Federal Court Justice Annabelle Bennett has just delivered her verdict on the temporary injuction against Samsung selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1. Apple has won the injunction, with the comment from the judge being that it was “appropriate” to grant a temporary injunction. Samsung’s issued its statement on the ruling, and Apple’s repeated its position from earlier in the case as its statement.
This clearly won’t be the end of matters; it’s a temporary injunction and there’s always the faint possibility of a settlement between the two companies. Samsung’s representatives told Gizmodo that they’d be sending through a statement once the court had finished delivering its verdict.
Stay tuned for further developments throughout the afternoon…
Update: ZDNet is reporting that Justice Bennet saw the case as mostly evenly weighted, but ruled in Apple’s favour at least partly because Samsung wasn’t willing to present itself for an early final hearing in November. Both parties are expected to release statements, and they’re both expected back in court tomorrow for a directions hearing that’ll determine where the full patent case goes from here. [ZDNet]
Update: Samsung’s issued its statement:
Statement from Samsung Electronics
We are disappointed with this ruling and Samsung will be seeking legal advice on its options. Samsung will continue its legal proceeding against Apple‘s claim in order to ensure our innovative products remain available to consumers.
This is a part of our ongoing legal proceeding against Apple’s claim. Samsung is also confident it can prove Apple’s violation of Samsung’s wireless technology patents through a cross claim filed on September 16, 2011 with the Federal Court of Australia, New South Wales.
Our wireless standard patents are essential for mobile business. We will continue to legally assert our intellectual property rights against those who violate Samsung’s patents and free ride on our technology.
-END-
Update: ZDNet reports that Apple’s statement on the case mirrors one it made earlier in the proceedings:
It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging. This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property when companies steal our ideas”
Reviews
- Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 Touchwiz Quick Review: Google Tablets Transformed?
- Samsung Galaxy Tab 8.9 Review: The New Best Android Tablet, Again
Apple Vs Samsung Timeline
- Samsung May Scrap Galaxy Tab 10.1 In Australia
- Kogan Stops Selling Galaxy Tab 10.1
- Apple Vs Samsung: A Question Of Design?
- Samsung Countersues Apple In Australia
- Samsung: Galaxy Tab 10.1 Still Coming To Australia ‘In The Near Future’
TSH
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:13 PM*shrug* fair enough
With Note (5″), 7.0, 7.7 and 8.9″ tablets I don’t think Sammy’s desperate to get this one product to AU.
Scott
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 10:15 PMDon’t answer unless your KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT but can anyone tell me what is different between the situation in Australia and the situation is say USA. Why is it that the arguments being used hear cant be used by Apple to stop the galaxy tabs being sold in over there. The States would be the most obvious place for Apple to try this kind of behavior. I am assuming it is due to a legal issue and not a PR driven decision.
Scott
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 10:21 PMIf anyone has purchased one or has checked where they can be ordered for delivery to Australia (with out trying to hide my country of origin)Please let me know. Im sure there are other reader who would be interested in some decent feedback on the best (reliability and price) options to get one from OS.
Matt
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:14 PMI suppose people will be turning to grey markets now. :( What a shame.
Greg
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 2:55 PMGrey market, what are you talking about? You can buy a completely legit one from anywhere from Amazon to Best Buy.
There is nothing grey market about buying a piece of technology and having it shipped to you.
bob
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 4:01 PMI’m assuming he means grey importing… i.e. what you just described.
James
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:21 PMI guess Apple had a case after all hey?
Peter
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:49 PMIf by that you meant Samsung’s attempts to get this stalling shit out of the way hurt their case, then yes. Go fuck yourself Apple.
Leo
Thursday, October 27, 2011 at 4:25 PMI agree. Apple are coming across as total douchebags.
hahah what the phuc
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:22 PMno, the judge is a fanboy
fanboi
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:36 PMOH OF COURSE THAT’s YOUR CONCLUSION! God forbid the judge was a normal person that just looked at both and thought “yeah the samsung IS a complete copy of an iPad”
Cheshire Cat
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 10:47 PMBut the judges decision was that they were evenly matched…. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty. Or more importantly if samsung win how much will apple owe them in lost revenue?
