HN Explorer

6 comments

[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 18.9 ms ] thread
caf
This seems to capture the general flavour of the ruling:

  It is sufficient for us to express the view that, on the
  present state of the evidence, there is a real and
  substantial prospect that the importation into and supply
  in Australia of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 will not infringe
  claim 6 of the Touch Screen Patent. We have referred to
  a number of difficulties that confront Apple in making good
  its case on infringement. It may well be that, on a final
  hearing, Apple will meet these difficulties. But
  difficulties they are. Whilst we would not be prepared to
  say that Apple's case on infringement is not open to be
  argued, the difficulties to which we have referred do
  affect the assessment at the present time of the probability
  that, if on a final hearing the evidence remains the same,
  Apple will be found to be entitled to final injunctive
  relief for infringement of that claim. If Apple has
  established a prima facie case at all (which we doubt), it
  is founded upon a construction argument which, if the
  evidence remains as it is, is unlikely to succeed at trial.
fpgeek
Just started looking at it, but I like this bit from the initial list of court orders:

  7. The respondents pay the appellants’ costs of and  
  incidental to the application for leave to appeal and the 
  appeal.
The appellants are Samsung and the respondents are Apple. I don't know about Australia, but in the US winning court costs tends to be a big deal.
InclinedPlane
"Loser pays" is the norm for most of the world outside the US.
cturner
In line with what inclinedplane said, I've always found it strange that costs are generally not awarded in US legal culture. Awarding costs takes a lot of the momentum out of strategic and extortive lawsuit practices, and gives people a lot more incentive to settle out of court - a practice that's broadly regarded as a good thing. If anyone knows a reason it's not done, I'd be interested to hear it.
ars
If I were in the market for a tablet I would certainly look at the the Galaxy Tab.

If Apple considers them their biggest threat, then that's quite an endorsement.

fondue
They were the biggest threat at the time the lawsuit was filed. I think the target will be changing to Amazon and ASUS in the near future.