Apple's Appeal Rejected, Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 On Sale By Christmas

The legal battle between Samsung and Apple over the launch of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia seems to be over, with the High Court today rejecting Apple's leave to appeal. That means you'll be able to buy a Tab for Christmas.

The Tab will start at $579 for 16GB with Wi-Fi only, and go up to $729 for the same version with 3G built in. An official release date hasn't been announced yet, but Samsung say it will be on sale before Christmas.

Here's the official statement for Samsung:

As the High Court has today rejected Apple’s leave to appeal, Samsung Electronics Australia is pleased to announce the highly anticipated Samsung GALAXY Tab 10.1 will be available in stores in time for the Christmas shopping period from a RRP of $579 (16GB WiFi variant) and a RRP of $729 (16GB 3G variant).

Samsung Electronics Australia is pleased with today’s judgment by the High Court of Australia to deny Apple’s request to appeal the decision of the Full Court.

The Full Court of Australia decision on November 30 clearly affirmed our view that Apple’s claims lack merit and that an injunction should not have been imposed on the GALAXY Tab 10.1.


Comments

    Awesome News, Game on Apple...

      Fcuk yeah baby!! :D

    Does this mean it's all over and we can get back to actual gadget news?

    Great news. But not great prices.
    Hope they will lower it down a bit.

      www.kogan.com.au is your friend

    I'm sure Samsung's next phase will be to sue the pants off Apple to get the lost revenue caused by the injunction back. Maybe Samsung can use the funds to lower the price a bit.

      Can they do that?

        I believe they can... based on the outcome of the case that the "injunction should not have been imposed" in the first place.

        The damage is done already because this close to Christmas, I bet a lot of people who MIGHT have bought the Galaxy Tab for Christmas have since bought another tablet thinking that with the might/power of Apple, they wouldn't see the Galaxy Tab at all, let alone before Christmas.

        This shouldn't be too hard to prove..

          The High Court today agreed with Samsung and the judges said Apple's special leave would be “denied with costs”. A lawyer who didn't wish to be named said costs would be in the "hundreds of thousands".

          Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/tablets/samsung-slays-apple-in-tablet-war-20111209-1omep.html#ixzz1fzoNyK8w

          There you go.

            The term "denied with costs" only refers to legal costs. Compensation for lost sales would be a civil matter. It would be difficult for Samsung to prove how much revenue they lost as a result of the legal action. The legal fees would be huge for such a case. Samsung may decide it could be a case of throwing good money after bad and simply let it die.

            http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2011/08/samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1-australian-release-blocked-by-apple-federal-court/

            "The next hearing is scheduled for August 29, and Samsung is required to supply Apple with three Australian 10.1 samples before then. Samsung will stop advertising the device until the matter is resolved, and Apple pays Samsung damages if they lose."

            Key word: Damages. I guess the period inwhich sales were lost may possibly begins at the time that the 10.1n was available for distribution... that's for the courts to decide :P

        I think it comes down to what the ruling was in the Full Court. I haven't been following it all that closely; but as long as a judgement was made (i.e. the Full Court found that Samsung hadn't infringed on Apple's patents) then Apple can be held accountable any any knock-on effects of having raised a legal challenge in the first place.

          It wouldn't be difficult at all to ascertain the lost revenue. All they would need to do is contact Kogan, Mobicity and Expansys (to name a few) and get their total units sold to Australian buyers, then factor in the deals they had agreed with Vodafone on their projected sales, and done.

          I would suggest Apple are in deep doo doo (giggles)

          Ordinarily a party seeking the benefit of an interlocutory injunction will be required to give an undertaking as to damages. If that has occurred in this case, one would think that Samsung would be entitled to seek damages from Apple with respect to loss of sales sustained during the intervening period whilst the injunction has been in place.

    I already have one but great news. This was a ridiculous case.

    does that mean the price should fall quickley on such an old product?

    Hooray! Justice prevails! :)

    Only an idiot would buy it at that price with the new/other Android tablets around..

    About time. Wifi model is looking good, would have gone for 3g and sold my phone earlier but this will do.

    Have one too and it's really good. Alot better than my previous Iconia tablet even tho they used the same OS. Samsung has developed it well.

    Interested to see sales figures for a quarter compared to the iPad. Daresay it still won't come anywhere near it, but would be interesting to see.

    but the damage is already done... the Prime is out next week!!!

    there really shooould be a claus for the loss of revenues... they'll never get their money back for the rnd invested in it...

      so out of the 100 they were going to sell in this country, of which 90 would have been overseas ebay purchases, leaving 10 potential buyers. call it $100 and move on?

