Samsung's 'Crisis of Design' Memo Enters Patent Trial as Early Apple Designer Testifies on Confusion

[rjohnstone]

Strong words from an anonymous Internet nobody.

Offensive, really.

And you're a "somebody" right?
Didn't think so.
Just another nobody like the rest of us with a computer, an internet connection and an opinion.

Why are you offended anyway?
Actually.... I'm offended that you're offended.

If one calls someone else an idiot just because it can not agree, it must be a pure and total IDIOT first.

I rest my case.

 

[John McCollum]

Read what I wrote again, my comment only relate to the points "similarity of the marks" and "defendant's intent in selecting the mark" and I correctly said that those two points doesn't necessarily mean infringement because those two criteria alone aren't enough.

Again, you're wrong. In fact, any of those criteria are sufficient if the court finds either the intent or the actual injury sufficiently serious.

 

[rmwebs]

Incorrect.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/12/us/12experts.html?pagewanted=all



Yes, of course. Since she was fooled, it's because she (one of the pioneers of computing GUI iconography) has no idea what she's talking about. Not because Samsung's stuff is such a duplication of Apple's.

Sorry, but if a supposed expert is able to confuse this:

with this:

Then she is no expert.

I'm not saying its not alike - far from it. The Galaxy S was very clearly meant to look just like iOS. But it's a 2 year old handset. Apple had LOTS of time to actually do something about it if they really felt it infringed (which, IMO it still does not - you cant claim rights on a black screen with a grid of icons), but didn't bother until Samsung's sales skyrocketed.

The latest handset (S3) looks NOTHING remotely like iOS. It's gone back to a much more standardised android UI:


S2:

S3:

 

[rendevouspoo]

.

The latest handset (S3) looks NOTHING remotely like iOS. It's gone back to a much more standardised android UI:

S3 is the reason for the litigation because Apple is butthurt that there is a better phone out than theirs and they can't do anything about. They want to do damage to a company for making a better phone. Plain and simple.

 

[gnasher729]

Let me guess she is probably a blind or an idiot or both, well unless Apple put their hands deep in their pockets and gave some love to this woman(apple shares anyone or simple cash). to confuse an iphone with a samsung is stupid plain and simple.

You're insults show that you have absolutely no clue about the history of computing.

 

[samcraig]

Apparently you don't know much about color mixing. Do you know what red + yellow mixed together produce? Orange. Add a little blue into your orange and you get brown. Now, they are not identical colors, but just slightly tweaked color sets.

Thanks for the laugh. This was the funniest justification I have ever read on here

 

[Mad-B-One]

The memo reads to me more like "Ok, we've got a new competitor and their new UI makes ours look terrible. We need to step it up and modernize our design".

At the same point, you have to remember that the Samsung UI on android based devices is just that - ANDROID. So you can hardly start calling Samsung out for copying icons when in many of the Samsung builds they are using stock Android icon.

You are right. You can't. Apple isn't. They sued them for customizing the Android phone to the point it looks like an iPhone.

Either way, Apple really DID NOT design a unique, unseen new type of icon. You only have to look at the likes of Palm and even some of the freely available Windows Mobile skins that were around to know that.

Show them and someone can explain to you why Apple got a trademark on it because they are indeed unique. Changing just a few features does not make that happeneing. I cannot make shoes and call them Adibas and get away with it. It is close enough to be mixed up and it is not the single icon which is at question, it's the pattern. You don't need a CD as background for music nor do you need the same color scheme.

The icons have quite simply evolved over time. For an example, look at a screenshot of stock Android 2.3 (gingerbread) on the Nexus S. You'll notice a 3-icon dock with a green phone. The next icon released by google was the same phone and the same green. The only difference was that they made the background of the phone the green color, and the phone symbol was white.

So, they all might infringe then. Where is your point? They could have used a green phone on a white background - same functionality, but significantly different than the Apple Trademark. They didn't.

Whilst I do think that Samsung (or more specifically ALL of the 'big boys' running on Android (Samsung, HTC, LG, etc) have taken some heavy influence from the UI of iOS, they have not 'blatantly ripped it off' or stolen anything directly. This goes down the same lines as the Mac VS Windows debate. The natural progression was that better hardware allows for more advanced UI concepts to be used without it causing fundamental UX issues.

