In 2012, although Judge Colin Birss deemed Galaxy 10.1, 8.9 and 7.7 tablets "not as cool" as the iPad, the unlawful re-use of unique design features made it practically indistinguishable to the non-expert consumer and consequently the London court decision found that Apple's registered designs had indeed been infringed by its component supplier Samsung Electronics.

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
By Ed & Brian HartmanAs expected Apple dismissed the possibility of licensing design to any "third party" contrary to the proposal that both companies "get a room" and find a resolution for the consumer. And in support of Samsung, those third parties (Google, Oracle, Motorola and Microsoft) rejected Apple's claim of innovating and competing with better products and services. Instead, they accused the company of seeking to destroy the market for Android devices through patent litigation. In a creative solution to the problem, it was Samsung that demonstrated innovation in the coming days; to retain its prominent place in the tablet market the South Korean based company announced a forthcoming new device codenamed the Galaxy 10 that would include an infrared projection feature for the keyboard.