Apple gets sales ban on certain Samsung devices in the U.S.
The names of the Samsung devices that face the sales ban were not listed by the court document. A wide range of products are involved. What we can tel you was that among the devices found to have not infringed on an Apple patent covering audio jack I/O circuitry, was the Samsung Transform (SPH-M920), Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.0 and the Samsung Galaxy S II. The ITC also ruled that four other Apple patents were not infringed on by the Korean manufacturer.
"Apple has been stopped from trying to use its overbroad design patents to achieve a monopoly on rectangles and rounded corners. The proper focus for the smartphone industry is not a global war in the courts, but fair competition in the marketplace. Samsung will continue to launch many innovative products and we have already taken measures to ensure that all of our products will continue to be available in the United States."-Adam Yates, Samsung spokesman
The banned devices can still be sold while a Presidential Review period comes into play. It should be interesting to see what the President does in light of his action the other day which essentially saved the two aforementioned Apple products from being banned in the U.S. And while the President doesn't look at the Samsung vs. Apple battle as a fight among fanboys and operating systems, he most likely does take into consideration the fact that Apple is a U.S. company while Samsung is headquartered in South Korea.
1. willard12 (Posts: 553; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
Not in this article, "Samsung also suggested that it may have already made the design tweaks necessary to keep selling all its products despite the ruling." The ruling and ban is already null and void just like the ban on the HTC One X last year. Thanks Apple for wasting everyone's time.
25. AnTuTu (Posts: 599; Member since: 14 Oct 2012)
I laughed my a$$ off after reading Apple's statement hahahahahah
37. sipha (Posts: 144; Member since: 12 May 2012)
I hope samsung doesnt do any tweaks at all.. I seriously want to see Mr Obama reaction to this, i've always suspected him of being an apple fanboy!!
40. Dorothy69 (banned) (Posts: 498; Member since: 21 May 2013)
Me too, let's see him iVeto this!! He probably doesn't even know how to use a Galaxy S II - II complicated (for him).
66. willard12 (Posts: 553; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
I don't know. His justice department is going after Apple pretty hard over e-book price fixing. Of course, Amazon is also a US company.
70. quakan (Posts: 1079; Member since: 02 Mar 2011)
He wasn't being a fanboy, just protecting an American company. I bet he won't do anything for South Korean Samsung though.
85. rallyguy (Posts: 439; Member since: 13 Mar 2012)
He won't do anything because his buddies don't work for Samsung. Al Gore isn't on the board of directors for Samsung. He doesn't give a crap about the economy. If you think that is why he vetoed the iphone ban your not seeing the big picture
5. xperiaDROID (Posts: 4830; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)
Are you kidding me? Do you know how many peoples around the world? Do you know that not everyone want a high-end flagship like the S4?
Come on, don't be a smart*ss. We know you're rich, go buy yourself a S4, or maybe a Vertu.
23. willard12 (Posts: 553; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
The ban would only apply to US imports, not peoples around the world.
24. xperiaDROID (Posts: 4830; Member since: 08 Mar 2013)
I know. But his comment is just ridiculous, "Come on, who buys S2 anymore?".
There are still many people who want a Galaxy S2 or Galaxy S2 Plus.
41. Dorothy69 (banned) (Posts: 498; Member since: 21 May 2013)
Luckily, "peoples around the world" aren't subjected to an iPresident. BTW, I haz' been around the world and "I, I, I can't find my baby."
28. CaoCiBai (Posts: 24; Member since: 07 Aug 2013)
S3 is cheap now. And im well aware this applies to USA only, and i dun think those in USA will buy a S2 anymore. That's exactly what i meant. Anyone in USA still buying a S2? S3 is probably free on contract already.
53. squallz506 (banned) (Posts: 1075; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)
S2 sells like crazy to prepaid users its less than 200 new now. The s3 is closer to 350
69. VZWuser76 (Posts: 986; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
Prepaid company StraightTalk sells the S2, it's actually one of, if not their best smartphone. Most of the others available from them sound like 2009 specs (1GHz single core cpu, 3.5" screen, 2GB of onboard memory). While it may be gone from the main carriers, the consumers who can't afford them would be hurt by this ban.
20. pwnarena (Posts: 720; Member since: 15 Feb 2013)
and it's still quite pricey even now. that means there's still demand for it.
26. LetsBeHonest (Posts: 547; Member since: 04 Jun 2013)
Galaxy s2 is still pretty good mid range smart phone which made quite buzz on smartphone market even gave iPhone a great challenge which was in a pretty good form at that moment.
