|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 09 2012 @ 05:20 PM EST |
Still haven't found the original ruling, but secondary
sources indicate that one model of Galaxy Tab was found to
violate competition laws for reasons that sound a lot like
what in the US we'd call "trade dress", and that in fact
this did result in an injunction (or rather, upholding the
preliminary injunction entered by the lower court).
In particular, one of the requirements of the trade-dress-
ish statute is that the devices must be similar enough that
consumers will conclude that one [Galaxy Tab 8.9] was an
imitation of the other [iPad]. So it's not much of a
stretch for apple to say that the German court concluded
that Samsung copied the iPad.
Hm, the sources are a little unclear on which models of
Galaxy Tab were covered by the injuction. There were at
least three in play in Germany: 8.9, 10.1, and 10.1N. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: yacc on Saturday, November 10 2012 @ 09:06 AM EST |
design = Gebrauchsmuster in this context.
(Gebrauch = usage, Muster = pattern)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