Btw I’m writing this on an iPad I’m just pro competition and choice.
Chris
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:38 PMNo, not a fanboy or girl but a judge.
A judge works in law not technology
The patent system is fundamentally flawed and this judgement is a good thing.
When a judge has to make a decision based on law around a flawed system then the judge must explain the decision. This in tern opens up legal avenues to challenge the ruling or even the entire patent system itself.
It forces the ACCC to act as well as the patent laws then become anti compeditive when used in such a manner. Which law and body overides which becomes the question.
James
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:28 PMoh right….here we go.
stalkman
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:31 PMi bought one from millennius. stuff apple
Ruen
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:31 PMJames. . . please resist the temptation to open the floodgates. . .
Jim
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:35 PMApple , keep digging that hole, the more you pursue this the more we hate you!
BenDTU
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:40 PMWho’s we? The vocal people who aren’t going to buy their products anyway?
Dave
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:54 PMI am actually tossing up between an ipad and a Galaxy tab. but the more apple tries to stop samsung the more i feel like swapping out my iphone and (future) ipad for the galaxy series.
Harvz
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:07 PMi love android but y go for the Tab over the ipad? i would go the asus transformer but y the tab? its missing all the ports.
Steve
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 3:21 PMI love it, you might prefer an ipad, but out of some weird miss guided allegiance to a global corporation, you are willing to get what you might consider a lesser product.
Smart.
Leo
Thursday, October 27, 2011 at 4:29 PMPeople make ethical purchase choices every day. Some people don’t buy from factories that employ sweatshop workers, even though they might sell great products. That *IS* smart.
And the more Apple look like jerks, the less inclined people will be to support them.
Ftruck
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 8:58 PMwhy will we hate them..i kind of like them a little bit more. as long as they don’t go after the windows 8 tablets next year i’m cool.
light487
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:35 PM[CANCELLED IN AUSTRALIA]
…Fixed!
Craig
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:35 PMIf you have used the Galaxy you will see there are huge differences and the only reason apple sued as they new some launched a surprisingly superior product, shame because no android/pc user wants to be locked into the money machine that the iPad is.
andy
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:35 PMdisgrace – this is just going to make Apple more a monopoly -on flimsy patients that are laughable produced by and even more laughable USA patient system that’s so broken – Apple will become the new patient troll company…
Dan
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:45 PMall those poor patients. what will the hospitals do with all those flimsy patients?
andy
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:53 PMhave you read how farked up the US patient system is? how can you get away with a patient on “feel and touch” …worse is there’s a case coming up with a game compnay trying to sue of a word within a title of their trademark – “scrolls” a single word! Read up on patient trolls if you haven’t already.
Mav
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:58 PMI still can’t believe anyone would troll a patient. you have to be sadistic to do that to a sick person.
Joshua
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:04 PMI think the state government needs to do something about this! People trolling sick patients in hospital is just plain cruel! Maybe we need to have more security in hospitals!
P.A.T.E.N.T
FSM
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:05 PMlol Andy, I wish you were trolling, please learn what the actual thing you are talking about is called before you start trying to educate others on it. (Although I mostly agree with what you are TRYING to say)
andy
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:10 PMok trying to fast – sorry all for the spelling mistakes – must read before hitting submit :)
But the PATENT trolling issue is a big problem for tech companies – especially any company trying to start up – there’s a court in texas that these trolling companies use as they know they will win the judgenments …actuallt the companies setup empty offices in the area to use as the address just so they are in courts area.
Joel
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 5:56 PMHoly crap I think this is the best thing I’ve read in the comments ever.
Kroo
Friday, October 14, 2011 at 6:23 AMYeah, multitouch gestures are just a patent troll aren’t they. Fool. Its because Apple didn’t cover its ass in the 80′s and 90′s that led Microsoft to lift the GUI from Mac OS and get away with it, because Apple didn’t have patent protection. They won’t be fooled again. Fool me once… yada yada yada. The kings of copying have been called out. Simple. 3 injunctions, 3 granted. Thats the law speaking, not fanboys. Sorry you Apple haters can’t accept it.
