Apple's Evidence in Samsung Tablet Case Reportedly Flawed

[MacRumors]

Last week, Apple made news with its victory over Samsung that saw courts issue a preliminary injunction barring Samsung from selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1 anywhere in the European Union except the Netherlands following an infringement complaint filed by Apple over the Galaxy Tab's design.

Computerworld now reports, however, that an investigation by its Dutch affiliate Webwereld.nl has discovered [Google translation] a significant flaw in a key piece of evidence used by Apple in the case. According to the report, a key exhibit comparing the appearance of the iPad 2 to the Galaxy Tab 10.1 utilizes an inaccurate or distorted image of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 that makes it seem more similar in appearance to the iPad 2 than it actually is.

Specifically, the image of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 shows an aspect ratio of approximately 1.36 compared to 1.30 for the iPad 2, whereas the Galaxy Tab 10.1 actually carries an aspect ratio of 1.46. (It should be noted that the term "aspect ratio" is used here to refer to the dimensions of the actual device, not the screen.)

Photographic evidence submitted by Apple, found on page 28 of the German complaint, shows two pictures: the iPad 2 and the alleged Galaxy Tab 10.1, accompanied by Apple's claim that the "overall appearance" of two products is "practically identical."

But the picture Apple submitted of the Tab is inaccurate and does not match the real Galaxy Tab 10.1, Webwereld discovered. Further investigations have verified this assessment. The Galaxy Tab due on the European market is taller and more oblong than the iPad 2. However, the shape of what Apple claims to be a Tab 10.1 resembles the iPad very closely.

The inaccuracy is of key importance due to the fact that Apple's case centers on the Galaxy Tab's design being "practically identical" to the iPad, and any misleading evidence presented to support that stance could considerably damage Apple's case.

It is unclear whether the image has actually been intentionally manipulated to make the Galaxy Tab 10.1 appear more similar to the iPad, as some sources have suggested that Apple may have utilized an image of an early Galaxy Tab 10.1 prototype. Regardless of whether the image is obsolete or doctored, the German court responsible for the injunction is not likely to take kindly to the error when a full hearing on the matter is conducted beginning on August 25th.

Article Link: Apple's Evidence in Samsung Tablet Case Reportedly Flawed

 

[KnightWRX]

Ok, I gotta admit I was wrong here, the nice people at Macrumors did post this as news, on the front page no less.

This will be especially harmful to Apple because the injunction was granted based on Apple's complaint alone, Samsung having had no chance to reply or file opposition and the judge not doing a hearing.

 

[Jerome Morrow]

I doubt Apple is that stupid to try and sell stuff like this.

 

[dgree03]

LOL wow, would they stoop that low??

 

[ConceptVBS]

I'm more shocked that MacRumors would post a news that would potentially hurt Apple.

I applaud you MacRumor editors for your professional journalism.

Well deserved. You guys are above others in the world of Mac news reporting.

 

[praetorian909]

I quickly skimmed this, but I have to say if they're throwing out the case because of this, I'd have to say that is preposterous!

So if I go out and make an iPhone4 clone and just change the shape a bit and make it fat & short or square, then I'm ok legally??!

P.S. I'm going to make a Mac mini clone and shape it like a cube! (Well maybe the patent on the G4 Cube is still active though...)

 

[jagolden]

Some legal assistant just lost their job.

 

[al256]

There's going to be hell to pay for this.

 

[miles01110]

However, the shape of what Apple claims to be a Tab 10.1 resembles the iPad very closely.

Well obviously Apple has the patent rights to "quadrilaterals."

 

[Matariel]

I believe this is against the law in Germany, and if the filing was the same in Australia, they'll be in trouble there too.

I think Apple is in a lot of trouble for this.

 

[KnightWRX]

I quickly skimmed this, but I have to say if they're throwing out the case because of this, I'd have to say that is preposterous!

So I copy the iPhone4 and make it fat and short dimensions, then I'm fine??!

Considering that the brunt of Apple's claim is that they have a registration for a rectangle with rounded corners, I'd sure hope there's actual limits on what kind of rectangle they can claim to own :

http://es.scribd.com/doc/61944044/Community-Design-000181607-0001

Well obviously Apple has the patent rights to "quadrilaterals."

Not a patent, a Community Design registration.

 

[Abyssgh0st]

If the 'doctored' image is actually a prototype of the device which Samsung used to help create the final product (obviously), then nothing changes. Highly doubt Apple would 'shop a photo, and even though Samsung could not respond you can sure as hell bet they'd speak up if the evidence was fake.

