• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Gadgets
  • Tablets and e-Readers
Apple has won a preliminary injunction blocking the sale of Samsung's 10.1 tab
<<
<
5 of 6
>>
>
alanwarwic
24-08-2011
An interesting article.
http://news.techeye.net/hardware/sam...moled-monopoly

They feel that Samsungs display technology is so far ahead of the game no one can compete with them for a good long while yet.

Its possibly a chicken and the egg question. Has Samsung already refused to sell the screens or even asked far too high a price?
Roush
24-08-2011
I guess you missed the other Samsung AMOLED news story that Tech Eye carried yesterday.

A sizeable portion of the technology is not Samsung's. They've licensed it.

Besides, the Galaxy Tab 10.1 not having an AMOLED panel tells us everything we need to know about AMOLED panels at the moment - they are currently too expensive to produce at tablet sizes.
alanwarwic
24-08-2011
(It says they buy some materials or license the use of them. Of course an ultimate protectionist policy would be to buy the company to eventually stop use of those materials.)

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...pple_suit.html
All Samsung Galaxy phones now banned in Europe, at least via the Netherlands hub.

"The ruling reportedly applies to countries where one European software patent, entitled "Portable Electronic Device for Photo Management," is valid." (Samsung copied the patented 'scrolling method for browsing a picture gallery')

It might sound daft but these events might help trigger wide ranging and world wide protectionism as happened in the 1930's.
ACU
24-08-2011
Originally Posted by Roush:
“Lol, no I'm not an Apple 'fanboy' but judging by the belittling tone of your post you seem to be an Android fanatic, and fanaticism doesn't do anyone any good.

Take a look here: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1S88DNuFgj...2B11.03.22.png

As of March 2011 there were a staggering 37 active lawsuits against Android, and Apple were the litigator in only 3 of them I believe.

The problem is not Apple. The problem is that Google made a decision to disregard everyone else's patents and IP rights and deal with the consequences afterwards, which has meant a lot of their hardware partners getting caught up in the fallout.

Lawsuits relating to mobile phone technology and IP have been around for a lot longer than the iPhone too.

Just off the top of my head I can tell you there were 11 lawsuits alone between Nokia and Qualcomm between 2005 and 2007 relating to phone technology and I'm quite sure I wouldn't have to go very far to find a lot more.”

One key thing you overlook, is that apple will file one lawsuit, yet add several IPs to it. So while the number of lawsuits is small, the actual number of IPs they are claiming for is a lot larger. They probably do this, to drag the whole thing out longer.
alanwarwic
24-08-2011
They are certainly using the 'splatter gun tactic'.
I imagine there are at least 37 active lawsuits against Apple too, but without as man millions available for lawyers fees.
alanwarwic
24-08-2011
Its also reported that the Apple patented 'hand signals' otherwise known as 'tapping the screen'.

So it seems gestures now have to different for each system. Maybe the BBC can get some money here in that playschool might have prior claim to some of these.
The Sack
24-08-2011
Dear Apple i use my nob to swipe the screen, does that count?
Matt D
24-08-2011
"Samsung says Apple lifted iPad from Kubrick's 2001"


LOL
grumpyoldbat
24-08-2011
This helpful graphic shows who is suing who at the moment!!!

http://blog.thomsonreuters.com/index...ic-of-the-day/
Dai13371
25-08-2011
Originally Posted by Matt D:
“"Samsung says Apple lifted iPad from Kubrick's 2001"


LOL ”

I doubt Samsung will convince the courts but it has proven that the form factor at least existed in some guise before Apple claimed it. The picture frame does too even though it isnt a multi-touch capacitive screened device.
Dai13371
25-08-2011
Originally Posted by alanwarwic:
“(It says they buy some materials or license the use of them. Of course an ultimate protectionist policy would be to buy the company to eventually stop use of those materials.)

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...pple_suit.html
All Samsung Galaxy phones now banned in Europe, at least via the Netherlands hub.

"The ruling reportedly applies to countries where one European software patent, entitled "Portable Electronic Device for Photo Management," is valid." (Samsung copied the patented 'scrolling method for browsing a picture gallery')

It might sound daft but these events might help trigger wide ranging and world wide protectionism as happened in the 1930's.”

