Samsung Galaxy Tablet Ban In Australia Continues:
If you have not been keeping up with Apple’s recent legal actions against Samsung et al then please do type “Samsung”, “Legal” or “Patent” into our search box to your right and read all about it.
In yet another blow to the South Korean device manufacturer, Australian courts have upheld a continued ban on the sale of the Samsung Galaxy Tab from stores in the country.
Prior to the recent ruling, a judge in Australia had deemed that Apple had:
“established a prima facie case for an entitlement to relief on the Heuristics Patent”.
And Samsung duly appealed and actually obtained some degree of success, though unfortunately for Samsung this did not mean that they could simply start selling their tablet again in the country. Apple was given until the end of the week to respond to the ruling that overturned Apple’s desire to block all sales of the Samsung Tab in Australia.
Apple take Samsung Galaxy Tab case to High Court:
Obviously Apple did this with gusto in a move designed to further delay any verdict by taking the case to the high court, so now the high court of Australia must come to a decision, but until this actually happens, the ban will remain. Giving Apple an extra few days or weeks to get back to their legal team and start working out further counter claims and plans of attack and defence.
Such are the stakes in the fast paced environment of tablet and smartphone technology that every day and month counts, especially coming up to Christmas.
Yes, Apple have been heavily gunning for rival manufacturers of smartphones and tablets over what they perceive are patent issues related to their own technology.
But out of all the companies that have been affected by recent litigation, Samsung seem to be the ones who have had it the toughest, with a current ban on sales of their Galaxy tablet in Germany which looks set to be lifted after Samsung have redesigned the tab to counteract claims of copying.
What do you think to Apple’s continued aggression related to patent issues? Are they pushing their weight around a bit too much or simply protecting their assets?
Anthony Munns