Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Jan 2012 19:09 UTC
Legal Summer last year, the Dutch courts ruled that Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 did not infringe on Apple's community designs, and as such, would not be banned from The Netherlands. This was a "quick case", and as such, Apple had the right to appeal and turn this into a "full case". Apple did, but I now think they really wish they hadn't - the Court of Appeal in The Hague has pretty much ripped Apple a new one [Dutch], and upheld the District Court's ruling.
Thread beginning with comment 504476
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Bad result for Apple
by Hollinch on Wed 25th Jan 2012 08:58 UTC in reply to "Bad result for Apple"
Hollinch
Member since:
2009-08-05

It is correct that you use the word 'innovative'. According to the definition, innovation is about bringing better or more effective products, services, technologies, etc. This in contrast to invention, which is about the development of novel products.

So, in a sense, this is exactly what the expected outcome should've been. Apple (and many others including Samsung) released _innovative_ products built on inventions (and innovations) of others, which means there will always be predecessors with a high degree of similarity to the released products, and thus a high likelihood of prior art. The uniqueness of the original invention defeats or at least severely downplays the uniqueness of those innovations.

Cheers, Jaap

Reply Parent Score: 2