This is all really irrellavent. (I believe) The only device currently sold here is the SII's, and they aren't even that popular anymore.

Does the latest Galaxy SIII infringe on any of the patents? If so does that mean Apple needs to file a new case?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AppleInsider 

Though a jury found that a wide range of Samsung products infringe upon Apple's patented inventions, Apple has informed the court that it only seeks to ban the sale of eight Samsung devices.
Though the trial involved a total of nearly 30 Samsung devices, just eight were named by Apple in a court filing on Monday. The following are the devices for which Apple seeks a court-ordered injunction:
Galaxy S 4G Galaxy S2 AT&T Galaxy S2 Skyrocket Galaxy S2 T-Mobile Galaxy S2 Epic 4G Galaxy S Showcase Droid Charge Galaxy Prevail
Cited in the filing as reasons for the injunction are a total of seven patents. Those inventions are the same ones that a jury determined last week have been infringed upon by Samsung's mobile devices.
In particular, the Galaxy S 4G has been found to have infringed on all seven patents cited by Apple: Design patents D'677 and D'3905; utility patents '915, '381 and '163; and two more trade dress patents.
Various forms of the Galaxy S2 were also found as infringing upon a number of design and utility patents, while the Galaxy S Showcase violates Apple's design and trade dress patents. The Droid Charge infringes on one design patent, while the Galaxy Prevail violates all three of Apple's utility patents in the case.

The full list represents just eight out of the 28 infringing products that were included in the jury's decision handed down last week. The jury also determined that Samsung should pay Apple more than a billion dollars in damages.
Apple's filing made on Monday asks the court for a preliminary injunction barring sale of the eight infringing devices, pending a potential final injunction against the smartphones.

This article kind of implies that we are all well versed in the Alphabetic gobbeldy-gook that Samsung uses for naming it's devices.  A simple explanation as to which of these devices are current, when they were sold, where and when they were made etc., would shed enormous light on the article.  

Without that info this article is almost meaningless.  

You might just as well have said "some phones made by Samsung." 

Quote:

Originally Posted by simtub 

Does the latest Galaxy SIII infringe on any of the patents? If so does that mean Apple needs to file a new case?

Apple would need to bring up the Galaxy SIII in a separate case. However, they can ask they judge for an injunction separately if they believe that it infringes upon the patents, similar to how they asked prior to the existing case for the judge to issue an injunction (which she did only for the Nexus S).

Quote:

Originally Posted by logandigges 

This is all really irrellavent. (I believe) The only device currently sold here is the SII's, and they aren't even that popular anymore.

It's not at all irrelevant. Just because a bank robber robbed a bank last year, that doesn't mean that you won't go after them. It's a matter of principle.

I would say that it's more about damaging and hurting Samsung's reputation, and turning their brand name into crap. No brand wants to be associated with stealing, copying, thievery and a whole slew of banned products.

And slightly off topic, but I ended up with two brand new Samsung devices today! 

I went to exchange a couple of cable boxes which I had, and came home with two new Samsung boxes. I didn't have much of a choice in the matter.

Which is the Samesung that looks just like an iPhone 4? I've seen it being used quite a lot and always have to do a double take and look really hard to see the difference.

If Apple gets the injunction Samesung should be forced to recall all the infringing products and force carriers to change the software.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple ][ 

It's not at all irrelevant. Just because a bank robber robbed a bank last year, that doesn't mean that you won't go after them. It's a matter of principle.

 

I would say that it's more about damaging and hurting Samsung's reputation, and turning their brand name into crap. No brand wants to be associated with stealing, copying, thievery and a whole slew of banned products.

And no other vendor wants a judge to tell them "Why didn't you pay attention to what happened to Samsung... don't waste my court's time!"

Importantly, it lays out the fact that Apple does in fact seek enforcement of it's patents.    When Apple approaches other vendors, there will be no, "But they are singling US out... They didn't stop Samsung!"  The case law and the enforcement make the next judge overseeing an injunction much more likely to grant the injunction, and less likely overturned prior to trial.

This is less thermonuclear and more Sherman's March to the Sea.  Apple will be burning towns and plantations to let the next City know resistence is futile.

The infringing product is the SII, you've seen it in Media Markt & Interdiscount for 350 CHF. Still a good deal, thank goodness we live in Switzerland where these corporate games aren't played as much. We can only sit, watch and shake our heads at the insanity.