That's incorrect. The fight started last week in The Hague. At some point the samsung lawyer asked all press to leave, because they wanted to show the judge some corporate secret.
Last edited:
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
That's incorrect. The fight started last week in The Hague. At some point the samsung lawyer asked all press to leave, because they wanted to show the judge some corporate secret.
Well, too bad for Apple.
The Samsung tab was hardly affecting Apple, and now Apple has dug itself into the ground with this one.
The Samsung tab was hardly affecting Apple, and now Apple has dug itself into the ground with this one.
Since this "error" is so easy to notice, are you suggesting that Apple submitted the evidence without anyone reviewing it? Because if they did review it, how come they did not notice such an "obvious mistake"?
Apple you don't own the rights to make a device a shape !!
get over it already and enjoy the fair competition.
Or, sue every TV maker for obviously copying the iMac design
get over it already and enjoy the fair competition.
Or, sue every TV maker for obviously copying the iMac design
Nor was the image in the filing. It was 1.362:1. The iPad is 1.300:1 (external bezel, not the screen opening) and the actual Samsung Galaxy is 1.46:1. The Computerworld website's "comparison" Galaxy image is 1.475:1 (slightly wider, exaggerating further the difference between the two devices). Samsung's own website ranges from 1.49:1 to 1.45:1 in its front-on images.
Aspect ratios are tricky. In promotional images (which this image appears to be, although I do not have proof of that) aspect ratios are always fluid.
Aye, looks like they hit "fit to frame" rather than "fit frame to content" inside of InDesign.
This evidence is not flawed. They are still practically identical. But I'm sure Samaung will be sure to bring this up in court to try prove their copying of Apple was just.
Sure I can copy something and change it's size slightly and call it a new product. But I'd get my ass sued for copying a product. Any fair and just judge will understand this. But in the real world the legal system is not this fair and just.
Sure I can copy something and change it's size slightly and call it a new product. But I'd get my ass sued for copying a product. Any fair and just judge will understand this. But in the real world the legal system is not this fair and just.
You know that The Hague is not Düsseldorf, the court where Apple presented the filing we are talking about, do you?
If that is the case, Apple is doomed because they blatantly copied the design of Samsung's photo frame (circa 2006) for their iPad:
Is this supposed to be sarcasm, or are you just ignorant of the Galaxy's interface (which, like the iPad, switches between portrait and landscape, and like iOS has an icon-based launch screen exactly like the home screen on an iPad)?
Actually they kind of do. Look up "Trade Dress". The complaint isn't that one or two aspects are similar, it's that MANY MANY aspects are the same or similar. It's the whole package. It covers any and all visual aspects of a company and/or it's products. You could argue that a yellow curved "M" used to represent your restaurant called "Mojo's" or whatever has nothing to do with McDonalds, but they have trade dress rights and trademarks that forbid exactly that. It's just a letter of the alphabet in yellow in a curved font, but McDonalds OWN it for the purpose of branding.
Did you know that Orange the telecoms company also own the colour orange when it comes to telecoms? T-Mobile also own the magenta/pink of their branding too when it comes to mobile telecoms. This kind of thing is common.
The main thing is that patent era is impacting real innovation. Shapes and product design are not big innovation, they are just concepts. And no concept is based on nothing, a tabula-rasa idea.
They're based on social relations, influential artists, advertising, cinema, psychology. In this way we can say Apple, Samsung or whatever manufacturer are infringing intellectual property from someone (or from some community).
Real innovation are, for example, a new technology for manufacturing displays, a faster cryptographic algorithm, an art object like Van Gogh's paintings. Patents like "two finger scrolling" are a joke. Looks like imperialist behaviour when protecting status quo of slaving employees in China facilities while denies them from producing their own stuff.
They're based on social relations, influential artists, advertising, cinema, psychology. In this way we can say Apple, Samsung or whatever manufacturer are infringing intellectual property from someone (or from some community).
Real innovation are, for example, a new technology for manufacturing displays, a faster cryptographic algorithm, an art object like Van Gogh's paintings. Patents like "two finger scrolling" are a joke. Looks like imperialist behaviour when protecting status quo of slaving employees in China facilities while denies them from producing their own stuff.
Perhaps the tab is used 90% of the time in landscape and you hardly see the icon grid
Wow, you really are a seriously deluded Apple fan aren't you? So you are stating Apple NEVER does anything dodgy to gain sales and market share, yet Samsung have because they are from a country, part of the world that makes counterfeits? Because no one in America EVER sells or makes counterfeit products right?
