Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

Summary: Samsung has won a rare patent battle with Apple in Australia, in an ongoing global legal war between the two tablet and smartphone giants.

SHARE:
51

Samsung is set to resume selling its Galaxy Tab tablets in Australia after a rare win against Apple in an ongoing, global patent dispute.

An Australian federal appeals court unanimously chose to lift the preliminary sales injunction that banned the sale of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1.

Samsung will not be able to sell its tablets immediately in the region, however. A stay was granted on the order until December 2nd at 4 p.m. local time. While this will reduce its time on the market in the run-up to Christmas, it allows Samsung to gather its pace and issue stock to local retailers.

The ban will allow Samsung to participate in the highly-anticipated Christmas markets, one of the busiest times for shopping in the annual calendar. Though Australia's market is not as large as Germany's or that of the United States, it remains a key market for competing products, including the iPad.

A sales injunction forced Samsung to stop selling its Android-powered tablets in Germany earlier this year, and a court in the Netherlands forced the company to modify some of its smartphone models.

Apple has since filed a preliminary sales injunction request in Germany to force the redesigned Galaxy Tab 10.1N off the shelves. Samsung has changed the appearance of the tablet to comply with Apple's lawyers' requests in a bid to circumvent the order.

While a rare victory for Samsung, where the seemingly one-sided war has seen Apple prevail in all but every jurisdiction it has brought a claim, it may not have significant impact on other cases around the world.

During the ongoing proceedings, it has been made clear that the Samsung range of tablets offers one of the greatest competitive threats to Apple's iPad, though still a distant second in marketshare statistics.

It was only last week, Justice Lindsay Foster told the Australian appeals court that the initial preliminary sales injunction was "not terribly fair to Samsung".

Read more on this story from ZDNet Australia.

Related:

Topics: Tablets, Apple, iPad, Mobility, Samsung

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

Talkback

51 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

    Rare? Hardly. This would be common place if junk patents were cheaper to contest.
    BrentRBrian
    • Junk patents aside, this court specifically set up that Apple could appeal

      @BrentRBrian: ... this decision.
      dderss
  • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

    Dear ZDNet

    I asked this before and I ask again: Why is a defeat for Apple "rare" and for its competitors "huge"?

    Specifically why, every time something goes against Google, is it projected like the end of the road for the search giant and why when the same thing happens to Apple are adjectives like "rare" and "minor" used?
    Lord_of_the_Singhs
    • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

      @Lord_of_the_Singhs
      Google sells ads and by doing so takes money away from mainstream media. Apple buys more ads then Google. Mainstream media is just protecting their bottom line by siding with Apple.
      Jean-Pierre-
      • and this answers the question how?

        @Jean-Pierre-

        hmmmmm................
        rhonin
      • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

        @Jean-Pierre-

        If only consumers realized this. To many consumers read stuff on sites like this thinking it is unbiased reporting, when in reality they are basically reading nothing but roundabout Apple advertising. Sad.
        gatormba2003
      • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

        @Jean-Pierre-

        Interesting.
        DonRupertBitByte
    • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

      @Lord_of_the_Singhs

      You can no more rightly compare "rare" and "huge" that you can "rare" and "minor." Reviewing only the patent violation suits by and against AAPL ove the past 3-4 months only, a loss would have to be considered rare indeed.

      So, when something occurs RARELY (such as Apple's loss of a Patent lawsuit filed against AAPL) is indeed huge. Using 'rare" and "huge" in the same comparison is one thing, but to attempt to compare the two words is inane.
      Rbutler222
  • Rare ?

    The times they are a-changin': November 2nd 2011 '' Apple loses tablet case against small Spanish firm '' . NT-K, the small Spanish firm, , is demanding compensation from Apple for losses during the ban of its product and is suing Apple for alleged anti-competitive behavior.
    Legal007
  • Android Tablet

    I really didn't expect to happen this as i was looking for the Samsung tab, because Apple is really Expensive.
    http://www.gadgetmasala.com/latest-and-best-android-tablets-available-on-pre-order.html
    cbhattarai
    • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

      @cbhattarai

      If AAPL were to manufacture the iPad, iPhone or MBA from plastics, and cheap, flimsy frames and then violated AAPL's patents rather than innovate something exciting, revolutionary and magical, THEN AND ONLY THEN could the item be considered expensive. But, if you offer the public something that is truly new, innovative, revolutionary and magical and that same company filed and received a good, solid patent as a result of all the hard work, dead brain cells, THEN IT COULD NEVER BE CONSIDERED EXPENSIVE.

