Apple Lists Samsung Products It Wants Banned; Samsung Vows To Fight

As you probably heard, over the weekend, a jury found in favor of Apple in the computer company’s fight against Samsung over allegations that the latter willfully copied Apple’s iPad and iPhone designs to make its own products. Now, Apple has provided the judge with its list of eight Samsung products it says should no longer be sold in the U.S.

Here are the products that Apple feels fall under the lawsuit’s umbrella:

Galaxy S 4G

Galaxy S2 AT&T

Galaxy S2

Galaxy S2 T-Mobile

Galaxy S2 Epic 4G

Galaxy S Showcase

Droid Charge

Galaxy Prevail

This is only a fraction of the 28 devices originally listed in Apple’s lawsuit. Many of those offending items are no longer for sale in the U.S. market.

The judge had already placed a ban on Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 because she believed it infringed upon a design patent, but the jury in the case found that the Samsung tablet did not infringe on that particular patent.

A hearing is scheduled for Sept. 20 to review the above list, but it’s possible that this date will be pushed back as Samsung has said this is not enough time to sufficiently prepare.

But the AP reports Samsung says the verdict is not supported by the evidence in the case and it plans to appeal the case, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if need be.

Meanwhile, Apple feels that the $1.05 billion in damages should actually be tripled to $3.15 billion because the jury found that Samsung’s patent violations were done willfully.

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. mistyfire says:

    I prefer Samsung over Apple. Glad I already own the Galaxy S2 Epic 4G.

  2. Coffee says:

    Damn, Apple…that’s pretty much Samsung’s entire phone and tablet line. You’re a cold-mother-shut-yo-mouth.

    I hope you sue Google for making the Nexus next and they erase you from the internet.

  3. luxosaucer13 says:

    Those who can compete in the marketplace, do; those who can’t, sue.

    • Coffee says:

      Uh…Apple is pretty damned good at competing in the marketplace. It’s just tired of competing now that Steve is dead and wants to eliminate the marketplace entirely, yelling “Monopoly! I win!”, and flipping over the game board triumphantly.

      That’s how Monopoly is played, right?

    • NotEd says:

      Actually I believe both Samsung and Apple are competing in the marketplace and did, in fact, sue.

  4. kcvaliant says:

    Most of those phones other then the s2 look nothing like iphones, unless being black and tablet like is what apple is saying it owns. Which my tablet by hp from 06 looks like a bigger version of. Maybe hp should sue for apple stealing the look of their laptop tablet?

    Hopefully the appeal goes through and apple gets nothing.

    • pecan 3.14159265 says:

      Part of the suit was not about the look of the devices, but how they operated. Things like swipe, pinch and zoom, etc. were (at least partially) patented by Apple.

  5. sagodjur1 says:

    Better headline: Apple Lists Samsung Product Shopping List It is Inadvertently Recommending to Its Customers

  6. YouDidWhatNow? says:

    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390

    Please. Apple is going to probably wind up worse after this is all done than if they just lost outright.

  7. bnceo says:

    Your copy/paste is wrong. Supposed to be:

    Galaxy S2

    Galaxy S2 AT&T Skyrocket

  8. Gorbachev says:

    I’m done with Apple.

    I will never buy an Apple product again.

  9. Invader Zim says:

    This just makes people dislike Apple. At least it does me. If competition gets stiff just sue them. I can think of a lot of products that came before Apple that are very similar to its products. Perhaps Microsoft could take their lead and sue Apple, or Hp (hp6315) sue apple because apple made a phone with icons, wifi, gps and bluetooth all sporting a touch screen. Just like the old HP 6315

  10. Lyn Torden says:

    You can’t have my S2 unless you pry it from …

  11. JoeJackson says:

    Since this has hit the papers and the news, I’ve heard more people pay MORE attention to Samsung products, because if Apple thinks Samsung products are so similar that people will get confused, then why not take a look at Samsung products… Most then notice that Samsung’s “iPad” sells for a whole 200$ LESS than Apple’s iPad. That’s just how most consumers work..

  12. Crackpot says:

    So, let’s recap:

    – The jury chose not to read the 108-page instructions given to them by the judge.
    – The instructions explicitly forbade them from assigning punitive damages, instead requiring only ACTUAL damages. This was stated twice in the instructions. The jury foreman then stated “We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the wrist. We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable.”
    – The jury “skipped” the question of prior art “so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down.” Prior art is one of the key facets of any question of patent validation.
    – The jury’s math does not appear to add up correctly.
    – Different jurors give different reasons for making decisions, and those reasons conflict with the statements of other jurors.
    – “The jury found no direct infringement but did find inducement.” You can’t have the latter without the former.

    After all of this, the court’s decision has had a direct impact on Samsung: to the tune of over $1 billion in the form of a stock devaluation. The patent system is now being used as a weapon. I cannot imagine that this decision will actually stand, with the jury’s statements out in the open.

    Source: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390&repost=1

    • Coffee says:

      Yeah…IANAL, but it seems like people who are don’t really like the way this verdict smells.

    • JEDIDIAH says:

      You forgot about the jury foreman. He’s a wannabe patent troll that has a patent on another Tivo-like device. The PTO even granted it to him. That despite that he makes references to PCs and off the shelf software.

      • Crackpot says:

        I didn’t go there because, although that appears to be the case, assuming that about him would make me no better than the jury that made their decision without doing the proper research. ;-)

  13. GreatWhiteNorth says:

    Considering the poor quality of the actual jury verdict (ignoring prior art!), I will be buying anything but Apple products until this farce is fixed.

    Hello Nexus 7.

  14. psm321 says:

    In case anyone doesn’t know, the judge in this case was incredibly biased, and disallowed evidence of prior art that showed that Samsung actually had the design FIRST. And then got mad when the info about that got leaked to the press, for showing everyone just how biased she was.

  15. Shinzakura says:

    I was on the fence this weekend between a Galaxy Tab 2 and a Nexus 7, then the verdict came in. Hello, GT2.

  16. Bladerunner says:

    I’m surprised the Note isn’t on the list.

    Speaking of which, I love my Note!

    Though, the “Voice Talk” app sounds suspiciously Siri-esque, which made me laugh.

  17. Gehasst says:

    How many on this jury had an iphone & how many had Android? That is all I want to know!

  18. axiomatic says:

    Go get um Samsung. This ruling against you was terrible. I own an iPhone 4 so I make this statement going against my phone of choice. Apple needs to grow up and compete, not litigate.

  19. Press1forDialTone says:

    Steve Jobs speaking from the grave.
    Apple = good products but evil
    All others = so-so products but not evil.

  20. dublinwolfpack says:

    I love that it took a trial and jury to figure out that all these phones have all looked and acted the same for too long. The lack of creativity in new design is stunning. I hope this spurs Samsung into being crafty. Look what Microsoft did, for god’s sake… Even that stiff of a company can be creative and make something different.

    Everyone talking smack about Apple and how much they love their Samsung/Droidxxx/whatever are hilarious because all that design came after the demand that Apple created, and is obviously borrowed from it. When the first iPhone came out, no other cell phones looked or operated like it, it’s a no-brainer.

    This is the best thing to happen to mobile design since Apple jumped into the phone market. You’ll all be over it in a few months anyways, Samsung isn’t gonna disappear because of this.

  21. Libertas1 says:

    I wonder how long it will take for Apple to get ruined enough to go hat in hand to Bill Gates again?

    • Fafaflunkie Plays His World's Smallest Violin For You says:

      And this time around, Apple doesn’t have Steve Jobs (aka Kim Jobs-il, as I referred to him as on several occasions during my many anti-Apple rants on this site) to save them when the inevitable shit-storm happens, and Apple is equated as even more evil than Microsoft was back in the mid to late 90s. You managed to hold on to your Apple stock when you bought it for a few bucks back then and saw it skyrocket to where it is now? Two words for you: SELL IT!

      This whole Apple vs. Samsung thing should hopefully open some eyes at the USPTO–patent reform has long been needed. To be able to patent such ludicrous concepts as “slide to unlock” only stifles innovation, not create it. What happened to having patent applications disallowed for obviousness? Please explain that to me.

  22. SabreDC says:

    If I was Samsung, I’d just stop selling Apple the A5 processor that’s in the iPhone/iPad and let them find a new manufacturer. See how Apple likes that…

  23. newfenoix says:

    Never have liked Apple. I have never owned an “i” anything to include iPods. I hope this buries that damn conceited company.