Galaxy tablets do not infringe Apple patents, says Dutch court

Galaxy tablets do not infringe Apple patents, says Dutch court

Summary: Following in the U.K.'s footsteps, a Dutch court has found that Samsung's Galaxy tablets do not infringe Apple's design patents for the iPad.

TOPICS: Samsung, Apple, iPad
Screen Shot 2013-01-16 at 11.18.01
Samsung's Galaxy tablets do not infringe Apple's patents, according to a Dutch court. Credit: Samsung.

Samsung's Galaxy tablets do not infringe Apple's design patents relating to the iPad, a court in the Netherlands ruled today.

In a judgment handed down by a district court in The Hague, the court found that the rounded corners of the Galaxy Tab 10.1, 8.9 and 7.7 did not infringe the patents held by Apple, citing a similar case in the British courts last year, which also found in favour of Samsung.

In a statement given to the Reuters news agency, Samsung said: "We continue to believe that Apple was not the first to design a tablet with a rectangular shape and rounded corners and that the origins of Apple's registered design features can be found in numerous examples."

In October last year, Apple lost a case at the U.K. High Court in London, in which the Cupertino, Calif.-based technology giant argued that Samsung's range of tablets infringed its design by using a similar rounded rectangle design. The court found that Apple's patents were not infringed.

And that's when it all started to get a little bit strange.

Apple was forced by a court order to run so-called "apology" advertisements on its U.K. Web site and a number of British printed publications. Apple placed a note on its U.K. Web site slamming the decision, embellishing the court-ordered text with additional detail in a bid to soften the embarrassment of having to admit to losing against its rival in court.

Samsung complained and Apple was forced to remove the statement. Instead of placing a link at the bottom of its Web site pointing to a separate page, Apple was instead told to include a message at the bottom of the page where it could be seen by anyone visiting the site.

Except, the problem was that nobody could see it. Apple was accused by the online community of using image resizing code that forced users to scroll down the page to view the apology text

Eventually the code was removed from Apple's site without a word from the court on the matter. The court ordered text was some weeks later published in a range of court-selected British newspapers and technology magazines as the court prescribed.

The iPhone and iPad maker was told to pay Samsung's legal fees in the U.K. for running a "false and misleading" statement on its site.

Topics: Samsung, Apple, iPad

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


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Message to Apple:

    More innovation, less litigation.

    I do not care how you slice it, but litigation takes management time and is a distraction, even though the cost to Apple may be peanuts.

    When you rage at competitors, it affects your mind.

    Perhaps we are starting to see the results of this ill advised mind set and strategy, as Apple seems to be falling behind.
    • Courts in Germany follow their own footsteps and they clearly found

      ... infringement of tablet patents. So there is no message to Apple. Also, Apple is all right with innovations. With court, they care that no one would steal their IP, and just it.
      • As did the US court.

        no text.
        • Funny, that US courts released Samsung from any claims regarding TABLETS.

          "Only" smartphones have been found infringing.

          Your comment only underscore how murky such things are to average consumer. (And media did poor job explaining too)
          • And,

            The English courts decisions, where Apple lost and was humiliated by having to post on their website that Samsung products to not copy Apple products (that they really never fulfilled to the letter of the law), can become law throughout the EU. The German courts, whose decision was arrived at later, could well be overturned. Especially with the new lawsuit in Spain.
        • But,

          The decision in the US court has been appealed. With the media attention afterward, the decision will most likely be overturned. (Nine jurors did not even read the instructions from the judge?!)
      • Apple's is full

        of innovation and bullshit. Their innovation is the conclusion that "everything in this world is innovated by them".
        Psychiatrist deal with this kind of innovations when treating severe cases of megalomania.
      • There are NO "tablet patents"

        • Yes - Apple claimed design patents on tablets

      • Apple is rotten

        This company patents existing ideas and sues other companies for infringement. It has run out of ideas and trying to protect territory by indulging in frivolous legal cases. This organisation is doomed.
        Van Der
    • Good advice

      But I don't think Apple needs it. They have always innovated and preferred to litigate without much noise.

      However, I see all these rulings as a future problem for Samsung. It is just a clash of the western and the eastern cultures. The way I read these rulings is more or less "Here, we told Apple to stop chasing you, now please behave, you too."

      The problem with Samsung is that they won't stop copying everyone, Apple included. It is just so deep in their culture and way of seeing the world. Not that Samsung has to copy Apple to be successful, but they just can't help it. Next time Apple brings the question of Samsung copying their next invention, no court will side with Samsung.

      Another issue is the FRAND claims by Samsung. My understanding is that given all these rulings, if Samsung does not withdraw these claims they will get sanctioned.
      • This is racist rubbish

        You are pathetic. So you want to say western cultures innovate and eastern cultures copy.

        Apple wants to use Samsung's technological FRAND patents for free where as demand $50 each for their rectangular shape with round edge patents. Large number of apple patents are being invalidated as they have re-patented existing patents belonging to others.

        Your moronic attitiude to innovation is just pathetic.
        Van Der
  • Ah ha!

    I said "Ah ha"!
  • More bad Court rulings

    No wonder Europe is following the U.S. in technology and wanting to put any U.S. based mobile OS in their products. This ruling proves they don't think for their citizens well being at all.

    In other news, all employees of the Dutch court system each received paycheck from Google and Microsoft following the ruling against Apple...
    • So the way you determine whether a court decision is correct... by looking at who won? This is a common approach, but I don't think it's the correct one.
      John L. Ries
    • Could you provide some proof

      If you have proof you should immedialtely provide this. Otherwise you are engaging in lies and innuendo and you need psychiatric care.
      Van Der
      • Van Der

        Whatever troll!
        • You should at least give him the choice

          or have you already decided which you want - pot or kettle?
          Little Old Man
    • But the Dutch court agreed with the US court...

      Your argument fails immediately, as the US jury also ruled that Samsung's tablets did not infringe. (They only penalised Samsung for their phones.)
  • Why do Americans always assume

    That the US ruling, despite all of its conflict of interest, and despite a US company winning against a non-US company, based on a plethora of ridiculous patents allowed by the US patent office for the benefit of US companies, that the US ruling is correct and all others are false?
    And what's with the stupid name-calling, and the implications that only the US allows its citizens any freedom, and all foreign courts (and individuals) are corrupt?
    Americans should remember that, unless they are first-nation, they all came from "overseas" originally, and that their government and legal system are based on European models.

    These arguments are simply childish.