One of the things that really irks any impartial observer of intellectual property developments is that there are courts in the USA and Germany known for their apparent partiality in IP cases, which leads to their being selected by petitioners in choice of venue situations in order to gain what appears to be an unfair advantage over opposing parties.
FOSS Patents writes that:
“Even though most of my blog posts relate to litigation in the United States, I’m actually a native and still a resident of Germany. The Düsseldorf district court has a reputation for being our equivalent of the Eastern District of Texas in terms of a strong tendency to favor the interests of right holders over those of alleged infringers. About half of all European (!) patent litigation takes place before that court.” [emphasis added by LawPundit]
If courts are not impartial, or if they permit situations to arise where their impartiality is legitimately called into question by prevailing venue practices, then an impartial observer draws the conclusion that intellectual property law is a pea and shell game in which certain courts can be relied upon to decide disproportionately in favor of petitioners on intellectual property actions.
That has little do with justice in law and breeds disrespect for law and order, which is the foundation of modern civilization.
There may be those who think that we exaggerate these matters, but current events tell a different story. Many observers — in our opinion rightly — see the current world and legal situation as a “rigged” game favoring monopolists and the wealthy.
Further below in this posting, embedded from Scribd and see also Google docs is the Apple motion for an EU-Wide Preliminary Injunction Against the Sale of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe apparently submitted to the Düsseldorf court by Apple’s lawyers, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP, a large German-English law firm conglomerate, with the objective of obtaining a preliminary injunction against the sale of an iPad2 competitor, the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe.
Take a look there at the allegedly unique iPad2 outer design features that Apple claims are infringed by the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1.
Here is what the Apple motion claims as the infringed outer features of the iPad2 (unofficial LawPundit translation into English from the online German-language document, allegedly a true copy of the original motion):
“The overall appearance of the two products shown above [LawPundit note: the reference is to the false and misleading side-by-side comparison] is virtually identical, because the Galaxy Tab 10.1 copies all of the distinctive elements of the features of the iPad2:
(i) a rectangular product with four uniformly rounded corners;
(ii) a flat, clear surface, which covers the front of the product;
(iii) the appearance of a metallic bezel [frame, side borders] around the flat, clear surface;
(iv) a display, which is centered on the clear surface;
(v) below the clear surface there are definite, neutrally kept limits [border lines?] to all sides of the display [LawPundit query: who can see these?]; and
(vi) when the product is turned on, color icons within the display.In addition, the Tab 10.1 copies the prominent thin profile of the iPad2.”
In fact, contrary to the above misleading representation, the following is true:
(i) the rectangles have markedly differing aspect ratios. The 10.1 takes its name from the fact that it is 10.1 inches in length and 6.9 inches in width, as compared to the Apple iPad2’s shorter length of 9.5 inches and greater width of 7.3 inches. TWO DIFFERENT RECTANGLES. The rounded corners of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 are drawn out longer.
(ii) the surfaces are not identical as the Galaxy Tab 10.1 uses Corning Gorilla Glass. TWO DIFFERENT GLASS SURFACES.
(iii) the tops and bottoms of the Apple bezel [frame] are wider than the sides, whereas the Galaxy bezel is equally wide on all four sides and connects to a plastic chassis underside as compared to the metallic chassis of the iPad2, and as Engadget notes, for the Galaxy Tab 10.1: “the edges are surrounded by a matte silver finish.” TWO DIFFERENT BEZEL DESIGNS.
(iv) the displays are not the same, as the iPad2 capacitative touchsceen is 1024 x 768 pixels and the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is 1280 x 800 pixels. TWO DIFFERENT GLASS SURFACES. The higher color saturation of the Samsung has been criticized (see Tested.com). TWO DIFFERENT COLOR DISPLAY SYSTEMS.
(v) I am not sure what this design feature means, so that a comparison here is not possible. Does this mean that the display has a thin anti-aliased line outlined on the edges? Surely this was listed in jest as an allegedly protectable feature. Is this related in any way to the light leakage on the display edges that iPad2 users have been complaining about?
(vi) The color icon systems are quite different. TWO DIFFERENT COLOR ICON SYSTEMS. We quote from Deviceguru.com in Tablet smackdown: Galaxy Tab 10.1 vs. iPad 2:
“The following two sets of screenshots compare the primary home screens of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 (left pair) and iPad 2 (right pair) after each tablet has had its home screen wallpaper modified and a screen or two of apps installed. See if you can spot some interesting differences…[See deviceguru.com for the images]
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (left pair) and iPad 2 (right pair) home screens (click thumbnails to enlarge)A few noteworthy differences in the home screens and icons include: [emphasis added by LawPundit]The iPad 2 holds 25 app or folder icons per screen, five of which are constant across all home screens since they’re located on the system tray.The Galaxy Tab 10.1 holds 35 app icons per screen but doesn’t come with a folder icon option; however, home screen folders can be added via an Android app (discussed below).The Galaxy Tab 10.1 maintains icon array placement consistency at the cost of adjusting row/column spacing a bit, when you rotate it between landscape and portrait orientations; this consistency makes it easy to keep track of where apps are located within the home screen array.The iPad 2 changes from a 4×5 to a 5×4 array (not including the 1×5 tray) when you rotate the device from landscape to portrait orientation; this alters the location of apps and folders (other than what’s in the tray) on the home screen, other than the upper-left and lower-right corners, making it harder to locate specific apps when you rotate the screen between its two modes. It’s surprising that Apple would tolerate this level of UI inconsistency; however, it keeps horizontal/vertical icon spacing constant across the two orientations, so perhaps this is a case of style trumping substance.Personally, I prefer the Galaxy Tab 10.1′s higher density of app icons to the iPad 2′s “airy” approach. It’s a more efficient use of home screen real estate, and it less[e]ns the need for scrolling among multiple screens to locate a desired app.”