Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 24th Aug 2011 13:58 UTC
Legal Breaking news from my swamp home country The Netherlands: the Dutch court has just banned the sales of all Galaxy S, SII and Ace smartphones in the entire European Union. The judge has ruled that Android 2.x violates Apple's 868 patent which covers scrolling through photos on a touchscreen. Only this one patent is violated - the complaints about two other patents as well as the design patents has been thrown out. In other words, the judge did not agree with Apple that Samsung is copying Apple's design. The injunction only covers the Galaxy smartphones, since they run Android 2.x; Android 3.0 does not violate the patent in question, and hence, sales of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 can continue. In fact, only the Gallery application violates the patent in question, and Samsung has already stated it is going to replace this application on all new Galaxy smartphones from now on - sales won't even be interrupted. In other words - two patents thrown out, design stuff rejected, and only one patent complaint upheld which will cause no harm to Samsung. Apple just scored a meaningless victory. The Dutch court order is here. The pictures speak thousands of words.
Thread beginning with comment 486638
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Dryhte
by Lennie on Wed 24th Aug 2011 17:52 UTC in reply to "Comment by Dryhte"
Lennie
Member since:
2007-09-22

Well, the EU (and thus the Netherlands) don't grant any software patents.

So I guess the judge thinks this isn't just software, because you need to use the touchscreen in a certain way as well.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Dryhte
by JAlexoid on Wed 24th Aug 2011 23:24 in reply to "RE: Comment by Dryhte"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Actually we(EU) do grant software patents. Philips of The Netherlands is the biggest offender in that area, by the way...
It's just it's a lot harder to do and overcomplicated language just results in a longer review of the patent. A real inventive step is required these days, though some older patents with ridiculous claims exist.

Reply Parent Score: 2