33. boosook (Posts: 774; Member since: 19 Nov 2012)
No, it's not… the s2 and s2plus are just 2 years old outdated overpriced phones tha samsung can sell only because there are people who buy every thing from samsung, because the just choose the brand, but for the same price you could get much better phones (faster, with higher res screens and so on) from other brands.
27. Planterz (Posts: 237; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
Can't any of you read? The article says the S2 is NOT one of the devices that infringed on patents (it's even in bold for you).
36. alterecho (Posts: 965; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)
I would buy an S2 now. Its one of the best from Samsung yet. No wonder they don't reduce its price.
78. -box- (Posts: 3566; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
S2 is still bring sold for boost, virgin, straight talk, and a few others. Rather have an s2 than any iPhail.
Essentially the same target as people still cross shopping them and the iPhail4 that was the subject of the newsworthy veto.
3. Taters (Posts: 2378; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)
If this ban goes through, watch out. It is too one sided at the moment with Samsung not only losing 1 billion and having the president spit on their patents and Samsung could just snap at any second and actually go steve jobs on Apple and use all of their profits to screw Apple over like Steve Jobs vowed to use all of his billions to destroy Android.
There are some level headed people over there, I would have done something drastic by now if I were Samsung.
10. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 598; Member since: 14 Jun 2013)
These aren't children on the playground, they are multinational companies. It's a good thing you aren't the CEO of any company, for that company's sake.
As for "profits to screw Apple over," they are still a publicly traded entity, and as such, they are beholden to shareholders, not petty emotions.
64. Taters (Posts: 2378; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)
Nothing petty about it. It is called principles and dignity, which is obviously something lacks.
Apple effectively sued them for 1 billion dollars by claiming they invented the society norm. It was the equivalent if Honda suing Toyota for using tires and winning 1 billion, even though the tire was invented way before either of them. To add on top of that,Toyota gets some of their patents disregarded by the president, and then on top of that Toyota gets two Honda cars banned.
There is just too much injustice there for anyone to take. It isn't about petty emotions, it is standing up for yourself and what is right. The only person that would take bullying of that level for the shareholders is the biggest pussy weaklings in the world. No one with a normal mindset would let that slide.
I know Steve Jobs wouldn't let it slide if the roles were reversed. That doesn't mean that he is letting petty emotions get in the way. It means that he is not going to be pushed over.
65. Taters (Posts: 2378; Member since: 28 Jan 2013)
Basically Apple is getting away with murder. It isn't petty emotions if you do something about that now is it?
71. VZWuser76 (Posts: 986; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
"These aren't children on the playground"
Could have fooled me looking at these patent trials. Apple is also a publicly traded company, so how does that explain his "thermonuclear" comment. As I recall he vowed to use every last resource to eliminate android, I'm sure the board and it's shareholders loved that. And his vow is what we have now. There are more court battles in the mobile industry than any other.
4. metoyou (Posts: 277; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)
Is Obama gonna Veto for Samsung? Thought so
12. jackhammeR (Posts: 1548; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)
why should he? Apple is an american company, Samsung's not.
62. Googler (Posts: 813; Member since: 10 Jun 2013)
Samsung has manufacturing facilities in the US. Probably does more job creation than the Mac plants in the US, but that's a guess without looking it up.
86. rallyguy (Posts: 439; Member since: 13 Mar 2012)
This is not even a valid argument. It has nothing to do about the economy. It's helping his buddies. iphones are made in China.
6. Sauce (Posts: 1095; Member since: 28 Apr 2013)
*Why can't weeee be friendddds. Why can't weeeeeeeee be friieeennddddsss.*
72. VZWuser76 (Posts: 986; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
I thought I was the only one on here old enough to get that comment. Judging by the amount of replies, I guess I am.
9. haseebzahid (Posts: 1775; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)
so what if they managed the ban its not like their sales gonna get better anyway
11. taojj (Posts: 33; Member since: 01 Aug 2013)
I am very glad to hear it. Samsung deserves that. They are just copy cats.
21. willard12 (Posts: 553; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
You do realize the same court banned versions the iPhone and ipad for copying Samsung , right? According to Apple's UK website, Samsung doesn't copy.
"On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited’s Galaxy Tablet Computer, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple’s registered design No. 0000181607-0001," writes Apple.