Craig
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:36 PMneedless to say the blackmarket is going to be huge!
Ekbul
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:38 PMI have to wonder though, if apples case is really so strong then why haven’t they pursued the matter in the u.s courts where the market is much larger and an injunction more damaging.
Wayne
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:53 PMBecause US is full of people who love android and the judge probably has a android phone and was waiting for the release of the Galaxy Tab 10.1,so that all his money spent on apps in the market place can be used on his shiney new tablet.
i dont think it would have faired as well for Apple hehe..
offcourse this is all bogus information surely a judge would not rule in favor just because he/she has a affinity to one side right?..
then again i have seen drastic measures taken to get things done the apple way.. SWAT breaking into a house to recover a lost iphone?.. hehe..
it deserves a Fast and furious quote right here..
Lord Crumplebottom
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:39 PMIf anyone is that desperate for one – then just import one. Solved.
Sucks for Australian retailers though. More than a few want to sell those bad boys.
Christopher
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:55 PMHow dare Apple tell Aussies what we can and can’t have in OZ. Very rude and bullish! You can get them on bay anyway, but my Xoom will be fine for now. I will never buy an Apple product though!
Warrick
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:55 PMSorry Apple, but I never wanted your tablet so the only people who missed out were the local retailers as I did import one.
Jona
Friday, October 14, 2011 at 12:50 AMIt is actually illegal for stores outside Australia to sell this to people in Australia at the moment. Very difficult to enforce though.
Leo
Thursday, October 27, 2011 at 4:33 PMI don’t think it’s “illegal” for stores outside Australia to sell them to Australian customers, as overseas vendors are completely outside the jurisdiction of Australian courts.
And since the court ruling is on the selling of the devices, not the buying or owning of them, it isn’t illegal for Australians to buy them from overseas, either.
Cameron
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:56 PMQuestions, questions, questions. Who’s got answers?
So, now that Apple have an even longer injunction against Samsung, what happens to all the lost revenue? Is it lost forever? If Apple end up loosing the case, will the need to compensate Samsung?
As Samsung are counter suing Apple for infringing their patents in products such as iPad 2 iPhone 4 ect. why is there no injunction against those products? Is this something that Samsung needs to ask for? Are they scared of the compensation that (may) have to pay if my question above is answered “yes”?
From what I’ve heard so far about the patents that Apple are accusing Samsung of infringing, they seem to be fairly widely used amongst Android devices. In that case, why is Samsung only having the Galaxy Tab 10.1 pulled off the shelves? Why are other companies still fine to sell their products?
James
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:38 PMYou need grounds for an injunction. Obviously the courts didn’t deem samsungs case against apple to have any grounds to do so whereas they obviously thought that Samsungs Tab infringed upon apple patents.
You can’t argue with a court ruling. I lol at people suggesting that a judge is a fanboy. haha
Cameron
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:56 PMHuh?
Labrys
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 2:39 PMMy understanding was that if Apple lost they would have to pay Samsung compensation so I would assume the longer it goes the more compensation is payable.
No idea about on your second point.
General theory on point three is that Apple sees Samsung as their greatest competition and isn’t so worried about the other companies.
Leo
Thursday, October 27, 2011 at 4:38 PM“You can’t argue with a court ruling”.
Whatcha have, a law degree out of a Weet-bix packet? Of course you can argue with a court ruling. In the judicial system, it’s called an appeal; in the legislature, it’s called a repeal.
Judges DO get it wrong; they aren’t perfect, the law isn’t perfect, and in some cases, like patent law, the law, or the courts, can be utterly wrong.
Kroo
Friday, October 14, 2011 at 6:30 AMLOOSING? WTF? LOSING perhaps? Can people spell these days? That several times I’ve seen that here (face palm) When trying to have an intelligent argument, at least have some intelligence first.
