Apple has lost a legal fight against a small Spanish tablet manufacturer called NT-K, maker of the NT-K Android tablet.
In a ruling that contrasts with Apple's legal domination against Samsung, NT-K successfully defended its products from accusations that the company was 'copying' Apple's iPad, Foss Patents explains.
The claim was filed by Apple in November last year, and saw the Spanish company's shipments from China seized, and its name temporarily placed on an EU-wide list of product pirates. Aside from the commercial dispute, Apple even brought criminal charges against NT-K, a move that Foss Patent's Florian Mueller called "absolutely outrageous".
Now those claims have been dismissed, and it seems the little company has lodged an anti-trust complaint against Apple, and is suing for compensation for monetary damages, lost profits and "moral damages".
NT-K published a triumphant post on its company blog (in Spanish), part of which 9to5Mac has translated thus: "We are a small company like many others in these times of crisis we are trying to get ahead, and it seems grossly unfair that a company the calibre of Apple has to use its dominant influence."
Interestingly, the complaint Apple lodged apparently concerned the same design right it asserted in its fight against Samsung, winning two injunctions in Germany against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the Galaxy Tab 7.7.
What are your thoughts? Is it unfair of Apple to sue tablet manufacturers and call their products copies? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below, or on our Facebook wall.
Android App 
RSS Feeds 
iPhone App 
Newsletters 
Comments 27
Add your comment
anonymous 2 November, 2011 18:43
Its completely unfair that apple choose to sue everyone saying they'be been copied, they really need to get over themselves.
Well done NT-K.
anonymous 2 November, 2011 19:50
apple copied from xerox
anonymous 2 November, 2011 19:54
The whole patent system is a sham, there is prior art for everything in an apple product (just google it).
Good for the little guys~
anonymous 2 November, 2011 20:01
It is not an issue of fairness. It is an issue of patent law. Don't blame Apple for attempting to enforce its IP rights under the mish-mash mess of national patent laws. Blame the laws if they seem unfair.
anonymous 2 November, 2011 20:11
"It is not an issue of fairness. It is an issue of patent law. Don't blame Apple for attempting to enforce its IP rights under the mish-mash mess of national patent laws. Blame the laws if they seem unfair."
I agree. The legal issue is that apple's behavior in this matter seems to be showing that they want to establish a monopoly on tablets. Suing companies that make competing products instead of out-marketing or out-innovating them seems backward when you remember just how much Apple has in their coffers. Why is no one comparing this to the way that Microsoft was treated with Windows 98 and forward?
anonymous 2 November, 2011 20:38
I refuse to buy from this company any more. They are stifling competition, picking off the strongest competitors first (Samsung) and now targeting smaller companies like NT-K. Pure EVIL.
@ anonymous - It's not just a matter of enforcing rights, Samsung, HTC etc could all 'have a go' at companies on the basis of questionable patents and IP rights but only Apple has the audacity to do so to try and kill competition.
But I can't believe they were stupid enough to sue a Spanish company in Spain. That's just idiotic, if Samsung was a German company they wouldn't have won against the tab 10.1 in Germany either.
anonymous 2 November, 2011 20:41
"It is not an issue of fairness. It is an issue of patent law. Don't blame Apple for attempting to enforce its IP rights under the mish-mash mess of national patent laws. Blame the laws if they seem unfair."
This is probably the worst justification I've seen for behavior. It's not external forces that decide my moral compass, it's me. Apple made the choice, the law didn't force them.
anonymous 2 November, 2011 21:45
Some people have it wrong on one count, Apple PAID (not COPIED) Xerox. I'm by no means an Apple fan-boy (own no Apple product, never have) but if there was no patent protection, who is going to have the incentive to keep innovating or simply working? Think people!
anonymous 2 November, 2011 21:55
Any smell a fanboy in the comment above? I sure do! FANBOY! FANBOY! FANBOY! You stink, fanboy! You're stinking up the place with your stink! Stink somewhere else, for example APPLEFANBOY.com/FANBOYCENTRAL/PAYMENTSFORLEAVINGPROAPPLECOMMENTSONTECHNOLOGYSITES.
Regards
Frederick J Muntersnatch
anonymous 2 November, 2011 22:49
"In a ruling that contrasts with Apple's legal domination against Samsung"
Thinks this lacks nuance. Apple won in Germany and Australia. It lost in about the EU-wide validity of the EU ban in Germany and most claims in The Netherlands. The jury is still out in may places also for counter suing of Samsung and other companies.
Samsung is able to sell the products that supposedly infringe in many places. Changes that Apple can stop that in the long term are slim.
Sometimes it looks like the wrong impression is given, media citing only a few sources and not double checking.
anonymous 3 November, 2011 07:58
It 's time the giants realize that they can 't monopolise the whole world market. They also started from scratch,from zero to be who they are today. Just 'dont be too greedy. Your adrenaline will only cause you to die young and not able to enjoy what you have made.you came with nothing and go away with nothing. What is the use of $$$$$$$$$billions ? You still eat that much and use that much ! greedy giants.
anonymous 3 November, 2011 11:46
"It is not an issue of fairness. It is an issue of patent law. Don't blame Apple for attempting to enforce its IP rights under the mish-mash mess of national patent laws. Blame the laws if they seem unfair."
So essentially: "don't hate the playa, hate the game"
I'd agree except in this case, as evidenced by the fact that they lost, Apple weren't enforcing their IP rights, they were trying to force a company out of business using their financial and legal muscle on baseless claims that they 'copied' them.