22. WHoyton1 (Posts: 1618; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)
you my friend are what they call a retard! now gtfo
29. mariosuneo4 (banned) (Posts: 75; Member since: 07 Aug 2013)
so much hate for Samsung??
just because they sit right on Top???
what do u think, was it easy??
they deserve to be on top
they gave us android
and thats what other million and billion people need
galaxy y-----made for those people who cant afford high android device
and samsung started this league of cheap android phones
then everyone just followed this path
samsung is Best..
30. piyath (Posts: 150; Member since: 23 Mar 2012)
I'M WITH YOU FRIEND!
I'M FROM SRILANKA. IN HERE SAMSUNG IS THE BEST SELLING BRAND..
32. mariosuneo4 (banned) (Posts: 75; Member since: 07 Aug 2013)
not only in sri lanka
samsung is leading in most of the countries
they care for each and every Class people
they give updates
they achieved the top position because of their hard work
they spend on marketing
they make every people know about its product
34. boosook (Posts: 774; Member since: 19 Nov 2012)
LOL… first of all, Google gave us Android, not samsung. Not only : when android came out, samsung was not even among the first manufacturers to adopt it (the first was htc) because they were pushing they own OS. In the first period, htc became the leading oem, and when samsung realized that android was growing so much they just jumped in the ship and used all their money to flood the market with models and ads. Not only: they were not even the first to push low price handsets. They did it only when they were forced by LG, sonyericsson and huawei who were the first to release affordable yet usable phones. Fanboys cannot rewrite history, yet it's very interesting to see how they modify reality to fit things in their fanboy mental schemes.
42. Ronny666 (Posts: 108; Member since: 08 Jun 2013)
Funny thing is HTC failed to push Android ahead of Apple although they adopted earlier. Samsung has been the main contributor for Android popularity. Both wouldn't have been this successful without each other (win-win situation). I would say both form a very good team to provide end-users choice of devices. Many among average users today buying Samsung smartphones not because it has Google in it, because it is from Samsung.
All other manufacturers today are also trying to emulate Samsung's success. That is what driving HTC, Sony, LG, Lenovo, ZTE, Huawei, ASUS and others OEMs to work harder to produce competitive devices.
81. -box- (Posts: 3566; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
In fairness 1) google didn't invent Android, they bought it and eventually distributed it to a wider audience, 2) HTC was first and remains in many folks' mindset, 3)Motorola helped the platform reach "regular" mainstream with the original Droid line (and the Backflip), as many consumers continue to refer to Android as "droid", and 4) Samsung does smother the market with its too-many options, something other manufacturers have done to their downfall, and they should consider slimming down their offerings.
13. Kevinphantom (Posts: 82; Member since: 17 Jun 2013)
Hell no apple your iphones processesor is from samsung and gpu from imagination technologys
And display is from lg and other from foxconn (hon hai precession) who are you apple to do that
14. gaby1451 (Posts: 111; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)
WTF? Really? REALLY. If this ban goes through (regardless how old the devices are) and it isn't vetoed by the President. It sends a clear message just how biased, one-sided, and UNEDUCATED his administration is. What, just because Samsung is headquartered in S. Korea? WHO CARES, it's called competition. FREE MARKET, business 101. Just because a company isn't American doesn't mean you give them an underhand by banning their products. If you feel threatened, IMPROVE your products, get creative! None of this low blow import banning non-sense. Both companies need to SETTLE THIS, now. In the mean time, my feelings stand. I am just waiting on the Obama Administration now.
This is coming from a girl who owns an iPhone 5 by the way.
18. MartianMe (unregistered)
I think i love you gaby baby.. ;P
19. btbotimtim (Posts: 134; Member since: 08 Dec 2010)
He won't veto because his administration has been uneducated.
91. gaby1451 (Posts: 111; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)
Clearly! It's laughable, the level of hypocrisy in that administration. But I digress...
31. piyath (Posts: 150; Member since: 23 Mar 2012)
Yeah baby.. You are correct as hell. Normal people hate useless disputes like this and when they become unfair people will get outrageous. I think Samsung is a fair and a TALENTED company than Apple. I'm from Sri Lanka.
92. gaby1451 (Posts: 111; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)
It's the entire patent system. It needs a complete OVERHAUL. But it is what it is and for now, companies are taking advantage of it. Just my opinion.
15. nasznjoka (Posts: 222; Member since: 05 Oct 2012)
Things are really getting messy here...................... All these stories benefits Samsung by marketing them for free thou
16. SprintPower (Posts: 71; Member since: 29 Dec 2008)
Yeah, a presidential veto of the Samsung ban would show impartiality because banning the Galaxy S2, an obsolete device, would have such an enormous impact.