Difference is that Apple and Microsoft both licensed GUI from Xerox and built on their own history. Heck, Microsoft even sells MS Office first to Macs and is interested in having similar designs and functionality. As long as both sides agree on not having a brawal over it, it's all fair game. They basically agreed to co-exist and did not blatantly copy each other.

The argument is so silly that its got to the point where people are now claiming that ALL phones made after 2007 MUST be a rip off of the iPhone. Some people really need to listen to the complete crap they are spewing out. I'm an Apple fan as much as the next guy, but some people are just completely deluded here.

No one said ALL phones. That is your accusation. Apple's stand is that Android phones do copy iOS functions and specifically here: Samsung is even going a step further and customized the UI to look confusingly similar to iOS and violates trademarks.

The bottom line is that Apple are trying to stop competition. They are scared of Samsung, and rightly so if the recent sales figures are to continue. This is not the correct way to stop your competition. If you want to beat them, make your stuff better.

That is your interpretation. In my opinion, the bottom line is that Apple wants to protect their IP. They would be foolish not to. And they still make the better products - hence they can sell the iPhone 3GS still even though it is years old. Is there any Samsung smartphone that is that old and still sold?

One final thing. Just to put this out there about the icons, take a look at the LG Optimus 4X HD P880 (god thats a terrible name) - it has the same style icons: http://www.lg.com/uk/mobile-phones/lg-P880 . HTC also use a similar icon: http://www.htc.com/www/smartphones/ - it's a fairly standard icon. It's a damn phone symbol.

So, if Samsung looses the case, they will be next to be sued. Apple doesn't have to enforce their right on trademark equally to all at the same time.

(Sidenote for the immature kids: I'm not a 'fanboy', 'fandroid', etc - I dont idiotically worship any company, I simply use some of their products that do what I need them to...you know, like any sane human being would)

Well, I guess in your interpretation, we are all insane. This is by the way a legal term meaning we were not aware of what we were doing while commiting a crime. I think I have competency and capacity. That would be the medical term (competent) and the legal term for being able to understand what I'm doing and what the consequences are.

 

[NumberNine]

Typical Fandroid! Without the ability to present a cogent argument they resort to ad hominem attacks. So sad!

Ouch, you got me.

 

[LagunaSol]

And you're a "somebody" right?
Didn't think so.

I'm not the one calling Dr. Kare (Ph.D, renowned iconographer) an idiot.

Why are you offended anyway?

It's offensive to her, not to me.

 

[rmwebs]

Apple's trademarks are pretty specific as to color, and it's very easy to see that often their details are quite different from what Samsung did:

View attachment 351928

As for the green phone icon, what you have to realize is that Apple chose it to LOOK LIKE the Send icon that had been used on phones for years. It was so common, that they couldn't even trademark the first one they showed off... they had to throw in background stripes in their trademark application:

View attachment 351927

Likewise, when it came time to add microphone icons, Apple ... just like other companies... used familiar looks:

View attachment 351924

View attachment 351926

As for the packaging, styles come and go. Apple's interior setup looks like almost a clone of the Prada's packaging (which came out before the iPhone did), from the display when you open it, to the inside accessories layout:

View attachment 351925

Great post

Just to point another little tid bit out. The green phone icon. Skype has used a green phone icon since it's initial release, right back on Feb 19th 2006 - one year before the iPhone.

 

[JohnDoe98]

thanks for the laugh. This was the funniest justification i have ever read on here

Glad to be of service

 

[gnasher729]

Here's what I don't get.

I owned a small branding firm (5-6 employees) for about 15 years. Most of our work was done for regional and local companies, and none of it received the type of exposure as Samsung's.

But we were always conscious -- as were our clients -- about infringing upon someone's trademark. Aside from being unethical, it's just not worth the risk of lawsuit, of product redesign, of, well, anything.

Time after time, we'd reject at sketch stage logos that looked too similar to others in the marketplace. We even redesigned and reimplemented at our own expense a client's visual identity when shortly after launch, their legal department notified us that they'd found another logo -- in a completely different market -- that looked (accidentally and incidentally) very similar.

What in the hell was Samsung thinking, blatantly copying Apple's UI and launching it into the same marketplace? It's branding 101, people.

