A good way given the close commercial ties and that linked the two companies and "to give them a chance to come into line," said Lutton. But Jobs did not participate in subsequent meetings. An approach to the summit did not work, as proof the launch in September of that year the first Galaxy Tab in Germany and other materials the following months. The complaint of Apple Australia was originally on 13 patents, the number has since been reduced to 5, and in the lot, certain functions or applications were withdrawn by one or other of the protagonists. Samsung has removed an algorithm that allowed the shelf to detect if a contact on the touch screen was intentional or not (to produce an action). "We can live without this feature your Honor, I told you it was trivial," commented David Catterns, counsel for the Korean group. Samsung has also removed from the Australian version of its tablet a rebound effect in the animation produced by zoom on an image or document. Another loss - this time at the initiative of Apple - the system for unlocking a cursor that is moved on the screen (it was previously retoqué the Netherlands). Australian shelves will also receive mention in front of their manufacturer, a way to better differentiate the iPad. According to the country, the Galaxy Tab 10.1 "is not always presented with the Samsung logo on the screen (example below with the U.S. model that does not, it appears that back). Samsung said Apple had conducted a total of ten changes to the Australian model, including seven on the interface. Two violations of patents are still cited by Apple. One of the manufacturing process of capacitive screens of the iPad 2 and the new Galaxy will also use Tab (it will be noted that much progress has been achieved between the two generations of iPad for their finesse). The other is how to correct the movement of the user's finger on the screen when performing a vertical movement.
Stephen Burley, Apple's lawyer, defended the idea that Samsung was trying to push the latest possible a decision on the merits in order to lift the temporary injunction. He called for a continued ban of sales in Australia, arguing that even a temporary permission would be detrimental to sales iPad "It [the Galaxy Tab] will be launched on the market at the speed of a horse gallop, it will take sales iPad so rapidly that by the final ruling, the impact of patent infringement will be at the expense of Apple and Samsung to benefit. " Rob Small, marketing director for Apple Australia, concurred, "Once customers have their Galaxy Tab and have invested in apps for the tablet, we have permanently lost for other applications, because they become Android users and they can use their apps on the iPad. It is this vitality that underlies the success of Apple, which can be undermined by the violations of the Galaxy Tab. " According to IDC Apple shipped 420,000 iPad Australia and New Zealand (mostly in the first) in the second quarter, double the previous one. David Catterns Samsung has argued that his main competitors were the other manufacturers Samsung tablets Android rather than the iPad. Whether customers choose between Android and IOS, and it was the Android market as a whole trying to bite into the majority market share for Apple in Australia. "People will choose to stay because they love Apple Apple operating system, iTunes and so on. Or you want a completely different system and you will on the side of Android. " To which his opponent, David Burley, countered that Samsung sought to play down the influence of the tablet to escape the dictates of justice. The Korean group, according to Burley, the marketer would pad in the direction of the iPad and beyond the shelves of other manufacturers such as Acer and Android Motorola weighed nothing. Judge Bennett then issued a statement "I understand there point of view of a concession that Apple Samsung will be a player on the market feared. The objective of the Galaxy Tab will double - to develop Android market and more broadly - in the first instance at least - it will be at the expense of Apple. " Competition with other manufacturers Android is only secondary to begin with.
Apple is seeking a ruling on the merits at the earliest to avert the risk that the injunction lifted or Samsung not so modified versions before this trial takes place. The judge, in view of reducing the number of patents involved, suggested that November would be possible for this trial. Samsung for its part said it needed time, at least until next year to tie his record. He also asked that the maintenance of the injunction on sales, claimed by Apple or rejected. Annabelle Bennett said it would give its decision only on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 "and any other product. A new hearing on this extension of the ban on the sale is expected after next week.
