Sidebar Sidebar
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

I guess this should be a tiny error. There are many photos in the documents.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/61993811/10-08-04-Apple-Motion-for-EU-Wide-Prel-Inj-Galaxy-Tab-10-1

and all of the photos except for one have the true aspect ratio. For example,

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • ipad.jpg
    ipad.jpg
    38.1 KB · Views: 1,419
dgree03 said:
The evidence is clear as day, go look at the images in the orginal court filing. They are doctored, Apple will lose even if they have a valid case.
Click to expand...

Dd you look? There are at least 5 photos (at least) clearly showing the difference in aspect ratio.
 
wovel said:
Anyone who thinks these are the only pictures, or that it somehow implies anything about the future of this case needs to try and think for themselves occasionally.
Click to expand...

Except the doctored image is the most illustrative image in the entire document.
They even show both devices activated side-by-side in the single image, to show their "similarity".
Every other image shows the clear differences between the other devices, other than that they're both rectangular in shape, and the Samsung has a silverish back.
 
apologies as jasontll has pointed out, this is for the injunction, so I guess before its decided upon and the judge has to handle them. Though you would think at this stage, he still would get to see them up-close.
 
srgz said:
This is pretty f'ed up...they purposely photoshop'd it to look more like the ipad than it actually does...wow.
I gotta say I don't see why Apple is so bent on killing the new galaxy tab -- they didn't seem to mind when the original came out...just cause this one has a larger screen? What about all the other android tablets out there with 10"+ screens? Pissing off samsung = not a good idea...especially when other divisions of samsung supply displays \ components \ NAND \ SSDs to apples products.
Click to expand...


To anyone who has looked at the whole report, it is very clearly inadvertent. Try it for yourself..

----------
Matariel said:
Except the doctored image is the most illustrative image in the entire document.
They even show both devices activated side-by-side in the single image, to show their "similarity".
Every other image shows the clear differences between the other devices, other than that they're both rectangular in shape, and the Samsung has a silverish back.
Click to expand...


That is just silly. There is no possible way you believe you just made some sort of valid argument. Everyone in this thread apparently assumes all German judges are morons.
 
Well I'm sorry but if those photos are what Apple is trying to base it's pathetic embargo case on then Apple should NEVER have been allowed to take the case to court. I can appreciate the iOS and the Galaxy S interface appearance similarities.
But to state those two tablets physically look the same is clutching at more straws them me stating I am going to put my cape on now and fly to Mars!

Which leads me to believe when Samsung presents it's evidence Apple will loose and have to pay Samsung for it's costs and lost sales etc which I understand is the penalty.
 
*LTD* said:
And if it isn't?

This seems very fishy, and not on Apple's part. Seems like an Asian-knockoff-artist thing to do.

Let's let the courts decide.

It also seems like the original Dutch source misunderstood something or failed to look at all the photos.
Click to expand...

Or they wanted a good headline.
 
So let me get this straight, Apple or the lawyers:

Made it look thinner.
Made the dark gray border black.
Compared the iPad home screen to the Galaxy's Tab App Screen.
And gave it a silver outer border like the first iPad.

I guess Apple's lawyers didn't see the similarity between the iPad and Galaxy Tab and had to create some.;)
 
mp0890 said:
Is this a mock trial? Why would they be looking at a picture of it? Just compare the physical devices
Click to expand...

This^^

I can't imagine that the German court did not use the actual devices in making their decisions. If They did not, any judgment would be ridiculous, considering that you can make anything look like anything you want with digital editing.

FriarNurgle said:
Seems pretty slimy... but I'll wait for more information before making a judgement on the slimy factor of this issue.
Click to expand...

Agree completely. It would be an incredible bit of stupidity for Apple to be found to have presented falsified evidence, intentionally or unintentionally.
 
wovel said:
To anyone who has looked at the whole report, it is very clearly inadvertent. Try it for yourself..
Click to expand...

I love how the fanboys suspend their disbelief when their much loved company screws up royal.

There is NOTHING inadvertent about court filings. Apple pays it's lawyers a LOT of money, they even have their own goddamn building in Cupertino.

Even if this was a "mistake", the Judge won't give a flying frak, they presented false evidence to screw a competitor, and used the Judge and this German court to do it.

----------
Shrink said:
This^^

I can't imagine that the German court did not use the actual devices in making their decisions. If They did not, any judgment would be ridiculous, considering that you can make anything look like anything you want with digital editing.
Click to expand...

The way injunctions work, is that you file before the "day in court" so that the product in question is banned from sale until the actual judgement.

The Judge simply reads the filing (the document linked above) and renders summary judgement. There is no argument from either side, and no counter-filing from Samsung.

So basically Apple got a few free months of no competition by filing a bogus injunction document.
 
Matariel said:
I love how the fanboys suspend their disbelief when their much loved company screws up royal.

There is NOTHING inadvertent about court filings. Apple pays it's lawyers a LOT of money, they even have their own goddamn building in Cupertino.

Even if this was a "mistake", the Judge won't give a flying frak, they presented false evidence to screw a competitor, and used the Judge and this German court to do it.
Click to expand...

But, you still haven't looked at it have you? People creating court filings, particularly rushing to get an injunction before a product reaches market can and do make mistakes all the time. If you were to actually look at the complaint, you would realize how foolish our comments are. Anyone who has used word before knows precisely how that could happen.

Oh well, it does not really matter what you want to believe. I wouldn't expect you to take look at the facts and make an informed decision. Too much work.

Think of the amount of disbelief you are suspending to assume the judge ignored the 15 pictures on the 28 pages previous to this one in the report.
 
srgz said:
This is pretty f'ed up...they purposely photoshop'd it to look more like the ipad than it actually does...wow.
I gotta say I don't see why Apple is so bent on killing the new galaxy tab -- they didn't seem to mind when the original came out...just cause this one has a larger screen? What about all the other android tablets out there with 10"+ screens? Pissing off samsung = not a good idea...especially when other divisions of samsung supply displays \ components \ NAND \ SSDs to apples products.
Click to expand...

No. They didn't. Samsung have TWO versions of the Galaxy Tab 10.1. They showed off one design before Apple announced the iPad 2, which looks almost identical to the iPad 1, then they went back to redesign it after the iPad 2 came out. Do you people not remember them saying they need to go and do some work or something to that effect after the iPad 2 was shown off?

Do a Google Image search for "Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1". Look how you see two different products. One is the version they announced before the iPad 2, and the other is the one they changed it to.

Does nobody remember longer than 2 months into the past these days?
 
This is why the culture of suing people over patents and if things look similar in the dark need to end.
 
Oh GOD! This must mean the Samsung tablet isnt copying after the iPad after all!
 
Posturing!

Samsung made $100 Billion US revenue in 2010. Perhaps they now feel like they can take on the world. Why anger one of your top customers (Apple) by obviously copying the device. Okay... it is an inch smaller, but could you tell the difference if held 3 feet apart? This is a political and legal game being fought for those that have the most to gain. If you really want to motivate innovation, deter infringement on intellectual property. If they really wanted to get into the game, they could have just paid Apple patent rights. This will be the downfall of Samsung as a whole.
 
Mr. Gates said:
After the judge is forced to overturn the verdict and allow the Tab to be sold, the CEO of Samsung should say ..

"and another thing...Steve Jobs : Go F'k yourself and find some other place to provide 75% of the parts for your products"
Click to expand...


I suspect a lot of disappoint is coming your way :). No matter how this case goes, I doubt Samsung will toss out more revenue then their mobile division earns...
 
mind=blown. this can't be true

I'm having a hard time imaging :apple: would pull something that stupid and underhanded
 
Mr. Gates said:
After the judge is forced to overturn the verdict and allow the Tab to be sold, the CEO of Samsung should say ..

"and another thing...Steve Jobs : Go F'k yourself and find some other place to provide 75% of the parts for your products"
Click to expand...

Well Apple has moved to another supplier for the A6 processor. So they are moving away themselves anyway. But I'm pretty sure Samsung can look after themselves without Apple as a customer. And for flash storage Apple just buy's what ever it can get as it uses so much. So it will use Samsung for that no matter what, unless they want to risk not making any iToys.
 
Last edited:
wovel said:
But, you still haven't looked at it have you? People creating court filings, particularly rushing to get an injunction before a product reaches market can and do make mistakes all the time. If you were to actually look at the complaint, you would realize how foolish our comments are. Anyone who has used word before knows precisely how that could happen.

Oh well, it does not really matter what you want to believe. I wouldn't expect you to take look at the facts and make an informed decision. Too much work.

Think of the amount of disbelief you are suspending to assume the judge ignored the 15 pictures on the 28 pages previous to this one in the report.
Click to expand...

I looked at the document, it's in German.
I can't read German, and I doubt anyone here can.

The image in contention is very clear. It's the only one in colour. It shows the two devices side by side, in an orientation that the Samsung device does not operate in.
 
I can't believe anyone would be that DUMB enough to forge and alter photographic "evidence"

Bad.
 
MadusMaximus said:
No. They didn't. Samsung have TWO versions of the Galaxy Tab 10.1. They showed off one design before Apple announced the iPad 2, which looks almost identical to the iPad 1, then they went back to redesign it after the iPad 2 came out. Do you people not remember them saying they need to go and do some work or something to that effect after the iPad 2 was shown off?

Do a Google Image search for "Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1". Look how you see two different products. One is the version they announced before the iPad 2, and the other is the one they changed it to.

Does nobody remember longer than 2 months into the past these days?
Click to expand...

yea and both versions have the same aspect ratio. even the prototypes:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4233/samsungs-galaxy-tab-101-89-smaller-than-ipad-2-competitively-priced
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back