Apple Vs. Samsung: Phones that brought the $ 1 billion verdict

Apple won a decisive victory against Samsung in court last week when a jury awarded $1.05 billion in damages to Apple for Samsung’s infringement of design patents, software patents and trade dress.

The Apple Vs. Samsung ruling has been released, and there is a lot to process in there, but one of the most interesting things is the list showing how much each Samsung contributed to the more than $1 billion ruling Accused Samsung Product Amount

Captivate (JX 1011) $80,840,162

Continuum (JX 1016) $16,399,117

Droid Charge (JX 1025) $50,672,869

Epic 4G (JX1012) $130,180,896

Exhibit 4G (JX 1028) $1,081,820

Fascinate (JX 1013) $143,539,179

Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)$0

Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022) $57,867,383

Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007) $0

Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019) $73,344,668

Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031) $40,496,358

Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032) $0

Galaxy S II (T-Mobile) (JX 1033) $83,791,708

Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) (JX 1034) $100,326,988

Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) (JX 1035) $32,273,558

Galaxy S Showcase (i500) (JX 1017) $22,002,146

Galaxy Tab (JX 1036) $1,966,691

Galaxy Tav 10.1 (WiFi) (JX 1037) $0

Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G LTE) (JX 1038) $0

Gem (JX 1020) $4,075,585

Indulge (JX 1026) $16,011,184

Infuse 4G (JX 1027) $44,792,974

Intercept (JX 1009) $0

Mesmerize (JX 1015) $53,123,612

Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)$1,828,297

Replenish (JX1024) $3,350,256

Transform (JX 1014) $953,060

Vibrant (JX 1010) $89,673,957

Both companies are due back in  court on Sept. 20 to begin the process of injunctions against the devices found to have infringed on Apple’s patents.

The Apple Vs. Samsung ruling (PDF link)


Parallel Importing and Trademarks

Mark My Words Trademark Services

What is Parallel Importing?

Essentially, it is bringing in of legitimate or genuine products to a country, but without the express permission of the intellectual property owner. So, it’s not a fake or counterfeit product – it’s the real deal, but to parallel import it basically means you are bringing it in alongside those that have permission to import the property. Generally, this happens because the importer can get the same legitimate product overseas at a lower cost than they can in their own country through the licensed or authorised distributor/s of the product.

The subject of whether Parallel Importing should be allowed in Australia has been the subject of debate for many years. There are certainly arguments for and against it – for example, as the IP owner you wouldn’t want others ‘cashing in’ on your products without your authorisation or without paying you a fee would you? However…

View original post 719 more words