Did you know you can cook bread with steam?
© 2026 Appliancenews. All Rights Reserved.
Apple has chalked up some success in stopping online retailers circumventing its temporary injunction on the sale of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia.
Apple has chalked up some success in stopping online retailers circumventing its temporary injunction on the sale of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia.
One online retailer, Android Pads, said it has stopped selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1 until patent litigation between Apple and Samsung in the Federal Court over the tablet is settled. Kogan Technologies shelved the Samsung unit in September, following correspondence with Apple.
Apple’s lawyers are also understood to have sent letters of demand to Dmavo and eTail Solutions, the Queensland-based partners of Hong Kong online retailer Mobicity.com.au.
Wojtek Czarnocki, who has openly defied Apple’s written demands that he stop selling the device from his online store Dmavo.com.au, claims that his company is the last Australian retailer still selling the tablet.
“We are not the only retailer who sells these, but it seems that we are the only (Australian) retailer to do so,” Czarnocki said. “Everyone else seems to have given up.”
Apple won a temporary injunction against sales of the Samsung tablet in Australia in the Federal Court on October 13, pending a trial on patent infringement allegations to be held next year.
In a tit-for-tat case, Samsung has sued Apple in Australia and several other countries, claiming its iPhone 4S transgresses Samsung patents – in Australia that case will be heard in March.
– Czarnocki last won a mention in CDN back in 2000 when he agreed to pay $31,500 to the Business Software Association of Australia and do 100 hours of community service to settle a software piracy case involving publication of a 900-page catalogue of allegedly illegally copied computer programs (CDN May 25, 2000).
He gave himself up after the BSAA printed a “Wanted” poster featuring his photograph and offering a $5000 reward. He apparently paid the 31-grand but didn’t have to do the community service after the BSAA failed to find a community organisation prepared to take him on. As he had given himself up, no-one scored the five-grand reward).
