When did Apple submit screenshots to support a claim that Android is a rip off of iOS?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Evidence in Samsung Tablet Case Reportedly Flawed
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
When did Apple submit screenshots to support a claim that Android is a rip off of iOS?
It is not irrelevant for the claim if Apple is pushing to have the Galaxy ruled as a "fake ipad". All these side by side comparisons are not there without good reason. Apple wants to make the judge think they are virtually the same - a reality distorted picture of a Galaxy looking even more like an ipad fits that agenda.
(but yes, its been blown a bit out of proportion by now. the act is just as foul, but the impact when it comes to the outcome will probably be quite small).
And it would, in the sense that the ipad-specific elements would be protected. But this is a different matter all together. It may sound a bit backwards, but thats the thing. A design worthy of protection would allow Apple to make a 16:9 pad and still be protected by the same design registration. A generic - dimension-less - simple shape is not worthy of protection at all (and less so than one that actually has dimensions - even though that doesnt qualify either).
Should be all public records unless told otherwise. Think its a far assumption (excl. NL, which had some patents as well if im not mistaken)
You're right, that's a different Apple v. Samsung lawsuit than the EU one, in which Apple has concentrated on the shape and packaging. However, even then they used a screenshot to make them look more similar:
Here's the Apple image copied straight from their EU injunction request (I scaled it down by 50% for the mobile viewers here).
Notice that it not only shows the app drawer instead of the Honeycomb homepage, but also has stretched out the Tab to look more like the iPad.
Last edited:
Sure, but Apple's claim has nothing to do with Android being a ripoff of iOS. According to reports, their only claim with regard to the software is that it has colored icons.
Yep. As you can see in my edit, I realized that and changed my post.
Alas, you were quicker than me and had already finished replying, while I was still typing
That'll teach me not to submit first and edit later! Cheers!
I'm certain that some people here mentioned this in previous Galaxy S threads but it seems the press have picked up on the discrepancies with the Galaxy S claim now.
http://www.computerworlduk.com/news...les-inaccurate-evidence-in-dutch-samsung-case
http://www.computerworlduk.com/news...les-inaccurate-evidence-in-dutch-samsung-case
I've asked this about the tablet "manipulation", and I'll ask it again. Why does it matter if Apple's claim has nothing to do with size or aspect ratio? The article even points out that Apple acknowledged the difference in size in the claim.
I have no idea what matters, I was just adding the latest press reporting to the discussion.
This could turn out to be another antennagate all over again (we all know how the press love an Apple story) or it may have some sort of effect on the outcome of the case, of that I have no idea.
Apple's EU injunction request claimed that consumers could not tell the difference between an iPad and a Tab in the store, and thus were "angry" (or words to that effect) when they got home and found out they had bought the wrong item.
This Apple-claimed inability of mass consumers to tell the difference, rests on the similarity in shape and packaging. In order to make that case more believable, they apparently felt the need to manipulate every set of images in their request.
You see, Apple didn't just stretch out the Tab in that one image set. They also made sure that no other comparisons were of both in the same plane. In multiple other sets, they always show the iPad and/or both at an angle which makes them look to have the same aspect ratio. E.g. this image:
It's all actually a beautiful piece of handwaving, a skill that Apple excels at.
If you have to doctor images to get your point accross, then it hurts your credibility. And in these "he said, she said" scenarios, it's all about credibility.
We'll know for sure if this is the smoking gun it's made out to be when Samsung has its day in court on August 25th for the German decision, and again on August 29th when they do in the Australian trial.
Anyway, this has all been a big pie in the face to Apple. It's obvious all they are trying to do is delay Samsung which seems to be more and more the flagship Android OEM nowadays (with the sales number being touted for the GSII and now these Tab 10.1 attacks).
The only real beef I have with the evidence is Apple's insistance to show the application drawer in iPhone comparisons and not both home screens (a point you've also bought up I believe).
The way both handsets behave (iOS and the TouchWiz launcher) are very different. A closer iOS clone is easily the MiUi version from China (even moreso the "Xiaomi Phone"). If that thing goes worldwide commercially, Apple will have a fit.
Source? Not being able to tell the difference between an iPad and a Tab is very different from the claim that the Tab copies design elements from the iPad in order to give customers the idea that it is just like an iPad. The idea that customers can't tell the difference when they are sitting next to each other is absurd.
Except specific claims have been reported that make no reference to size or aspect ratio. Illustrating similarities by adjusting proportions is completely legitimate as long as you acknowledge the manipulation. The article cited Apple acknowledging the size discrepancy.
Not if you did it for illustrative purposes and acknowledge the manipulation. As the article claims that Apple did.
----------
Except, according to reports, Apple's only claim to the OS is that it displays "colored icons". It does. The application drawer is just a better example of that fact.
That's my point. Which screen they show is irrelevant, as long as it contains icons.
Apparently in the Netherlands lawsuit filed at the same time as the Dusseldorf one, Apple again manipulated pictures.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2384...accurate_evidence_in_samsung_patent_case.html
This time, of a Samsung Galaxy to look more like an iPhone. The two phones on the left are Apple's lawsuit image comparing the iPhone to a Galaxy. On the right, reporters have added the true Galaxy size for comparison:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2384...accurate_evidence_in_samsung_patent_case.html
This time, of a Samsung Galaxy to look more like an iPhone. The two phones on the left are Apple's lawsuit image comparing the iPhone to a Galaxy. On the right, reporters have added the true Galaxy size for comparison:
also note that how they are showing the app drawer screen on the samsung instead of the factory default homescreen of Samsung.
homescreen of any android phone is customizable. it is UP TO THE USER how they want to customize it.
iphone homescreen is... just like any other screen. scrollable icons, icons, and more icons...
homescreen of any android phone is customizable. it is UP TO THE USER how they want to customize it.
iphone homescreen is... just like any other screen. scrollable icons, icons, and more icons...