Another daft patent gets protection. Perhaps if Google and Samsung used a system whereby the new picture does a spiral spin from the left hand corner to the middle and has flashing lights round the edge they would not have lost that case. "Scrolling method". Get lost Apple you creeps.
xxTinkerbellexx
25-08-2011
Originally Posted by grumpyoldbat:
“This helpful graphic shows who is suing who at the moment!!!

http://blog.thomsonreuters.com/index...ic-of-the-day/”

Love that graphic.. I just had to share it on FB
You_mo
25-08-2011
Originally Posted by grumpyoldbat:
“This helpful graphic shows who is suing who at the moment!!!

http://blog.thomsonreuters.com/index...ic-of-the-day/”

You couldn't make it up!
Dai13371
25-08-2011
Gawd. You wonder why the executives don't just stop and say, hang on lads, its getting a mite silly now.
paul2307
25-08-2011
Originally Posted by Dai13371:
“Gawd. You wonder why the executives don't just stop and say, hang on lads, its getting a mite silly now.”

Because when theres billions of Pounds involved common sense and the customer take second place to the greed of executives
alanwarwic
25-08-2011
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...g-apples-claws
"The swipe-to-unlock patent will likely be declared invalid, the judge wrote"

Is it to be admired that Apple got given the "swipe to lock patent"?
Or was it just 'more good business' for a patent office?
Dai13371
25-08-2011
Apple would have preffered a graphic of money going into the Bank of Apple everytime we unlocked our phones, and lo and behold when we swipe to unlock, all the Android phone manufacturers would deposit a fiver in Apple's account for real.
alanwarwic
30-08-2011
An ARS 'current update' on the situation in their usual very ambiguous style.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...they-mean.ars?

"Dries-Ziekenheimer also pointed out some differences between Apple's and Samsung's photo-swipe system. "I tried the old system on my wife's Samsung Ace and must say I prefer the new 'one swipe' system," he told us."

So with the Samsung update out the patented Apple photo swipe becomes negated.
alanwarwic
03-12-2011
Samsung had options. According to Apple they could have

"A front surface that is not black."
"A shape that is not rectangular"
"No rounded corners."
"A front surface that is not flat."
"Varying Bezel size."
"A device that is not thin."
"A cluttered appearance."

Do some of that and Apple appear to say they would have been happy.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...t_patents.html

Strangely enough, My magensium alloy laptop fits most of that bill too.
freeview_user
03-12-2011
Originally Posted by alanwarwic:
“"A front surface that is not black."
"A shape that is not rectangular"
"No rounded corners."
"A front surface that is not flat."
"Varying Bezel size."
"A device that is not thin."”

But who is going to design a tablet that isn't flat, thin or is cluttered?
alanwarwic
03-12-2011
I would hazard my usual guess and say Samsung were meant to negotiate and agree to 'just some of them'.
darkjedimaster
04-12-2011
Apple failed to convince a U.S. judge to block Samsung Electronics from selling Galaxy smartphones and tablets in the U.S. market, depriving the iPhone and iPad maker of crucial leverage in a global patent battle between the two companies.

http://www.themobilelinks.com/Samsun...-galaxy-sales/

Well done to the judge on making the correct decision on this.

*Flips the finger up at Apple*
swills
04-12-2011
Just bought a samsung 10.1 at' Best Buy' in the States, cracking bit of kit
darkjedimaster
04-12-2011
Originally Posted by swills:
“Just bought a samsung 10.1 at' Best Buy' in the States, cracking bit of kit ”

How much did that cost you ?
ACU
05-12-2011
Originally Posted by swills:
“Just bought a samsung 10.1 at' Best Buy' in the States, cracking bit of kit ”

I have recently purchased one from Duabi. I agree with you, it certainly is a very good tablet. It cost around £340, was quite lucky as most of the electronics stores were the same price as in the UK (around £400). We came across a stall in Dubai mall, after a bit of haggling (actually about 10mins of haggling), we got it down to 2000Dhs (from 2200Dhs).
<<
<
5 of 6
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map