Samsung copied Apple. Samsung sold lots of phones and made lots of profit. HTC didn't copy Apple, and HTC is much less successful making phones. Do you think there might be some correlation?

 

[ahireasu]

S3 is the reason for the litigation because Apple is butthurt that there is a better phone out than theirs and they can't do anything about. They want to do damage to a company for making a better phone. Plain and simple.

There are more than 1 phones out there that are better than the iphone but the S3 is the one that has high sales

 

[John McCollum]

The Galaxy S was very clearly meant to look just like iOS. But it's a 2 year old handset. Apple had LOTS of time to actually do something about it if they really felt it infringed (which, IMO it still does not - you cant claim rights on a black screen with a grid of icons), but didn't bother until Samsung's sales skyrocketed.

You just said it yourself. It was clearly meant to look like iOS. That's infringement.

Apple had lots of time to do something about it? How long do you think it takes to prepare a lawsuit of this magnitude?

As you've conceded, here was intent to infringe. Apple was within its statutory time limits to sue. The fact that you think they should have done it sooner is wholly irrelevant, as is the supposition that Apple waited until the sales went up.

That's actually the point here. The Samsung Galaxy brand was built using stolen IP. When the sales reached a certain level, Apple realized that this wasn't just an annoyance, it was a threat. So they sued. How is this hard to understand?

 

[rjohnstone]

I'm not the one calling Dr. Kare (Ph.D, renowned iconographer) an idiot.



It's offensive to her, not to me.

So having alphabet soup after ones name makes them incapable of making idiotic mistakes?
Gotcha.

 

[nanotlj]

Someone must be butthurt badly so it creates a new account to troll on a forum related to a company it hates so much.

S3 is the reason for the litigation because Apple is butthurt that there is a better phone out than theirs and they can't do anything about. They want to do damage to a company for making a better phone. Plain and simple.

 

[NumberNine]

S3 is the reason for the litigation because Apple is butthurt that there is a better phone out than theirs and they can't do anything about. They want to do damage to a company for making a better phone. Plain and simple.

Nailed it. S3 dominates the dinky little iPhone.

iOS is so sad and stale looking at this point.

 

[NAG]

Sorry, but if a supposed expert is able to confuse this:

[snip]

with this:

[snip]

Then she is no expert.

With all the circular reasoning here you'd think this wasn't just about rectangles. Get your arguments straight people!

And when in doubt just say "Apple is evil".

 

[Mad-B-One]

Sorry, but if a supposed expert is able to confuse this:

with this:

Then she is no expert.

I'm not saying its not alike - far from it. The Galaxy S was very clearly meant to look just like iOS. But it's a 2 year old handset. Apple had LOTS of time to actually do something about it if they really felt it infringed (which, IMO it still does not - you cant claim rights on a black screen with a grid of icons), but didn't bother until Samsung's sales skyrocketed.

The latest handset (S3) looks NOTHING remotely like iOS. It's gone back to a much more standardised android UI:


S2:

S3:

In the last picture, you actually have a good way of showing how you can use icons which are significantly different. Good job! No ringbinder needed to do the contacts icon. The icons shown before were still used by Samsung. You get the point? Just because Samsung got phones that don't infringe doesn't prove anything. When the police arrests a robber in his own home, he is not in the home he broke into either. Doesn't mean he wasn't in the past.

 

[lucas107]

So let LG sue Apple if there's a viable case to be made.

"Samsung couldn't have copied Apple because Apple copied X" isn't a very strong argument.

And whenever I think "photos," I think of a flower with yellow petals. I mean, it's just universal!

the point isnt to get sue happy, its that apple is suing over patents they know are bogus most of the time. also if that lady did pick the samsung instead of the iphone she is not the brightest. my 93 year old grandma knew the difference between my friends 3gs and my 4 year olds galaxy s and it took her about 2 seconds and she has never held a cell phone before.

 

[LagunaSol]

Sorry, but if a supposed expert is able to confuse this:

with this:

Then she is no expert.

I'm not saying its not alike - far from it. The Galaxy S was very clearly meant to look just like iOS.

So what you're saying is only an idiot could be confused, even though Samsung "very clearly meant" to design their UI to be similar and that it's "far from" not being alike.

But it's a 2 year old handset.

