Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Samsung given Galaxy Tab go-ahead after Apple loses sales ban bid

By | December 8, 2011, 5:51pm PST

Summary: An Australian court has lifted a sales ban on Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1, allowing the highly anticipated tablet to be sold in the region — finally.

An Australian court has lifted a sales ban on Galaxy 10.1 tablet, giving Samsung the green light to push the highly anticipated tablet out onto the market just in time for Christmas.

The sales injunction had been in effect since late July, after Apple secured a bid in court to ban the tablet from store shelves.

But on Friday, Australia’s High Court refused Apple’s application for special leave to appeal in the ongoing patent dispute, which has spread to over 30 cases in 10 jurisdictions.

Samsung said it was “pleased” with the judgement, sister-site ZDNet Australia reports.

An earlier Federal Court decision lifted the injunction that had prevented the sale of the Galaxy Tab 10.1, but Apple immediately requested a stay on the order as to allow its appeal process to go through to a higher court. This then forced an extra week on the then-lifted injunction.

While the High Court did not explicitly say that there were no grounds for Apple to appeal, it said that there would be little chance of the case succeeding.

The Cupertino-based giant was also ordered to pay legal costs for Samsung’s case, but details are yet to be finalised.

While Samsung prevailed in this case, Apple was given reprieve in a French court after the Korean giant had proposed a sales ban in the country of the iPhone 4S.

Sales of the tablet in Australia will have been severely dented by this sales injunction, but the company hopes to recoup some of its losses in the coming fortnight leading up to the end-of-year holiday season.

Read more on this story from ZDNet Australia.

Related:

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Zack Whittaker, a criminologist who studied at the University of Kent, Canterbury, is a journalist, writer and broadcaster.

Disclosure

Zack Whittaker

I worked briefly with Microsoft UK in 2006 but no longer have any connection with the company. Regardless, I remain impartial and unbiased in my views.

I don't hold any stock or shares, investments or industrial secrets in any company, but have signed confidentiality agreements with a number of UK and U.S. organisations, whose names I am not at liberty to disclose.

I was involved with Kent Union, the University of Kent's student union, undertaking voluntary, non-salaried, elected positions between early 2009 and mid-2010.

No other company, body, government department, non-governmental organisation or third sector organisation employs me or pays me a salary in any capacity whatsoever.

As a freelance journalist, whenever expenses are given and taken by a company that is not CBS Interactive, these will be disclosed in each relevant post to ensure transparency.

I currently work with a UK law enforcement unit, but this is an entirely separate position which bears no connection to other work.

(Updated: 23rd October 2011)

Biography

Zack Whittaker

Zack Whittaker, criminologist who studied at the University of Kent, UK, is a journalist, writer and broadcaster.

After studying criminology at university, though still in his early-20's, he has already had a series unconventional work and voluntary positions. He has worked with researchers studying neurological illnesses like Tourette's syndrome (which he suffers from), has given lectures on the nature of disabilities in the public community, and occasionally ends up speaking on television and radio discussing the events of the day.

He first had academic work published at the age of 22, then still an undergraduate, and has been cited by a wide range of publications: from CNN, the Huffington Post, AllThingsDigital, The Atlantic Wire and CBS News.

15
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Samsung given Galaxy Tab go-ahead after Apple loses sales ban bid
non-biased 16th Dec
@WinTard You forgot to add "as long as you report things how I want to hear them" to the end of that line.
If I were Samsung I would drop 3 Million of them in Austrailia for $250 each over the next 2 weeks! Then I would do the same every place an injunction were lifted.

Why would I do this? Because Apple got pissed that they were 1 upped by the size and weight of the tablet so they moved to block sales.
@Peter Perry

Nice idea. I'll never buy anything Apple because of all these attempts to block competition.
@Peter Perry

Honestly, it's not like Samsung is moving large quantities of these tablets anyway. Injunction or no injunction... same difference. Selling them hundreds below cost is the only way they'd move that amount in a reasonable period of time anyway.

For all of this talk about how Apple "is pissed about being 1 upped", etc. this clearly is not reflected in the marketplace. Wasn't 2011 supposed to be the year of the iPad killer? You know... attack of the clones... what happened?
@techconc
You may be very right. iPad 2 is huge - and Apple can't hire enough genuises for their brick-and-mortar. It's just the principle. If the thing is so insanely great it doesn't need to place legal obstacles in front of the competition.
0 Votes
+ -
What happened?
daboochmeister 9th Dec
@techconc - their market share went from near-100% to ~68%. In about 1 year. With sales of major competitors blocked.

I don't think the bean-counters in Cupertino view it quite the way you do. Yes, their gross sales increased ... but the writing is on the wall, and i'm sure it looks very familiar from their experience with the iPhone. They know they're in for a serious fight.
@Peter Perry
Very cool idea. Anyone who sticks their finger in Apple's eye is AOK by me! And what better way to do it?
I must congratulate you Zack Whittaker, your articles are informative, useful, and I detect no BS or bias.

Kudos for reporting facts, basically true journalism. Your presence as well as that of Ed Bott on ZDNet gives me great comfort in coming here to learn.

Thank you.

~~~~~~~~~~
No person who is enthusiastic about his work has anything to fear from life.
~ Samuel Goldwyn
@WinTard You forgot to add "as long as you report things how I want to hear them" to the end of that line.
by this sales injunction,"

Not likely of a much adverse affect if sales and/or methods to pump up Android tablet numbers in Canada are any indication.

Service provider Rogers is giving away a FREE (or cheap) Samsung Tab with any contract when you buy 2 phones (3 year), or subscribe to it's digital TV+Internet (2 year) service.

http://redboard.rogers.com/tag/samsung-galaxy-tab/

Android numbers inflated by give-aways and buy-one, get one (or more) free promotions, no matter the recent drug-induced spin by Eric Schmidt.

( shields up!!! happy )
@MacCanuck
It doesn't matter if the carrier is giving away or not since it was the carrier who subsidizing the customer. Samsung still got paid for the Tab one way or another.

So does Robbers that suck blood out of their customers as well. Yes, I am also a Canadian.
Common sense seems to prevail, that a rectalgular black shiny slate and some packaging, bear no ability to be patented....

Just barking mad it took so long to be thrown out.
Zack
The Australian High Court is not just any old court, it is the highest court of the land. One can not appeal or review decisions by the Hight Court, so how about giving credit where credit is due. The Australian ZDNet sister site (which you cited) got it right so why can't you?
@Phil689 What are you on about? Where does Zack say our High Court is NOT the highest court??
@Gadsy ...see here:
Summary: An Australian court has lifted a sales ban on Samsung???s Galaxy Tab 10.1, allowing the highly anticipated tablet to be sold in the region...
and here:
An Australian court has lifted a sales ban on Galaxy 10.1 tablet, giving Samsung the green light to push the highly anticipated tablet out onto the market just in time for Christmas.

Even though Zack goes on to mention the Hight Court further in the text, the damage (ie belittling) has already been done, for few people read past the headline.
You see, the behemoth fought tooth and nail in all Australian courts to prevent Samsung from excercising its rights as a competitor.
Now, if you don't understand the difference (and importance) of this momentous decision then I'm sorry for you.
The irony here is that Apple may well have created interest in the Galxy Tab by seeking to have it banned.

If I were Samsung I'd be running ads touting the G-tab as: "A tablet so good, Apple doesn't want you to be able to by it!"

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix