Apple Vs Samsung Amended Verdict Form Released

In the first of what may very well be a long line of "amended" verdict forms in the Apple vs Samsung case here in the USA, a full list of damages has been displayed with each of the smartphones and tablets at hand listed aside their amount. Samsung has been quite vocal thus far on how little they agree with the charges, of course, and this first amended list will certainly be strengthening their case for the entire trial to be re-thought. This set of changes sits aside comments over the weekend by the jury that have led the public to wonder how solid their deliberations were as well.

Some of the un-changed rulings sit in this document as well, including the ruling that said Apple was unable to keep their "trade dress" for the iPhone and iPad, but that the iPhone 3GS trade dress would stand. This ruling allows Apple to continue to seek damages against manufacturers that create smartphones with a look that's significantly similar to the shape of the iPhone 3GS. It also sets a prescient for Apple's next devices in the iPhone 5 and possible iPad mini / iPad Air of the future. As for damages changed in this ruling, they are as follows (in $ USD):

Captivate . . . . . . . . . .80,840,162

Continuum . . . . . . . . . .16,399,117

Droid Charge. . . . . . . . .50,672,869

Epic 4G. . . . . . . . . . .130,180,894

Exhibit 4G . . . . . . . . . .1,081,820

Fascinate. . . . . . . . . .143,539,179

Galaxy Ace . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0

Galaxy Prevail. . . . . . . .57,867,383

Galaxy S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0

Galaxy S 4G . . . . . . . . .73,344,668

Galaxy S II (AT&T). . . . . .40,494,356

Galaxy S II (i9000). . . . . . . . . .0

Galaxy S II (T-Mobile). . . .83,791,708

Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch).100,326,988

Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) . . .32,273,558

Galaxy S (Showcase) . . . . .22,002,146

Galaxy Tab . . . . . . . . . .1,966,691

Galaxy Tab 10.1 WiFi . . . . . .833,076

Galaxy Tab 10.1 4G LTE . . . . . . . .0

Gem. . . . . . . . . . . . . .4,075,585

Indulge . . . . . . . . . . .16,011,184

Infuse 4G . . . . . . . . . .44,792,974

Intercept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0

Mesmerize . . . . . . . . . .53,123,612

Nexus S 4G . . . . . . . . . .1,828,297

Replenish. . . . . . . . . . .3,350,256

Transform. . . . . . . . . . . .953,060

Vibrant . . . . . . . . . . .89,673,957

Several of these devices were originally costing Samsung quite a bit more than zero – not a mistake that Samsung is taking lightly. Check out the full first amended verdict form here in PDF format. Per Groklaw, there've been some comments from the jury that the following was true once the first ruling was found to be incorrect:

The jury appears to have awarded damages for the Galaxy Tab 10.1 LTE infringing — $219,694 worth — but didn't find that it had actually infringed anything....A similar inconsistency exists for the Intercept, for which they'd awarded Apple over $2 million.

Intercept: "The jury found no direct infringement but did find inducement" for the '915 and '163 utility patents. If a device didn't infringe, it would be rather hard for a company to induce said non-existant infringement.

These quotes are also listed on live coverage of the reading of the events from The Verge who sat in on the trial. Stay tuned to our coverage of the trial as it continues on well past the reading of the verdict. Expect Samsung and Apple to stay at war for months to come, and for the results of this trial to be quite long-lasting as well!