Apple Denied Appeal in Australian Galaxy Tab Ban Case

[JMcEntegart]

Apple has been served another blow in its worldwide legal battle with Samsung.

Apple Denied Appeal in Australian Galaxy Tab Ban Case : Read more

 

[tipmen]

Trolls are troll and apple appears to be the biggest troll of them all. I hope they get denied again.

 

[Dacatak]

Denied!


...AGAIN!

 

[nao1120]

Good to have some competition. I think a 300 dollar price tag would be reasonable for a tablet. Since it costs 170-200 to make. I don't have a use for one yet.... Maybe when there is a use later on in life.

 

[freggo]

Good news for the consumer. Competition is needed to get the price down on these things !

 

[de5_Roy]

may be the court finally realized that apple wants to create a monopoly for their highly overpriced tablets and other ios devices. serves apple right.

 

[house70]

Apple's case had no merit to begin with, I'm glad common sense prevailed in this case; it's not very often nowadays that it does.

 

[john15v16]

It's about blasted time that the courts display common sense and stop this apple foolishness. I "previously" really liked apple until after all this fad iphone and ipad crap. Never thought the industry would bend like this because of one companies whims (oooops I forgot about MS) but, still man it didn't make good sense. Oh and BTW i really like Flash for all you trend trolls out there who just need something to talk about to make yourselves seem like you're in the loop. You obviously don't program and are simply pissed because the web doesn't look right on your stupid "I" device. And for all you noob JavaScript programmers who want to try and comment on my comments above, forget you too cause' any real seasoned javascript programmer knows that the real issue holding back the web isn't flash it's JavaScript because it's too damn rudimentary of a programming language and the other issue how the web treats dynamic data of any type (be it flash or ajax) the HTTP protocol needs to be re-invented to support dynamic data now, those are the real issues.

 

[friskiest]

Serves them right; its quite ironic that Apple is so obsessed in this matter even when the iPad/iPhone 4 is actually powered by Samsung's A4 chip.

About the design,. sure, they may have quite a similarity, but if someone has the money to buy a $500 iPad it shouldn't be hard for them to know which is which.

Competition Apple,. thats how you SHOULD play the game.

 

[joytech22]

Hell yeah. Can't wait to see these in stores soon.
Then again, kinda late now with Tegra 3 tablets arriving soon.

 

[renami9]

Apple : iAppeal
Court : iDeny
Samsung : iSmile

 

[alidan]

wait wait wait...

The newspaper cites one of the judges in the high court today as saying Apple only won the first injunction 'by the skin of its teeth' because Samsung was penalised for refusing to agree to an early final hearing.

are you telling me that instead of justice and whats right, samsung lost the first time because it didn't want the whole thing rushed?

if so... i find that sick.

 

[Scoregie]

I'm So Happy

 

[memadmax]

Apple + denied = HAHA! You got punked!

These two words in the same sentence bring a smile to my face every time =D

 

[husker]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]wait wait wait... are you telling me that instead of justice and whats right, samsung lost the first time because it didn't want the whole thing rushed? if so... i find that sick.[/citation]
Not exactly. Until a judgement was made, there was a chance that samsung was harming apple in some way. The judge cannot arbitrarily be anti-apple and say, "Aw, ya lousey bunch of patent trolls!", but instead has to actually be impartial. Therefore the court has an obligation to avoid any potential damage until a determination could be made. Samsung was offered a chance to get a quick answer so as not to waste time. They refused.

 

[husker]

[citation][nom]nao1120[/nom]Good to have some competition. I think a 300 dollar price tag would be reasonable for a tablet. Since it costs 170-200 to make. I don't have a use for one yet.... Maybe when there is a use later on in life.[/citation]
Where are you getting these numbers from? The Amazon Kindle Fire is a very scaled back tablet (no camera, a mere 8 GB, and smallish screen, etc.) and is selling for $199 USD and it is widely believed that they are losing money on it in order to sell digital content for the thing.

 

[egidem]

This news brings me joy! It goes to show that with all the influence and money that Apple has there are still good people out there in the world who will say NO to their bribes.

 

[Uberragen21]

[citation][nom]nao1120[/nom]Good to have some competition. I think a 300 dollar price tag would be reasonable for a tablet. Since it costs 170-200 to make. I don't have a use for one yet.... Maybe when there is a use later on in life.[/citation]
"iPad 2 Carries Bill of Materials of $326.60"
iPad 2 BOM
"The Samsung Galaxy Tab has a Bill of Materials (BOM) of $205.22"
Galaxy Tab 10.1 BOM
I believe that BOM is for the 16 GB models on both tablets. Kind of makes you wonder why Samsung doesn't make their product much more competitively priced. I can only assume the company needs to make up loses from the extended legal battles.

 

[synd]

Apple should be sanctioned for this bullshit they do almost every week.

 

[ojas]

Motorola's won against Apple in Germany too, btw.