One day before a Dutch ban on sales of its Galaxy smartphone is set to go into place, Samsung reportedly will jettison a feature that judges found violated an iPhone patent. The Netherlands had said it would ban sales of three offending Samsung smartphones beginning Thursday.
The design change, reported by South Korea’s Yonhap news agency, involves using “a different method of browsing pictures” on the Galaxy smartphone, according to the Associated Press. The Netherlands is not the only European country Samsung faces sales problems.
In early September, a German judge approved a permanent stop to sales of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1. In her ruling, Presiding Judge Johanna Brueckner-Hofmann wrote: “For the informed customer there remains the predominant overall impression that the device looks” like Apple’s iPad.
Samsung also faces potential sales bans in Australia, where the company has voluntarily withheld is device until a judge can rule on the merits of Apple’s allegations. Elsewhere, a Japanese court is also considering a case against Samsung. Samsung has not stood idly by, though. The South Korean firm recently sued Apple in France and has threatened to file a lawsuit in its home country to stop distribution of the new iPhone 4S.
Ed Sutherland is a veteran technology journalist who first heard of Apple when they grew on trees, Yahoo was run out of a Stanford dorm and Google was an unknown upstart. Since then, Sutherland has covered the whole technology landscape, concentrating on tracking the trends and figuring out the finances of large (and small) technology companies.
12 responses to “Samsung Will Drop Galaxy Feature As Sales Ban Nears”
Is Samsung just being a big baby when it comes to them trying to ban the iPhone 4S in their home country? I mean…they’re the ones who violated Apple’s patent.
They are probably trying to force a stalemate so the two companies can come to a worldwide settlement and get back to business. All these lawsuits are beleaguering an already battered Samsung. Plus they are losing lucrative component contracts from their biggest customer, which is Apple.
They think they can get Apple to back down.
Trouble is that they are not winning by a landslide anywhere else and they are the ones turning chicken. And there are even questions that the patents Apple allegedly violated fall under FRAND rules and the reason Apple doesn’t have a proper license is because either Samsung refused to give one or tried to violate FRAND protocol with their terms. So Samsung might lose there also
This whole thing is a joke…rip open most Apple mobile devices and you find Samsung manufactured components. Both companies are also working on a new touch screen. Apple’s claims are simply a means to protect their sales of what when you look deeper than the surface are technologically inferior devices. Samsungs first gen tablet has more inside it than the ipad 2.
The idea the galaxy tab looks like the ipad is laughable because as with the ipad components Samsung probably manufactures the ipad, just as it does Sony HDTVs.
People don’t be fooled by American pariotism or Apple cultism, this situation is nothing more than US coporate greed vs Korean coporate greed and Samsung is a much bigger beast than Apple
“…beleaguering a battered samsung”? you are joking right? Samsung has their hands in everything. Sony TVs are made by samsung, they are in global shipping, the manufacture all types of home and office electronics and appliances, they own one of Europes largest auto viehcle companies Renault. Like other South Korean coporates, such as LG, they are a well oiled, extremely diversified organisation. Apple may be a huge growing force in mobile devices but they are nothing compared to Samsung size or capital wise.
They may be in everything but not everything is profitable. Samsung had $140 Billion in revenues in 2010 and $6 billion in profit. The majority of their profits came from two divisions. Mobile and Components. Any company that makes less than 5% profit is having problems in my books. As for Renault, the French government was the largest shareholder in 2010 and they wouldn’t be in business today without that government bailout.