        What other fairy stories did the rainbow unicorn tell you?

          of all the fanboy of these haemeroids saying they can't wait to buy one now... well they haven't bought one yet and they're not exactly hard to find ...
          http://www.ebay.com.au/sch/i.html?_nkw=samsung+galaxy+tab+10.1
          there is a world of difference between penny-less fanboys who "can't wait to buy a product" and actual customers who are prepared to hand over their money.

            And many people have chosen that option. What is your point here exactly? Are you saying that just because something is available through more obscure channels, no one should ever complain, instead they should all jump through hoops to get these things and like it?
            If people want to walk into their local electronic shop or supermarket to make their purchases, I don't see why you should make some silly case about it.

    So, according to Australian law Apple was in the *wrong* to litigate in the first place.

    I wonder if Kogan still has his stock of them?...

    ...yup!

    http://www.kogan.com.au/shop/category/android-tablets/

    Wifi only - $489
    Wifi + 3G - $599

    Awesome! :)

    GO GO GO GO GO GOOOOOOOOOOO! :)

    They would have sold at least a million. So I see Apple owning Samsung around $500,000,000 in costs.

      Coming soon to a tech blog near you: Samsung and Apple spend the next 6 months arguing about how many 10.1's they would have sold!

        10% of the profits of this movie will go towards Apple's legal fees, because they love donations!

      HA a million...considering that the touchpad and the kindle fire are the only non-ipad tablets to crack a million world wide i don't see that happening in a country of just under 22 million. considering the tab has been on sale in the US and a whole heap of other countries this whole time

    Those prices look familiar.....

    http://store.apple.com/au/browse/home/shop_ipad/family/ipad/select
    iPad2 - Wifi 16GB - $579
    iPad2 - 3G 16GB - $729

    haha, oh wow.

    hmmm i just spend $99 on a Storage Works Android 2.3 .. it works ... HORAH

    I owned an iPhone 4 and iPod, but when I considers buying a tablet, I don't look for iPad2 as it is just a big iPod, I got the Samsung Galaxy S 8.9 3G from overseas for about $610 due to my own preference, like it smaller than the 10.1. Have never been happier with the tablet, used it as Wifi Hotspot for my laptop as well if I need to work at home. My next phone will likely be a Samsung Galaxy Note (white version) or something similar, they need to reduce the price first, ebay selling for $864 now which is ridiculuosly too high to pay for a phone. Not getting another iPhone unless they make the screen bigger, at least 4.3" for me to even consider it.

    Finally, some common sense. Thank you.

    Just a shit day for Apple all round it seems:

    http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/12/07/apple-not-allowed-to-call-ipad-ipad-in-china-court-rules/

      If Apple clever enough they dont need to sell in China, as long as able to sell HK and peoples from China will buy from HK and sell inside China and still call iPad.

        I'd daresay that might not work.. all electronics are heavily taxed in China (meaning that imports are closely watched) and the PRC government has been forced into some very tight and uncomfortable patent-related situations over the last couple of years... so I would say that they would simply stop them at the border, not to protect the China company even though they will say that but to bring balance and harmony to the world (read: China). :)

    No Job = No Apple = No Winning

      You mean Jobs I assume, cause all the people fighting this obviously have a job :P

    Those prices are pretty crap. If they really wanted to hit the market with a bang go in hard and make a minimum profit for the pre-christmas period.

    Woohoo!! Just in time to be obsolete!

    Given how long they've been kept from the market, this is a pretty hollow victory, Apple largely won this battle in the end anyway, even if they ultimately failed legally.
    It remains to be seen how much the extra publicity granted by this on-going series of court cases benefits the Galaxy tab, and how much this precedent damages Apple's on going global legal campaign against all things Android and tablet shaped.

      I can only hope that this sets a precedent for future Apple, or any company really, attempts for injunctions on products where the two companies are in direct (rather than indirect) competition so that products are not taken off the shelves so quickly.

        Hopefully. Because it would make more sense and be fairer for both products to stay on the market and, if a patent breach was indeed found, for the loser to to forfeit all profits to the injured party.
        The method used in this case was nothing more than a transparent abuse of the legal process in order to unfairly fix the market in a manner favourable to one party only.

        Agreed - though I'm more than convinced these suits in particular were just crazy Steve-Jobs pushed ones that, meaning no offense to the man, everyone else now has to pick up the pieces of.

          That is truly a valid point. We read in his biography that he hated the whole Android scenario and want them to pay, but only time will tell whether they pursue it as much now that he has passed.

      I'm more curious to see what the next Galaxy Tab looks like - if it'll go for something really different or just a variation of the 10.1.

    Pfft tablets are so 2011, bring on the ultrabooks

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now