      The cost of an item should never be viewed as expensive if what you are purchasing truly is made from the highest quality materials and made to specs that no one else uses much less thinks about, then it can't be thought of as expensive. If that item is still working as it was designed to do 5 years prior and working well, its cost is incalculable. And, it certainly is not expensive.

      If, on the other hand, the purchased item is made from materials that rarely last more than a year, if that long, and is cheaply made and flimsy rather than solid, where "solid" is the gold standard, then it's EXPENSIVE.

      REMEMBER, there is a big difference between "expensive" and "dear."
      Rbutler222
      • conclusion

        @Rbutler222

        all the devices that Apple has delivered these past few years are, by your own words, extremely expensive. More so, their prices can only be justified on the fact that people keep buying them.
        If I worked at Apple I would price them even higher!! Like double or more! Then a half-price or 15% "discount" would seem lovely to all those "enlightened" consumers!
        I agree with you on all you said! ;)

        PS: if you truly analyse these past few devices, nothing is new or unheard of, nothing is cutting-edge technology or even medium-edge technology sometimes, and some "upgrades" are comprised on things that were already available on many other devices years before!

        Years ago I looked to Apple as a good example of quality, though pricey.
        Nowadays it's only overpriced, with nice package. Like a mistress :P
        kalimeru
      • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

        @Rbutler222
        So using this logic then Apple should be able to charge $10,000 for an Ipad because its made of high quality materials and it is exciting, revolutionary, and magical.

        And Disney world should charge you $100,000 for admittance because of the unique, exciting, and magical experience you have inside their gates.
        chethammer
  • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

    [b]It was only last week, Justice Lindsay Foster told the Australian appeals court that the initial preliminary sales injunction was ???not terribly fair to Samsung???.[/b]

    I have to wonder if she in in Samsung's pocket... after all Samsung slavishly copied the iPad right down to the very packaging and thus far the Australian court is the only one to lift the ban.

    As for the rarity of Apple losing a patent suit like others here have pointed out that is becoming less rare.
    athynz
    • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

      @Pete "athynz" Athens

      Actually it's another way around. The judge that issued the ban, Annabelle Bennett, is married to the senior partner, David Annabelle, of the firm that repersenting in Apple's case.

      So no wonder the federal appeals court wants to lift the ban.
      Samic
      • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

        @Samic Many of us have been wondering why Bennett didn't just recuse herself from the case originally. If this fraternal relationship between Bennett and Apple is sufficiently explored, I wonder to what degree the AU court could be liable for damages from lost sales during the period in which the erroneous injunction was in place. Probably not a gambit Samsung wants to pursue at this time, but Bennett's decision to remain on the case was clearly an embarrassment to the AU legal system.
        sy69
      • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

        @Samic

        Samsung might wait until the 'dust settles' and then bring this apparent [i]conflict of interest[/i] to the attention of the Australian Judiciary. I do know that in many US states, such a 'conflict' could be grounds for removal from the bench.
        fatman65536
      • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

        @Samic Yep, and you likely will not see another one in the AU anyway!
        slickjim
      • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

        @Samic Interesting - do you have any proof of this?
        athynz
      • RE: Samsung's Galaxy Tab sales ban lifted in rare Apple patent defeat

        @Samic <br>@Pete "athynz" Athens<br><br>Yes, her husband and the Barrister representing Apple in her court are senior members of '5 Wentworth'. I am not sure whether this is a firm. Someone suggested that it is a chambers where all the lawyers suppose to work independantly.<br><br>One more thing, the Judge Annabelle Bennett herself is an alumni of '5 Wentworth'.<br><br>Google '5 Wentworth', you could see their website and under 'People' link in their website you could see all senior members. David Bennett is the husband of the Judge Annabelle Bennett. In their website, it is clearly stated Annabelle Bennett is an alumni of '5 Wentworth'.<br><br>I still think that, to be fair, Annabelle should have not taken the job as a judge in this Apple v Samsung.
        Yerie