.jpg)
Apple targets the Samsung Galaxy S III and Galaxy Note
September 1, 2012: 7:08 AM ETAfter last week's $1B verdict, it amends a second patent suit to cover 21 new devices
Samsung TV ad mocks diehard Apple fans
FORTUNE -- Claiming that Samsung has "continued to flood the market with copycat products," Apple (AAPL) on Friday asked a federal court in San Jose for a new jury trial to rule on 21 more "infringing products" -- including Samsung's best-selling Galaxy S III and Galaxy Note.
The filing, an amendment to a suit filed in February, comes one week to the day after a Silicon Valley jury socked Samsung with $1.05 billion in damages for infringing Apple patents with a wave of older devices running Google's (GOOG) Android operating system.
The new case -- not to be confused with what Apple now refers to as "the Earlier Case" -- targets 21 more Android phones and tablets released by Samsung between August 2011 and August 2012, chief among them the Galaxy S III and Galaxy Note.
The Note is the 5.3-inch hybrid tablet/phone with which Samsung attacked the iPhone in TV ads mocking the diehard fans who queue up for latest Apple product.
The "flagship" Galaxy S III smartphone, introduced in June, was particularly well reviewed -- CNETawarded it an Editor's Choice rating -- and sold briskly. According to Samsung, it took the company less than a month to sell 10 million units, helping vault Samsung -- and Android -- well ahead of Apple and iOS in this summer's race for smartphone supremacy.
The amended complaint charges that with these 21 products, Samsung has infringed on eight additional Apple patents. They are, according to the filing:
- '647 -- system and method for performing an action on a structure in computer generated data
- '959 -- universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system
- '721 -- unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image
- '172 -- method, system and graphical user interface for providing word recommendations
- '760 -- missed telephone call management for a portable multifunction device
- '502 -- graphical user interface using historical lists with field classes
- '414 -- asynchronous data synchronization amongst devices
- '604 -- universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system
The trial is tentatively scheduled for March 2014.
AppleInsider has made a pdf of the amended complaint available here.
Posted in: Apple, Google, Intellectual property, Samsung
The German Institute for Economic Research (DIW) calculated that if the wealthier members of society were taxed a one-off chunk of ten percent of their fortunes over and above €250,000 per head, it could make a real difference to reducing the country's debt.
The tax could even be tied into a mandatory bond scheme – where the state promises to pay back the money with interest as and when it can.
The idea is that such a “capital levy” – a one-off wealth tax – would only benefit the economy as it would not reduce all-important consumer demand. Reasonable personal allowances would be drawn up to make sure the tax does not impoverish people, and there would be measures to protect businesses.
But could such a tactic destroy trust and faith in the system? Would it encourage rich people to hide their wealth, or even leave the country? Is it the kind of ‘eat the rich’ solution offered up in student debates?
A writer at the Frankfurter Rundschau argued that those hit by the levy would also be those who would most benefit most from a stabilisation of the financial system and expensive bank bailouts.
Would it be fair to expect the wealthiest among us to contribute to keeping the national debt to sustainable levels and so help keep the crisis from crossing Germany’s borders? Or would Germany be shooting itself in the foot?
Registered users of The Local may add their comments in the field below. If you haven’t signed up yet, you can do so here – it’s free and only takes a moment.
The Local/hc
http://therightrant.blogspot.com/2011_08_01_archive.html
Should Germany hit the rich with a wealth tax?
Published: 11 Jul 12 16:47 CET
A respected economics institute has suggested a one-off tax for the wealthiest in Germany, to raise €230 billion to shore up national debt. Would such a measure kill investment in the country or is it a fair idea? Have your say.
- German economists: make the rich buy bonds - Business & Money (11 Jul 12)
- Bavarian firms: tax check once in 250 years - Business & Money(25 Jun 12)
- Left leader calls for 40k a month income cap - Politics (16 Jun 12)
The tax could even be tied into a mandatory bond scheme – where the state promises to pay back the money with interest as and when it can.
The idea is that such a “capital levy” – a one-off wealth tax – would only benefit the economy as it would not reduce all-important consumer demand. Reasonable personal allowances would be drawn up to make sure the tax does not impoverish people, and there would be measures to protect businesses.
But could such a tactic destroy trust and faith in the system? Would it encourage rich people to hide their wealth, or even leave the country? Is it the kind of ‘eat the rich’ solution offered up in student debates?
A writer at the Frankfurter Rundschau argued that those hit by the levy would also be those who would most benefit most from a stabilisation of the financial system and expensive bank bailouts.
Would it be fair to expect the wealthiest among us to contribute to keeping the national debt to sustainable levels and so help keep the crisis from crossing Germany’s borders? Or would Germany be shooting itself in the foot?
Registered users of The Local may add their comments in the field below. If you haven’t signed up yet, you can do so here – it’s free and only takes a moment.
The Local/hc
- Campaign finances
Money in, money out
Wonder whose donating and where that money goes? Search the senate candidates' recent finance reports:
Senate Campaign Finance Report (July)
