I'm sure they would have made it as slim as the battery and circuitry technology allowed them to do so at that time.
If you think they made it bulky by choice, and then Apple came in and "innovated" by making their own pad thinner, I don't know what to tell you.
Getting on a monopoly on (or due to) the design trait "thin", however, is not acceptable, even if it were the case that Apple came up with the idea of thin devices, which is obviously not so.
And where/when did monopoly come up in this conversation? To my knowledge patents do not enable a company to a monopoly.
That's exactly what a patent IS. A temporary monopoly, granted by the government.
Also, the article shows a tablet that came out before the iPad looking at lesst as much like the iPad as the Galaxy Tab.
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/1500_150...
http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/types/designapp.jsp#d...
http://www.theverge.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analys...
http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=7...
And I don't think the Crunch Pad looks like the iPad. For the reasons stated above, and the rumors of the iPad began before the Crunch Pad was conceived.
And seriously, this doesn't look like the iPad, at least to the same extent that the Galaxy Tab does? Come on.
https://img.skitch.com/20111209-miewsiy6mswhbbnid2ddfmmqbd.j...