Apple's Evidence in Samsung Tablet Case Reportedly Flawed

[Mr. Gates]

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...

If Apple is no longer able to secure the parts needed to make their stuff, people will look elsewhere.

And without having to produce Apples stuff Samsung would be able to provide.

I know....crazy talk. Just an Idea

 

[MadusMaximus]

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"

Then Samsung's CEO will be saying goodbye to his position and hello to his new found unemployment. Samsung made upwards of $8BILLION from Apple alone last year, that's set to go up to 10+ this year. You DO NOT end a contract with such an important client based on personal feelings when you run a multi-national, multi-billion dollar company. That's called professional suicide.

Not only would Samsung lose all of that income, they'd have to pay many more in termination fees, and I'm pretty sure Apple will have written "loss of potential earnings" into that contracts small print, and we all know how much Apple makes from their products. Samsung would effectively go out of business paying Apple back.

 

[Matariel]

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?

Products that "were prototypes months before the final product" are irrelevant to the case.

If Samsung were selling THAT product, then yeah, Apple would have a better case, but no, they're not selling that product. Legally, that product doesn't exist.
If what you're saying is true (every image I've seen of early 10.1 tabs has used the landscape orientation, and an early version of the Honeycomb desktop, NOT the iPad style grid of icons Apple wants the Judge to believe), Samsung actually changed their product to be more DIFFERENT from an iPad.

What were you trying to argue again?

 

[wovel]

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.

Google translates it in any case. BTW all the images are in color.. But your assumption is the Judge flipped through a 40 page document and based his decision soley on two pictures because they were brightly colored. If you translate the document you can even see those pictures are demonstrating the icon layout. The pictures document physical design all clearly show the aspect ratios.

No matter how much you really, really , really want this to be some terrible thing for Apple, it is not.

 

[Swift]

Didn't Samsung make a big deal...

about being 16x9? That's 1.76.

I seem to recall a change in Samsung's first design, no?

 

[Mr. Gates]

Then Samsung's CEO will be saying goodbye to his position and hello to his new found unemployment. Samsung made upwards of $8BILLION from Apple alone last year, that's set to go up to 10+ this year. You DO NOT end a contract with such an important client based on personal feelings when you run a multi-national, multi-billion dollar company. That's called professional suicide.

Not only would Samsung lose all of that income, they'd have to pay many more in termination fees, and I'm pretty sure Apple will have written "loss of potential earnings" into that contracts small print, and we all know how much Apple makes from their products. Samsung would effectively go out of business paying Apple back.

But it would be pretty sweet, right ...am I right ..Huh ?!
Yeah , you know I'm right

 

[buckawheat]

wait, what?

I think the real news from the story is that someone actually bought a Samsung tablet to measure.

 

[karel]

Or it's just regular reporting. There isn't a whole lot of negative Apple news to choose from in the first place.



In terms of Apple vs. MS, Apple was first, actually.

This is not entirely true; they both got their inspiration from Xerox. Who copies OS2? etc....

 

[aeaglex07]

If Apple is no longer able to secure the parts needed to make their stuff, people will look elsewhere.

And without having to produce Apples stuff Samsung would be able to provide.

I know....crazy talk. Just an Idea

supply and demand. why would Samsung stop making iPads for Apple? To open supplies for whom? Its not like there are millions of other tablets jumping off the shelves every month

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Dutch News from ComputerWorld is insulting the German Court by playing sherlock holmes and proclaiming this is a fruitless case.

If you think the Case dimensions are at question you really don't know the extent of the lawsuit between both parties.

 

[wovel]

If Apple is no longer able to secure the parts needed to make their stuff, people will look elsewhere.

And without having to produce Apples stuff Samsung would be able to provide.

I know....crazy talk. Just an Idea

If Samsung violated a contract , they would owe Apple 10s of billions of dollars. This is not some fly-by-night smartphone like Samsung would make. Breaking a contract to interrupt the supply chain of a product that has a proven record of moving over 100 million devices would be devastating for Samsung. It might be good for HTC or LG, I doubt Samsung would still be in the mobile business.

 

[Mike Oxard]

The Telegraph website has a nice video comparing the two which they made following last weeks ruling :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/samsung/8691707/Samsung-Galaxy-Tab-10.1-blocked-in-Europe.html

 

[samcraig]

I will tell you exactly what will happen if Apple is found guilty of providing/falsifying evidence.