Also while you could say that Apple didn't invent the patent laws, they just enforce their own rights; a company of that size has the power and influence to change 'the game' and in my opinion should. Especially given their motto of 'Think Different'.
anonymous 3 November, 2011 12:22
Having several patents myself, I take issue with the claim that patent protection is necessary to promote innovation. In my experience patents are an after thought to the act of innovation which is motivated by the desire to build a product to sell. It takes so long to actually get a patent (3-6 years in my experience) that many innovations and designs are obsolete before the patent is issued. The primary use of such patents is as a "trading card" in the IP cross-licensing game which large co.'s engage in to vaccinate themselves against another co.'s spurious IP claims.
IMHO, "method-of-use" patents actually impede innovation by preventing reuse of a good idea leading to redundant designs which are different simply for the sake of being different. This is a waste.
I suggest the current monopoly afforded by the issuance of a patent be replaced by a system in which the patent does not create a right of monopoly (thereby allowing anyone to reuse a good idea) but instead creates the right to seek a licensing fee to be determined by an adjudication of the cost of development of the innovation being licensed. Bright ideas would generally not be worth the litigation costs whereas the R&D of developing new drugs would be. Licensing fees would be a per-unit percent of revenues from products using another companies patented IP to prevent large lump sum fees being used as a barrier to entry.
anonymous 3 November, 2011 17:22
Apple, is just afraid that their products will become inferior to the vastly growing market of tablets, and fortunately they will! Simply because their is to much competition constantly waiting for Apple to come out with their new products only to be bested round after round. So they are doing what they consider to be the next best thing and trying to shut down the competition. However, the idea that it is even possible to copyright "rounded edges" and "slim design" is absolutely ridiculous and things like that need to be considered with patent officials because Apple is going to be on the back of every tablet manufacturer with their expensive lawyers. Apple is only thinking like a large company should and thats to shut down the competition but they are NOT doing it in a manner that puts them in the good graces of the public eye. I absolutely loathe anything Apple, when the president inacted his bill to cut the amount of cell phone waiste by forcing all cell phone manufacturers to make the same style chargers Apple was the only company that didn't have to adhere to that law.
anonymous 3 November, 2011 17:23
let's see:
both MS DOS and core OS of original Apple were "inspired" from CP/M(Control Program for Microcomputers)
of Digital Research, Inc.
The mouse and graphic interface was invented by Xerox @ Palo Alto and stolen by Jobs.
OSX is at it's core "inspired" from FreeBSD (with a fancier Graphic interface) a GPL software; Apple violated GPL since they never contributed back with their modifications.
MP3 encoding, the core of IPod and all mp3 players, was created by the German company Fraunhofer-Gesellshaft.
All wireless technology in iPhone is based on research done by LM Ericson, Nokia,Motorola and others.
Most hardware inside an iMac or MacBook is based on the same components as a regular PC ,OSX being the main difference,yet the cost is 2x or 3x more comparatively.
So who is the real expert in piracy, after all ???
anonymous 3 November, 2011 18:13
Apple computer invented the first functional Personal Computer.
1 - Apple did not invent the MP3 player Creative Labs did or they were the first to get sued for the mp3 legality.
2 - Apple did not invent the Laptop Xerox NoteTaker
3.- Apple did not invent the Tablet - sorry DynaBook
4. -Apple did not invent the smart phone - Simon; it was designed by IBM
5. -Apple did not invent the Graphical User Interface Xerox Star Workstation
6. -Apple did not invent the CLOUD - Eric Schmidt of Google
anonymous 3 November, 2011 22:25
"Apple computer invented the first functional Personal Computer. "
WRONG !!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micral
anonymous 4 November, 2011 05:43
It is ominous that, no more it is between NT-K and Apple, but anonymous vs anonymous!
anonymous 4 November, 2011 12:12
let's beat the **** out of this apple bully tactics
anonymous 4 November, 2011 14:48
Jobs & Wozniak made their money to start Apple by selling "Blue Boxes" that allowed you to make calls from pay boxes for "free" - Jobs only got holier than though once he had made his money
anonymous 4 November, 2011 23:08
If you ser the tablet in question, has no especial resemblance with iPad, it's just a normal android 2.2 tablet customized for spanish marketing from a genérico chinesse model.
If this can be sued, all android devices can also be sued... So Apple is simply looking for monopoly.
anonymous 4 November, 2011 23:22
It's sad companies have to copy Apple to make a living. Apple invented the tablet and smartphone and others are ripping them off.
anonymous 4 November, 2011 23:29
Sorry about the dupicate posts. I was using Firefox and it kept showing I didn't type the code words correctly and I kept trying. I loaded IE and it worked fine
anonymous 4 November, 2011 23:48
anonymous, you are an idiot!! lol
londonarcher 6 November, 2011 02:39
Glad to see Apple lose. They're using their Billions in the Bank to pay Lawyers to put every other company out of business. Even ones that are so small they are no threat at all to Apple. Not everyone can afford their high priced goods. In some countries the cost of an iPad is several years worth of wages for some people.
Small Companies like this are helping to make technology more affordable for everyone. Something Apple has no interest in doing. They sell premium products, at Premium prices. So why not just stop bullying smaller companies when they're clearly not a threat to yourselves. I hope this decision sets a precedent and other companies choose to fight and counter sue Apple.
anonymous 6 November, 2011 23:32
anonymous, why are you using firefox, or IE. why you don't use the grat safari?
anonymous 7 November, 2011 10:48
anonymous 4 November, 2011 23:22
It's sad companies have to copy Apple to make a living. Apple invented the tablet and smartphone and others are ripping them off.
You are as dumb as they come.. If they invented the smartphone, then why have HTC been releasing smartphones for over 10 years?? Dumb***.