Samsung: Australian Galaxy Tab 10.1 ban ‘grossly unjust’

“Samsung argues that the judge who ordered its Galaxy Tab 10.1 to be banned from sale in Australia ‘misunderstood and misapplied’ basic requirements of the law and elements of her reasoning were ‘grossly unjust.'” Asher Moses reports for The Sydney Morning Herald.

“Apple was successful in October in winning a temporary injunction banning sales of Samsung’s tablet in Australia until a final hearing could take place next year,” Moses reports. “Samsung’s lawyer claimed Justice Bennett did not attempt to properly evaluate the strength of Apple’s case for infringement or whether the patents in question were invalid. He said she decided Apple had a prima facie case for patent infringement without conducting the proper tests… ‘We contend that the primary judge made a series of fundamental errors in her disposition of the interlocutory application. They were all errors of principle,’ Samsung’s lawyer told the court. ‘Her honour misunderstood and misapplied the basic requirements concerning interlocutory injunctions as laid down in [previous cases].'”

Moses reports, “Apple’s lawyers rejected Samsung’s arguments and said Justice Bennett had made “no error in principle” and had carefully considered a complex case. He said she would have been keenly aware of the serious consequences of granting Apple the temporary ban on the tablet.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: You know what’s really “grossly unjust?” Trying to trick less savvy consumers into buying inferior knockoffs of other company’s original ideas.

Apple’s products came first, then Samsung’s:

Samsung Galaxy and Galaxy Tab Trade Dress Infringement


    1. Stop your whinning. Apples ipad is just ok. Samsungs Galaxy Tab looks and feels better than the ipad 10 fold. Apple thinks they can rule the phone and tablet market but its not working out in apples favor. I use to own a iphone and ipad but have dumped them both for Samsung Galaxy Tab and Galaxy S2. Samsungs products are great products and apple is getting worried that they are going to loose then place on the poll. Apple needs to worry about Asus coming out with the Asus Eee Pad Prime it blows every tablet on the market today 10 fold. I will always say that iphones and ipads are for the girly girls who want a glossy, appy, shiney type of device.

    1. Though I’m not an attorney, I have had a lot of involvement in the legal system, and at least here in the USA (and, I infer, anywhere with a British-based legal system such as we have), claiming in an appeal that a judge in a lower court made an error is one of the valid bases for an appeal, and is not unusual. It’s understood in the legal fraternity that (a) the law is complex, (b) no one is without any bias whatsoever, and (c) even judges can misapply or misinterpret, and that’s why there’s a system of appeals. It’s nothing personal, it’s just that the law is full of ambiguities, and honest people can disagree.

      Please don’t get the idea that I’m calling Samsung honest here. 🙂

  1. I’m not too happy with this part:

    One of the judges appeared to agree with this proposition and another was critical of Apple’s claim that, had the Samsung tablet been allowed to launch, Apple would suffer huge harm. He sceptically asked Apple’s lawyer whether “the whole of Apple’s going to come tumbling down” if Samsung had been permitted to sell the tablet until the final hearing.

    So these two judges were basically saying,
    “Gee, Apple, would it kill you if Samsung stole just a bit of your IP for only a little while, so Samsung could gain some interim market share on Apple’s coattails?”

    The disingenuousness of these Judges’ questions seems pretty obvious.

  2. Samsung has no creativity at all.

    Copy or Create: That is the initial design question.

    There are so many ways to design user interface elements that I would dare say there is an equally usable interface design that can be done that does not infringe Apple’s.

    Sad when a major company has to defend copying.

  3. You know what else is grossly unjust? That Apple has to spend tens if not hundreds of millions to defend its IP from unimaginative, lazy ripoff artists. This isn’t the 90s, retards. Apple isn’t going to sit idly by and let Dillard’s profit from its IP.

  4. Trasher Moses is a Google shill, masquerading as a journalist. He never wastes an opportunity to promote Google or put the boot into Apple, and is one of the most dishonest and disreputable tech writers in the field, quite an achievement. The fact that Fairfax (Sydney Morning Herald, The Age) continues to employ him says a lot about their desperation for clicks at any cost and abandonment of any standards.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.