I've been flamed to hell and beyond for claiming the same thing since the start.
how dare you have logic? gtfo right now, don't you know this is macrumors?!
Of course they do it. And look how some of the people here that don't bother with fact checking Apple eat it up. Apple is hoping the court eats it up too. Let's hope the judges aren't so daft as some posters here that refuse to see the difference.
The icon grid... seriously... CDE had an icon grid for god's sake.
Baldimac, have you ever been to a store where they list prices as $19.99 instead of $20?
The same concept is at work here. Yeah, the judge knows what he's supposed to be evaluating, but I'd be willing to bet that if you got a simple random sample of people, and showed them the doctored images and the claims against Samsung, more would claim that Samsung stole the design ideas than a group shown an actual galaxy tab in portrait mode on its home screen.
Why? Well the biggest thing is shape. If you can get the voice out of people's heads that says "they didn't steal the design, look, they're not even the same shape," then you've jumped the biggest hurdle. The largest part of the tablet is the screen. When you look at it, you see the bezel in relation to the screen, so Apple's not going to waste the opportunity and show the two tablets with blank screens, with separate images of the factory icons of both. No, they're going to make the two screens as close as possible, and then say "look, they copied our icons." Would it be more accurate to show the default home screen? Yes, but you don't want someone to look and say "Well, yes, the icons are colorful, but why would they make the screen sideways and have a big clock and weather display in the middle if they were trying to copy Apple? the iPad doesn't have that."
People see everything, and even things that aren't supposed to be considered factor into decisions.
Just a question, have you tried to look at this situation from the other perspective? Or does it just come off like we hate Apple and are gleefully plotting their downfall? Because I've tried to put myself in your shoes, and I honestly can't come up with an argument that doesn't involve thinking people such as myself are mounting a full-scale assault on Apple.
The same concept is at work here. Yeah, the judge knows what he's supposed to be evaluating, but I'd be willing to bet that if you got a simple random sample of people, and showed them the doctored images and the claims against Samsung, more would claim that Samsung stole the design ideas than a group shown an actual galaxy tab in portrait mode on its home screen.
Why? Well the biggest thing is shape. If you can get the voice out of people's heads that says "they didn't steal the design, look, they're not even the same shape," then you've jumped the biggest hurdle. The largest part of the tablet is the screen. When you look at it, you see the bezel in relation to the screen, so Apple's not going to waste the opportunity and show the two tablets with blank screens, with separate images of the factory icons of both. No, they're going to make the two screens as close as possible, and then say "look, they copied our icons." Would it be more accurate to show the default home screen? Yes, but you don't want someone to look and say "Well, yes, the icons are colorful, but why would they make the screen sideways and have a big clock and weather display in the middle if they were trying to copy Apple? the iPad doesn't have that."
People see everything, and even things that aren't supposed to be considered factor into decisions.
Just a question, have you tried to look at this situation from the other perspective? Or does it just come off like we hate Apple and are gleefully plotting their downfall? Because I've tried to put myself in your shoes, and I honestly can't come up with an argument that doesn't involve thinking people such as myself are mounting a full-scale assault on Apple.
Sure. I'm sure there is some of that. Presenting evidence in the best light possible is the way lawyers work. Nothing wrong with that. If Apple manipulated the images and presented them as scale representations, that's a problem. If however, they manipulated the images in order to illustrate a point and represented them as such, then there is no problem.
This case isn't about a judge looking at two pictures and trying to decide if the look the same. Apple registered specific design elements as unique to their product. The judge has to decide if those specific elements are worthy of protection and, if so, whether or not the Samsung products contain those design elements.
FWIW, I don't think the design elements that Apple registered are worthy of protection. But I don't know the standards of EU law.
Of course, I looked at it from your perspective. I understand how it looks on the surface. I don't care whether Apple wins this lawsuit or not. On the facts we have seen, I think they should lose. However, the outrage and accusation of dishonesty are based on assumptions that Apple did this to fool somebody. In reality, one on the stories linked a few posts ago quoted Apple as as specifically acknowledging the size differences.
The more I find time to translate pieces of the Apple request, the more interesting it gets.
For instance, I just ran across a paragraph where Apple admits that they had not actually used the EU Tab version in their request (they said they didn't have one yet), but were relying on a Tab they bought elsewhere, and on a magazine review.
For instance, I just ran across a paragraph where Apple admits that they had not actually used the EU Tab version in their request (they said they didn't have one yet), but were relying on a Tab they bought elsewhere, and on a magazine review.
I'm not accusing them of dishonesty, I'm just saying, like you acknowledged, that they're doing whatever they can get away with to get this passed. The response you just gave was very rational, and helped me understand your position. I'm not outraged at them, I'm just not happy with their supporters who will either say that the images aren't doctored, or that it makes absolutely zero difference how it looks on paper, when it clearly does. I think Apple's lawyers were exceptionally intelligent in chosing the photos for the document, and I obviously didn't assume they were trying to say it was a scale model. A couple pages back I made another post that articulated my feelings on that better, but I'm not going to look back and find it now.
And Apple's cases gets even weaker. I really hope they have to pay samsung millions for a baseless case.