It doesn't matter.

The latest handset (S3) looks NOTHING remotely like iOS. It's gone back to a much more standardised android UI:

So all past sins absolved, eh?

 

[Rodimus Prime]

She's made icons and graphics for a lot of companies.... Apple and Microsoft are her two biggest clients.
That being said, she is an idiot if she can confuse a Samsung phone of any kind with an iPhone.
Sorry, but they simply are not that similar.
Let's also remind everyone that Apple is paying $550 per hour to testify in their favor.
I'm sure her story would be different if Samsung was paying her fee.

The reality, "paid" expert testimony is biased to the company paying for it and is why it should never be allowed in court.

If an expert needs to be brought in, they should be a neutral party that has not done business with either party and their time should be paid for by both parties.

Pretty standard for the experts to get paid. Does not make it any better but it is pretty standard SOP.

 

[Ryth]

If Apple has a case here, then we have a serious problem on our hands... last I looked, most TVs look the similar... Ford and Chevy both use steering wheels... etc...
.

Your comparison logic is flawed.

First, you can't compare that both use steering wheels, have engines etc..thats like saying both phones have a display, processor, etc. Parts arent the issue here.

It's the look of the device and interface. That is equivalent to the 'design/look' of a vehicle.

Can you cover up a Ford logo on a F-150 and cover up the Chevy logo on a Silverado and tell the difference between trucks in design from a glance. I can. Grill, lights, body styling, etc

Can you cover up the logo on a BMW3 and Audi A4 and tell the difference even though both are sedans from a glance? I can. Grill, lights, body styling, etc.

That IS what a design difference is and what Apple is talking about.

vs

BMW

vs

Apple is making a point like this. You can't tell from a 'glance' that the Samsung Galaxy isn't an iPhone.

Each of these companies have a 'distinct' set of styling elements that make them 'theirs'...grills, lights, etc.

 

[SockRolid]

I think "willful" infringement increases the damages, though.

One can only hope.

 

[goinskiing]

The memo reads to me more like "Ok, we've got a new competitor and their new UI makes ours look terrible. We need to step it up and modernize our design".

At the same point, you have to remember that the Samsung UI on android based devices is just that - ANDROID. So you can hardly start calling Samsung out for copying icons when in many of the Samsung builds they are using stock Android icon.

Either way, Apple really DID NOT design a unique, unseen new type of icon. You only have to look at the likes of Palm and even some of the freely available Windows Mobile skins that were around to know that.

The icons have quite simply evolved over time. For an example, look at a screenshot of stock Android 2.3 (gingerbread) on the Nexus S. You'll notice a 3-icon dock with a green phone. The next icon released by google was the same phone and the same green. The only difference was that they made the background of the phone the green color, and the phone symbol was white.

Whilst I do think that Samsung (or more specifically ALL of the 'big boys' running on Android (Samsung, HTC, LG, etc) have taken some heavy influence from the UI of iOS, they have not 'blatantly ripped it off' or stolen anything directly. This goes down the same lines as the Mac VS Windows debate. The natural progression was that better hardware allows for more advanced UI concepts to be used without it causing fundamental UX issues.

The argument is so silly that its got to the point where people are now claiming that ALL phones made after 2007 MUST be a rip off of the iPhone. Some people really need to listen to the complete crap they are spewing out. I'm an Apple fan as much as the next guy, but some people are just completely deluded here.

The bottom line is that Apple are trying to stop competition. They are scared of Samsung, and rightly so if the recent sales figures are to continue. This is not the correct way to stop your competition. If you want to beat them, make your stuff better.

One final thing. Just to put this out there about the icons, take a look at the LG Optimus 4X HD P880 (god thats a terrible name) - it has the same style icons: http://www.lg.com/uk/mobile-phones/lg-P880 . HTC also use a similar icon: http://www.htc.com/www/smartphones/ - it's a fairly standard icon. It's a damn phone symbol.

(Sidenote for the immature kids: I'm not a 'fanboy', 'fandroid', etc - I dont idiotically worship any company, I simply use some of their products that do what I need them to...you know, like any sane human being would)

I think Apple may be trying to twist Samsung's arm to cry uncle (Google in this case). Samsung is really just in the middle of the bigger battle between Apple and Google.