LTD, and others like him will look a little like this

 

[mabaker]

Did ANY of the Android fanboiis ever read the complaint and the original photos Apple included? I doubt that. NONE of these photos have been doctored.

Keep the drama spinning !

 

[wovel]

The Telegraph website has a nice video comparing the two which they made following last weeks ruling :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/samsung/8691707/Samsung-Galaxy-Tab-10.1-blocked-in-Europe.html

Interesting video, actually a lot more similar then I thought.

 

[macwrangler]

Don't think it a phony comparison...

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

Totally agreed! Images do nothing but get the internet all worked up and make folks . A video is even more accurate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdjcI7vBOP8&feature=related

I personally think the top image (the so-called "real" image of the galaxy has been photoshopped...just go to a store and hold them next to each other...they are the same! was ripped off on this one...

 

[wovel]

Did ANY of the Android fanboiis ever read the complaint and the original photos Apple included? I doubt that. NONE of these photos have been doctored.

Keep the drama spinning !

Your confused. It is a well kown fact that German judges only look at pictures on page 28 of complaints when deciding on injunctions. They ignore all arguments and all other pictures.

 

[alhedges]

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.

What are you, in high school? Not everyone here is uneducated, or even American.

I've read the entire petition, and not only is wovel right about the additional photos contained in it, but the actual complaint in no way relies on the devices having the same size.

Basically, there are six distinctive elements that are at issue: (1) the rectangular shape with rounded corners; (2) the glass surface that completely covers the surface; (3) the metal edge that is visible around the sides of the device from the front; (4) the fact that the display is centered in the device; (5) the fact that the device has an equally size bevel on each edge of the display; and (6) the fact that the display uses colorful icons.

Copying only a few of these characteristics would be unobjectionable; Samsung's decision to include all of them does raise serious questions.

And it's not the case that all of these items are required for a tablet - look at the Acer Iconia (10" or 7") for a tablet that uses a different design, for example.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

No matter how you cut it Apple screwed up big time.

They should of made damn sure that the photo they used looked like the product Samsung was selling. Using photos of a prototype was bad. Apple has a good chances of its entire case being lost and then some extra punishment for this screw up.

They should of checked but Apple screwed up big time.

 

[Hurda]

I like how the "Samsung" logo is photoshopped out of the evidence picture.

Absolutely.

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,

Image

And they conveniently removed the Samsung-logo at the front from these pictures, too

Making mistakes (using the wrong aspect-ratio of images etc.) is one thing, but photoshopping pictures to fool a judge is a whole different ballgame.

Edit:
Also, it doesn't matter if a unreleased prototype looked like the iPad, it's only important what version lands on the retail-shelves.

 

[Chinamao]

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

If apple is just as stupid as these guys think, the iPad and the iPhone would have never came out. Making money by suing other guys is not apple's business. They just want to protect their our patent.

 

[jettredmont]

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



Not a patent, a Community Design registration.

If you actually read the court filings, they are not complaining about rectangles. They are complaining about interface element placement, bezel treatments, precise rounding ratios, packaging and trade dress, and interface layout.

All of those (as the court filing makes very clear) have little to do with the specific aspect ratio of the device.

 

[Northgrove]

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.

I agree. I can't imagine it can ever be worth it to fabricate evidence to support a case. This is serious and illegal. There'll be consequences.

 

[vrDrew]

Did any of you Android fools stop and ask yourself where Apple got the photo of the Galaxy from?

Answer: From Samsung itself, as part of their discovery process. It showed an image of the proposed Samsung Tablet that was being shown to resellers (like the German company that is selling the Galaxy.) If nothing else, this shows Samsung was guilty of intent in terms of their copying of the iPad. They certainly sold the Galaxy in Germany as a product that looked a heck of a lot like the iPad.

If anyone is guilty of fraud, its the people at Samsung.

Lastly, lets keep this all in perspective: Samsung undoubtedly "copied" the iPad. Its not as if Samsung Tablets were selling out all over the world, and Apple came along with their version. Whether Samsung's "copying" rises to the level of violating German trade law or not is a question that is best answered by German courts.

 

[Northgrove]

If you actually read the court filings, they are not complaining about rectangles. They are complaining about interface element placement, bezel treatments, precise rounding ratios, packaging and trade dress, and interface layout.

All of those (as the court filing makes very clear) have little to do with the specific aspect ratio of the device.

So why did Apple bother to 'shop it?