 

[OllyW]

I quickly skimmed this, but I have to say if they're throwing out the case because of this, I'd have to say that is preposterous!

So if I go out and make an iPhone4 clone and just change the shape a bit and make it fat & short or square, then I'm ok legally??!

If they throw the case out of court for this, it won't be because Samsung made the case dimensions different. It will be because Apple presented flawed evidence.

 

[Matariel]

I quickly skimmed this, but I have to say if they're throwing out the case because of this, I'd have to say that is preposterous!

So if I go out and make an iPhone4 clone and just change the shape a bit and make it fat & short or square, then I'm ok legally??!

It isn't just the shape, as proposterous as that patent claim is, they actually photoshopped in application icons to make it look more like an iPad.

The Galaxy Tab is a LANDSCAPE orientation device too, iPad's default orientation is PORTRAIT.

They've pretty blatantly misrepresented the competitor's product in a COURT FILING.

 

[mms13]

Oh no they didn't!

 

[BC2009]

That was incredibly stupid of Apple. If you are going to bring evidence then you use the actual photographs of the device, doctoring anything will lose this case for them no matter how strong it may have previously been.

Previously, it looked like Apple managed to register their iPad design very generally and would have forced their competitors to invalidate that. By distorting that image they just gave Samsung an easy route to defeat Apple. No court likes to be duped.

Whatever idiot prepared that photo should be fired. A good attorney would know better to use a distorted photo. I'm sure the head guy said "use a photo where it looks as much like the iPad as possible" and then somebody got a little too creative. This is probably going to cost Apple severely in this case.

EDIT: some are saying that the picture is of a prototype device and not the actual device, but even if it is, Apple's attorneys are paid enough to make sure their photos are accurate with respect to the actual device. Oddly the ad photo from the German reseller looks like they also distorted the image to make it look more like an iPad 2. If Apple got their image from an advertisement then they needed to verify it either way before submitting it as evidence.

 

[bushido]

good, i hope they get charged a big fine (not that it will hurt them in anyway) but the press will sure use it to make fun of apple which is great to bring them down from their high horse as of late

btw a huge german chain (like best buy) is selling the tab anyway

 

[TimeArrow]

I bought an iPad because the official website says it has a widescreen.
http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/
I want to watch 720p/1080p native format videos without large black areas at the top/bottom of the display.

But they are LYING! How can a 4:3 screen be called widescreen?
If 4:3 is a widescreen, what is not? a 1:1 screen?

I want a refund because of it, is that possible?

 

[DMVillain]

Is this a mock trial? Why would they be looking at a picture of it? Just compare the physical devices

 

[FlameofAnor]

If the 'doctored' image is actually a prototype of the device which Samsung used to help create the final product (obviously), then nothing changes. Highly doubt Apple would 'shop a photo, and even though Samsung could not respond you can sure as hell bet they'd speak up if the evidence was fake.

Exactly...... if the image was of an actual prototype, then it isn't false evidence. If the final product was changed, it only shows that Samsung knew they were copying the iPad too closely. There's a lot more to the copying claim than just the dimensions of the device.

 

[FriarNurgle]

Seems pretty slimy... but I'll wait for more information before making a judgement on the slimy factor of this issue.

 

[FlameofAnor]

good, i hope they get charged a big fine (not that it will hurt them in anyway) but the press will sure use it to make fun of apple which is great to bring them down from their high horse as of late

btw a huge german chain (like best buy) is selling the tab anyway

Image

Funny how the dimensions in the advert match the one that Apple presented.

 

[praetorian909]

It isn't just the shape, as proposterous as that patent claim is, they actually photoshopped in application icons to make it look more like an iPad.

The Galaxy Tab is a LANDSCAPE orientation device too, iPad's default orientation is PORTRAIT.

They've pretty blatantly misrepresented the competitor's product in a COURT FILING.

Ah ok so yes I did read too quickly--if the papers are doctored that will not look good. Just like when Microsoft doctored videos showing that you can't uninstall IE from Windows XP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

The Samsung Galaxy is obviously a different shape than the iPad (4:3 screen)--very readily apparent when you see them in person so I don't see why they would try to fudge that in their filing.

 

[bushido]

Funny how the dimensions in the advert match the one that Apple presented.

lol i didnt even notice



u would think the people in charge would actually compare the real device and not rely on some picture provided from ONE party

 

[jasontll]

Somebody is gotta get hurt real bad... lol