Friday, August 19, 2011

Apple on the offensive

Since Apple successfully banned all of Samsung's Galaxy Tab, by claiming it was a breach of their patented design of the iPad, their has been a lot of discussion about how the EU's laws about design-copyright.

This has all been a huge matter in Europe and I think it's about time to take a look at how Apple has been presenting their accusations and the validity of the information they have come up with.

First of all there is a law in EU that covers design-copyright which is used to protect against copying the looks of a product such as chairs, lamps, furniture and such. Then when Apple they submitted their design specification, you might expect them to send in a description of the iPad.
   Instead they just submitted a piece of paper with a drawing that could describe most tablets ever made and probably a lot more in the future. The specification is barely more than a square with screen and rounded corners. See this.

Then they misled the German court by manipulating evidence. In the about 70-pages-long document there is an image where the Galaxy Tab is compared to the iPad. And it's commonly known that the iPad has a screen dimension of 4:3 and the Tab 16:10, but in the document they have been presented to be exactly the same size, see this. This should be considered illegal and Apple should lose the case. But as a big and powerful corporation the ban was just reduced to just cover Germany.



Now Apple decided to just try again and do it in the Netherlands and now they require a ban of all the Galaxy products including the phones in all of Europe.

Should a company like Apple be allowed to manipulate and cheat respected courts? Or should they be reviewed for there behavior and another review for monopoly?

2 comments:

  1. This is absurd. I don't know how apple can expect people to take the seriously when they make claims like this. They are acting almost tyrannically in the light that they have attacked Samsung for putting out a tablet that doesn't even closely resemble their own. As far as I am concerned they are being childish.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with the comment above. We can't accept this behaviour.

    ReplyDelete