I think you really are living in that alternative reality you mentioned....
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1210629/
Sorry, buyer (and designer) beware. There are many, many more examples. Yes, there are Western exceptions, but China at least, clearly has a problem with this sort of thing.
Yes. So clearly Samsung is dodgy. Seriously, LTD? Your postings on this particular aspect of the "argument" is rather disgusting.
This has nothing to do with patents. It's Trade Dress.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress
I have no idea why so many people still think this is a patent dispute, then argue that it's stupid for companies to be able to patent these things. Yes, it is stupid to patent these things, because they haven't, and can't, for the very same reasons people argue for it being stupid!
It's you who have a problem with this sort of things, China does not. You forget that China has different laws. Patent protection is much more relaxed in China and seemingly their economy is doing just fine. BTW, many argue that West should follow their example in this case.
True. Apple substituted fake web pages from the very beginning of showing off the iPhone, in order to hide the lack of Flash.
My favorite was when they stuck in a fake photo not only to hide a missing Flash menu in the middle of the National Geographic website... but also to "prove" how much faster the iPhone loaded "real" webpages.
As for copying the iPad screen, Samsung's 2006 digital picture frame design predates the iPad by four years. It has a flush rounded front, even screen borders, edge trim and all. Yet Apple never complained about it.
It was also pretty sleazy of Jobs to repeat that badly transcribed Samsung "sales are quite slow" misquote, when everyone else knew for weeks that the actual words were sales are "quite smooth".
Last edited:
All LTD does is posts links. Hes what I call a Linkrebutter. He has no real input just posts a bunch of links to blogs and repeats buzzwords from those links.
... at which point Samsung's stock tanks.
I'm fairly certain Samsung makes a whole lot more off supplying parts to people like Apple - even JUST to Apple - than they do off Galaxy Tabs.
Try using any of the half dozen excellent translators on the Net. They aren't perfect, but you get enough of an idea of what specifically is being said in a legal document where nuance isn't exactly a key aspect.
Also, I'd be surprised if at least several people replying in this thread aren't able to read German fairly fluently. It's a widely-taught language, even here in the xenophobic US.
http://www.amazon.de/Samsung-Touchscreen-Android-interner-Speicher/dp/B00512GSBC/
http://www.samsung.de/de/Privatkunden/Mobil/Tablets/samsunggalaxytab/GT-P1000CWADBT/detail.aspx
http://www.samsung.com/nl/consumer/...AXEN/index.idx?pagetype=prd_detail&returnurl=
http://www.samsung.com/nl/consumer/...DPHN/index.idx?pagetype=prd_detail&returnurl=
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Probably not. Cause as you know Apple basically designed the iPad first then put that on halt to release the iPhone. So Apple could have iPad design patents from before 2006.
Uh huh. Right. Apple doctored photos.
Get your head out of the sand, Apple isn't the saints you seem to believe them to be. The sooner you get rid of the idea that Apple is our saviours and everyone else is evil and realize that Apple is just profit maximizing company just like every one else the better. How come you have this personal devotion to Apple as a company, do you think Steve Jobs really care about YOU?
And those photos clearly show how the Galaxy Tab is no more similar to the iPad than the iPad is to the digital photo frames that pre-dates it.
I like how they only show the white version of the Tab and have the light on the aluminum back of the iPad shine from an angle that makes it look white also. There's really no resemblance at the back of these devices, even different materials, white plastic vs shiny aluminum.
And at the same time Samsung now provides all the displays of the iPad instead of LG providing a portion of them. They aren't moving away, they absolutely need Samsung.
The interface of the iPad has clearly been made with portrait orientation as default in mind, the reverse goes for the Tab and like other Android devices it doesn't have the icon grid home screen that iOS has, you can place anything you like on the home screen in any arrangement you want. Icons, widgets etc.
The app drawer is what shows the grid of icons but that's a different context than the iOS home screen, it's more like opening the applications folder on your computer.
...
It was obvious from the beginning that Apple abused a flawed system to temporarily get rid of a competitor but now they're even distorting facts?
All he said was that they had started working on a tablet prior to the release of the iPhone, not that the iPad was designed/etc. already.
The Samsung picture frame released was released as a final product in 2006, which means it underwent design and development earlier than that...