

U.S. Design Patent D504,889 and its corresponding patents in Europe, Australia, and elsewhere have stirred up a lively debate about patent law in relation to competition.  The Apple, Inc. (AAPL) design patent contains precious little text, so it's left to Apple's lawyers to interpret it, and is up to international courts to decide how broad the protected design space is.

I. Does D'889 Grant Apple a Monopoly?

Apple claims D'889 is essentially a blank check to a tablet monopoly.  While the pictured device in the 2004-era patent:

Apple D'889 patent

...has no buttons and is substantially different from the iPad in bezel size and form factor, Apple says none of that matters.  It says it has "invented" the minimalist tablet  -- in Apple's words a tablet with "slightly rounded corners,'" "a flat transparent surface without any ornamentation," and "a thin profile" -- and that competitors should not be allowed to produce rival designs of any size.  The only unspoken exception is Windows 8 tablets, as Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) owns a favorable cross-licensing deal with Apple.

In the U.S., Apple's claims of monopoly ownership were backed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit who decided in a May 14th ruling [PDF] that Apple's design patent was valid and that Samsung infringed on it. The ruling led to Judge Lucy Koh in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San Jose/San Francisco) to institute a nationwide sales ban on Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd.'s (KSC:005930) Galaxy Tab 10.1, despite her personal opinion that the patent was invalid.

Overseas in Britain, Apple's broad claims met a far different fate.  Judge Colin Birss stroked Apple's ego, while offering it a stinging court defeat.

II. UK Judge Rejects Design Infringement Claims

He writes, "[The Galaxy Tab line] do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design... They are not as cool."

Despite the kind words, the Judge says that 50+ examples of prior art both in the industry and in fictional works show that Apple's 2004 idea was hardly "original".  The Judge considered it ludicrous that Samsung be expected to differentiate the front of its device, given that extra face buttons hinder the user interface and that the hardware form factor is almost entirely constrained by the multi-touch display, an industry standard.

Judge Birss says where tablets need to differentiate themselves is in the back face and profile.  He found that "unusual details" on the back of the Samsung devices, as well as a thinner profile, made them trivially distinguishable from the iPad.

Galaxy Tab v. iPad
The Galaxy Tab (left) is substantially different from the iPad (right) according to a UK Judge.  
[Image Source: Gadgets and Gizmos]

In short, he argued that Apple's lawyers were completely wrong in their argument that customers would confuse the Galaxy Tab 10.1 for iPads.

His ruling means that there will be no bans and no damages on a design basis.  A London court previously ruled that three of Apple's most-asserted EU technology patents were invalid on the grounds of obviousness and prior art, while a fourth was too narrow to sue Samsung and others.

Apple has 21 days to appeal the ruling to higher courts in the UK.  Otherwise it risks a complete loss in its UK efforts to kill Android in court.  Such a loss could spell a permanent end to the company's slew of suits in the European Union.

Amid the losses in the EU, Apple's bet at banning the competition may be in the U.S. However, it faces some tough tests, such as Judge Richard A. Posner who argues that the U.S. patent system is broken and that Apple is using the broken system to its advantage as a weapon to kill free market competition.

Source: Bloomberg



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: separated at birth
By MechanicalTechie on 7/9/2012 11:33:20 PM , Rating: 4
Seriously where you born this way? Or dropped on your head as a child?

Are you trying to make the claim that Apple made the first rectangle tablet?

Reallllllllllllllllllly!??


RE: separated at birth
By TakinYourPoints on 7/10/12, Rating: -1
RE: separated at birth
By MechanicalTechie on 7/10/2012 1:18:09 AM , Rating: 2
huh? what do you mean but simple and stripped down.. all the tablets I used before the ipad (been developing mobile data capture software since 2004)where no different to apples tablet.

They may have been thicker... but that’s because of the technological limitations of the day.

Based on your theory everything should be patented.. even oblivious crap like basic design specifications... damn maybe I should put a patent out on a t-shirt... then I could destory the industry with baseless law suits!


RE: separated at birth
By TakinYourPoints on 7/10/2012 4:47:53 PM , Rating: 2
BS. A multitude of buttons on the face, a simple surface that keeps focus on the display, etc etc, the differences between pre and post iPad tablets are so obvious. Before the iPad was popular people were saying that it was merely a large iPod Touch, now they want the exact same thing in their Android tablets.

Bunch of apologists up in here, stop living in denial.


RE: separated at birth
By MechanicalTechie on 7/10/2012 7:42:21 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong again!!

I have the feeling that you never owned a tablet before your MaxiPad, to give you just one example Motion M1200(11yrs old now)... very similar to apples design specs... rectangle with a sleek design. Yes it is thicker(tech limitations of the time) and has 4 extra buttons on it but.. remember the M1200 is not a toy is an actual PC..

Sorry to burst your bubble.. Apple is full of sh*t!


RE: separated at birth
By TakinYourPoints on 7/10/2012 4:48:22 PM , Rating: 2
BS. A multitude of buttons on the face, a simple surface that keeps focus on the display, etc etc, the differences between pre and post iPad tablets are so obvious. Before the iPad was popular people were saying that it was merely a large iPod Touch, now they want the exact same thing in their Android tablets.

Bunch of apologists up in here, stop living in denial.


RE: separated at birth
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/10/2012 4:57:09 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
now they want the exact same thing in their Android tablets.
And because you know what people want? LOL...

You have absolutely no clue what people want....

And no SHIT the pre-ipad are different, the TECHNOLOGY was different and didn't really ALLOW for tablets to be as they are NOW...

Are you really this thick headed? Seriously?

You are slowly starting to slip into TS, TG, Pirks territory.

"i am not defending apple"....bullllllllllllllshit....


"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki