Apple seeks ban on eight Samsung mobile phones after court win
Apple, which last week won its patent lawsuit against Samsung, has asked a court to ban eight Samsung mobile phones on sale in the US.
The phones include the Galaxy S 4G (right), Galaxy S2 AT&T model, Galaxy S2 Skyrocket, Galaxy S2 T-Mobile model, Galaxy S2 Epic 4G, Galaxy S Showcase, Droid Charge and Galaxy Prevail.
The iPhone maker has also indicated it will seek a sales ban on a total of 18 mobile phones at the heart of the disupte.
However, that does not include Samsung's flagship Galaxy S III model, although earlier versions are included.
Meanwhile, Google has said that it doesn't want the verdict in the Apple-Samsung case to limit consumers' access to Android devices. In a statement released in the US over the weekend, Google said:
"The court of appeals will review both infringement and the validity of the patent claims. Most of these don't relate to the core Android operating system, and several are being re-examined by the US Patent Office.
"The mobile industry is moving fast and all players – including newcomers – are building upon ideas that have been around for decades. We continue to work with our partners to give consumers innovative and affordable products, and we don't want anything to limit that."
Last week a jury in California ordered Samsung to pay Apple $1.05bn (£665m) in damages for infringing software and design patents on the iPhone.
Follow whathifi.com on Twitter
Comments
AFAIK the displays for the iPhone 5 are coming from LG Display and Japan Display (formed from the small/medium display ops of Hitachi, Sony and Toshiba), with Sharp now being drafted in to supply extra panels.
Its all a game to these guys and it keeps lawyers employed. If you consider this Samsung will always win this world wide they produce the screens for Apple so you can bet they hold the upper hand.
No screen no phone...
Apple is eventually going to slide up its own arrogant backside as more and more companies look to take it on. The Japanese and Chinese and South Koreans won't let Apple stay dominant for long.
The US economy is in the toilet and half of their biggest companies are teetering on the edge of disaster. Much of the US is working on old ideas and older equipment what has happened to the US car industry?
Lets not forget Apple are still living on past glories thanks to Jobs but as eventually the majority of people wake up and realize they are paying for "a name" the Apple big launch success will be condemed to history.
The Iphone 5 although different isn't exactly revolutionary and with products like the Galaxy note taking on the Ipad head on and arguablly starting to win that battle it seems unlikely Apple will be more than a cult following from whence it came.
Then of course don't write off Microsoft whilst Samsung and Apple have been fighting they have been enjoying being out of the limelight (at least in court) and have slowly been circling the wagons.
Watch this space...
The late Steve Jobs said Andriod is a stolen product and had vouched to destroy it with all the $$ it takes and every breath he has......words like.....going nuclear......... was also uttered
Windows OS 95 was also stolen from Apple in the eyes of Jobs
Samsung cannot innovate in smart phones like with their smart TVs...Apple has all the know how as Intel has over Amd in x86 processors.
Now Apple have also allegedly stole patents from Motorola in the voice recognition in the 4s... the latter a company acquired by Google to bash Apple with.
It is is an all mighty stand off!
Google needs to confront Apple sooner or later!!
As for windows based Nokia phones......naaaah.Savengers in the waiting!
Americans backing american products simple as that .Just goes to show how Apple is just like a spoilt kid throwing its rattle out of the pram!.Android phones are outselling apple ones now suprise suprise
Something like this could go against Apple if they are going to play bully and force people into buying there product by takeing others of the shelf ,then most sensable people wil just shop elswhere
I'm not saying this is correct as it does refer to Samsung, but I found this rather interesting regarding the iphone clicky.
What did you ever expect from a US Court? A US Jury is never going to find against Apple, they clearly don't have the 'smarts' to find as everywhere else in the world has found.
Still thankfully the legal system in the US will tie this all up for years till we have gone way past the importance of the conflict items. I should think Samsung could find the damages in the belly-button fluff of one of their executives.
If you read through all the details of the case it comes down to a few points. The Andriod operating system is customised by the handset manfucaturer to provide a unique experience on their particular device. Google themselves have released statements that the infringements that Samsung were found guilty of do not pertain to Android itself but were added by Samsung. There was quite a bit of evidence submitted in court of internal Samsung communications in reaction to the release of the iPhone in 2007 that specifically look at parts of the iPhone hardware and software experience design that the Samsung executives felt needed to be incorporated in to their devices, and as a result the design of Samsung hardware changed direction significantly at this point. These internal comunications were the pivitol evidence according to members of the jury who were interviewed post trial.
A bit odd how in other countries the court cases found no case to answer or patent infringements were found against Apple aswell. Yet in America Apple is the injured party and Samsung has to pay damages
So is Apple's main issue with the hardware design of Samsung devices or with the Android OS? I find it odd that the previous decision targets Samsung (hardware manufacturer) yet seems centered around the touchscreen/icons of the Android OS.
Maybe Apple should be taking actiona against Google rather than Samsung. It's all a bit confusing as I'm sure Samsung were making mobile devices before Apple and could demonstrate that in court.