James
Friday, October 14, 2011 at 11:38 AMAre people incapable of constructing sentences which make at least the slightest bit of sense? What are you, Yoda? “That several times I’ve seen that here (face palm)”. That doesn’t even make any sense. Also you forgot a full stop at the end of the sentence. How about you don’t criticise people for what could be a simple typo, especially when you aren’t that fly at literacy either…
Ekbul
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 12:57 PMI’m not really interested in this tablet so if these lawsuits have the effect of samsung refocusing its efforts on slates like the series 7 then I’d be happy. Although an 8.9 inch wifi galaxy note with S pen would be the bee’s knees.
Norgan
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:42 PMI wonder if the recent passing had any influence on the favourable ruling for Apple?!
I don’t really think the problem is Apple v Samsung here, it is as stated in previous comments about the ability for companies to use patent laws to effect anticompedative behaviour.
The ACCC seriously needs to at least review the things that led to and enabled Apple to “maintain the status quo” using current patent laws and broad generalised “look & feel” claims.
I’m going to patent Commenting on posts, and anything that looks or feels like a comment on a post on any website will need to either be removed or pay me a royalty! :P
Lachlan
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:42 PMDisappointed….
James
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:45 PMSamsung, I am dissapoint
Peter
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:53 PMShut up James, trolling the poor Android fans because your golden gods got their petty wishes in holding back the release of a competitor. You’re pathetic.
James
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 5:36 PMCry me a river
Actually the courts (those people who arent biased like people in here) decided that the injunction remains. Apple obviously had a case for it to remain. Seems like Samsung is in the wrong, no?
James
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 5:41 PMlol…..poor Android fans. I have a HTC Desire S, does that make me an Android fan too? Am I trolling myself. I have an iPad, HTC Desire S and a PC. If anything I own more non-apple products than anything. Seriously though, once the iPad came out everyone else was scurrying to copy it and if someone broke the rules in doing so then they deserve to lose.
Don’t get me wrong but if Apple legitimately had a case then they had a case. The courts deemed it so and they’re not run by tech fanboys.
sparhawk0
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 6:04 PMYou know, I’d always operated on this crazy idea that an accused party is innocent until proven guilty.
Crazy, isn’t it?
If that crazy fundamental part of our legal system was in place, it’d mean that Justice Bennett had ruled that Apple has enough of a case to maybe have an opporunity to take further legal action, and in the meantime, the current status quo holds.
But again, crazy talk, I know. “Presumption of innocence”, “fair trial” – who needs any of that? Giz readers already know that Apple and/or Sammy are guilty and/or innocent.
Ekbul
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 7:07 PMAlso in the article the Judge states that the case was mostly evenly weighted, so who knows maybe apple might find they have some defending of their own to do.
Pmac
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:50 PMI own an Acer Adroid tablet and I have to say when I saw a Galaxy Tab 10.1 (an imported one), I immediately thought it looked exactly like an iPad.
Peter
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:56 PMThe big Samsung name on the front would quickly dispel that idea on closer inspection. It’s a generic tablet shape and design, Apple have being trying to trademark “app” as well. they’re fucking geniuses.
Shogun
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 2:14 PMBad troll Pmac. If you aren’t a troll, i’d suggest an optometrist appointment. Then again, if you’re that blind you wont be able to read this anyway.
Bad troll
Cameron
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 2:18 PMThat’s nice. However the court case in Australia isn’t about the Galaxy Tab looking like the iPad, it’s about the software on it.
Kroo
Friday, October 14, 2011 at 6:34 AMNo. It isn’t. Read the injunction, if you can.
moloko
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:58 PMAnd an ipad looks like many other tablets before it
Ben
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 1:59 PMBuy ipad
Root android on it
????
Profit!
EckyThump
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 2:02 PMMaybe they should give it away free with a new phone. That would get around the actual selling there of, and Samsung will get rid of the stock! #]
Ftruck
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 9:05 PMyou could then say that it was for advertising purposes thus was still in the course of trade so they would still be infringing that patent here. it would still be damaging the goodwill and reputation of apple and would just be have to claim damages instead of an account of profit (as there was no profit)
Ftruck
Thursday, October 13, 2011 at 9:07 PM*and they would just have to*….top quality first round grammar effort.