Nine Samsung devices that Apple wants to ban

Nine Samsung devices that Apple wants to ban

Summary: A jury decided that more than 25 Samsung phones and tablets contained contained technology that violated Apple patents. Now Apple wants to make sure than 9 of them won't get sold in the US.

TOPICS: Apple, Patents, Samsung

 |  Image 3 of 10

  • Thumbnail 1
  • Thumbnail 2
  • Thumbnail 3
  • Thumbnail 4
  • Thumbnail 5
  • Thumbnail 6
  • Thumbnail 7
  • Thumbnail 8
  • Thumbnail 9
  • Thumbnail 10
  • The Droid Charge was determined to contain 4 patent violations. The jury decided that its patent violations were worth $50.7 million.

    Read CNET's Full Review

  • Galaxy Prevail from Boost Mobile: The jury ruled 3 patent violations. The jury put the damages from the Galaxy Prevail at $57.8 million.

    Read CNET's Full Review

  • Galaxy S Showcase: The jury ruled 2 patent violations. The jury pegged the Showcase for just over $22 million in damages.

Topics: Apple, Patents, Samsung

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Related Stories


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • New Apple slogan

    Choice: Taken away from you by Apple

    The interesting thing about all those screenshots of smartphones? None of them have a grid of icons and all of them have 4 hardware buttons at the bottom.
    • because,

      it's not just a "slap on the wrist", you know. I hope that Apple would not ban Apple fruits on the ground of that these copy-cats shamelessly plagiarize on their logo and make all Apple farmers pay some billions of $$.

      I bet, most of zdnet authors would start speculating what the copy-cat farmers should do to change in the design of the grown fruits to comply with such decision.
      • The farmers will be "OK"...

        as long as their apples do not have a bite out of them while on the tree!!
        • the jury and

          the judge Koh will be biting on them while deliberating (I hope they will have a prolonged diarrhea at the end)

          The Apple CEO T. Crook would point at to the pile of the bitten off pieces, calling it a "mountain of evidence".
          • Poor todd's buttocks

            He must have had a rotten weekend with that billion dollar win causing his FUD diarrhea to get worse.

            You gotta stay away from the fast food, shill.

            Cylon Centurion
      • "Because it's not just a slap on the wrist"

        And after the jury were specifically told NOT to award punitive damages, too.
    • So Toddy

      You think it's okay for a company to blatanty use another company's IP after refusing to pay a licensing fee? Or is it just because it's Apple?

      Here's the thing that completely invalidates your post: HTC phones are sold all day long. So are LG, Sony, Nokia, Motorola... so yes indeed there are still choices. Apple did not take away those choices.
      • This is just the beginning

        Not yet. Samsung is just the first target.
        • Re: This is just the beginning

          Right. Apple did the same thing in prepping for its lawsuit with Microsoft and HP in the last century. They went after Digital Research over design elements in DR's operating system, claiming ownership (via patents) of things like the trash can icon and the use of the mouse (which was, actually, already in the prior art), causing them to fold (due to lack of resources to fight Apple). Then Apple was able to use that precedent in its fight to bolster its position against Microsoft. In the end, the combined resources of MS and HP made the fight much more interesting, and Apple wasn't successful. But HTC? I don't think so. They are next, and if Nokia manages to mount a reasonable business, they will be next.

          Come to think of it, if this keeps up, it might end up being another Apple vs Microsoft horse race in the phone and tablet markets after all!

          Huh. Who'd have thought?
      • Apple is trying to ban 29 HTC models

        "An Apple ban a day keeps the choice away."
        • Do you have anything to back that up?

          Post some links toddy
          • athynz, this is at least the 2nd time I've given you links

            Why do you feign ignorance?
        • Let's hope it's 9 billion dollars

          A billion per each, eh todd's buttocks?

          Cylon Centurion
        • as far as i understand it

          none of the models in the lawsuit that the jury found to be infringing (which itself is a mistake, and appeal will prove this), are still being manufactured.
          Unlike Apple, most cellphone manufacturers have to refresh models every 6 months or so to keep market share.
      • iphone blatant copy of lg prada

        Which won a design award months before the iphone was released. And then there is the mitsubishi 2001 technology public demo with bounceback and multitouch. What were you saying about stolen ip? Microsoft also did not steal the desktop from apple, both apple and. Microsoft copied the xerox star. Billg bought one for $100k, apple guys went to a demo. Apple isn't some slighted creator of tech.
      • They didn't

        In fact, the jury decision is now being reviewed for misconduct.

        None of Apple's patents should have been upheld. Prior art existed for all. But the foreman dismissed the prior art because he was a patent holder.

        This whole case is going to be overturned.
      • are you that niave?

        do you think this is it for Apple? They are going to bully all those other companies too and the sad thing is they may bow down to just the bullying because they do not have the financial means to afford a long court battle.

        Mark my word, write it in stone, plaster it on the walls of the white house: Apple is going to go after all those cell companies.
      • It's not ok to copy...

        But it's not ok either to claim that

        1) you own the rectangular design

        2) you own the feature of rounded edges

        3) you own the icon of using a picture of
        * a handset to symbolize "call"
        * an envelope to symbolize "mail"
        * a clock to symbolize "clock"
        * a calendar (rectangle divided into squares) to symbolize "calendar"

        These were the features Apple were complaining about.

        Look. Every modern device has rounded edges because sharp edges may hurt. Rounded edges are also common in most other designs, not just tech devices.
        And do you really want all other companies to use squares, triangles, and other shapes just because Apple thinks using a rectangle with rounded edges is their design "innovation"???

        And those icons... if you were designing a phone, wouldn't it be at least *natural* to use a picture of a handset to mean phone, an envelope for mail, and a clock to mean, er, a clock?

        Then Samsung wanted to present evidence that there are prior products with rounded edges even by other companies like Sony. But Judge Koh ruled that Samsung cannot present these evidence because it is unrelated; the only issue, he says, is whether Samsung phone's shape is indeed similar to Apple's. That is how stupid US patent law is.

        Oh, and btw, Apple also claimed in the trial that using green for call and red for missed call is their "design innovation" which was copied by Samsung. That is bullshit. Those are the most natural colors to use.

        If the judges continue to validate these features as Apple's "design innovation", it will force other companies to avoid these good design elements helpful to users rather than compete on better things like features, specs, and size.
        Bamm Gabriana
      • " . . . okay for a company to blatantly use another company's IP . . . "

        You mean, like Apple does? Everything they have is copied from someone else. They haven't done anything remotely innovative since the original iPhone and even much of that was copied. Apple is genius at marketing. That's it. And the only reason they have a case at all is because the patent process is such a joke. BTW, I have owned Apple, Android and Windows mobile devices, so my comments are not because I push one over the other.

        Speaking of the patent process, why wasn't Apple fined or sanctioned for submitting items for patent without including the information on prior use of the same concepts? That is a requirement they simple ignored and were granted patents with no ramifications. As I said, the process is broken.
      • Re: So Toddy

        The real question is whether that IP should have ever been granted at all.