Did Apple Doctor Evidence in Samsung Patent Suit?

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Apple has been accused of doctoring evidence, specifically images of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet, in it's ongoing lawsuit with Samsung.

Whether the alleged inaccuracy on the part of Apple is intentional or accidental, it throws into question at least some of the evidence on which a German court based a recent decision. Arnout Groen, an intellectual property rights attorney at Klos Morel Vos & Schaap, was quoted by Webwereld.nl as saying that the inaccurate Tab photo is a "blunder" and a mistake that "can hardly be a concidence."
Click to expand...
 
Blasphemers! The Almighty Jobs is infallible! The Holy Apple are incapable of such acts! Such baseless accusations from heathens does not serve them well, only causing them to solidify the fact that they are infidels! Death to the non-believers! Glory to Apple! Hail Steve Jobs!


Another appropriate news to post this. LOL
 
Coicidence? lol..

When you're working on banning a competitive product of the market based on fabricated evidence, there's no such things as coincidence. It's all about money grabbing and I really hope Apple will be hold responsible for this blunder. This is truly damaging to Samsung reputation and what they did simply can't be done. They should be studied for anti-competitive behavior because that's what it is.
 
Even looking at the "doctored" images, they don't look nearly similar enough to me. iPad looks to have harsher corners and Galaxy still more oblong. The fact the German court upheld that is sad in my eyes.
 
Oh noes, the Galaxy is rectangular and has rounded corners. :rolleyes:

How many black LCD/LED TVs would look nearly identical if you removed the branding?

Roody-poo Apple.
 
yes they did and i hope they fucking burn for it. im tired of apple using its ip as a sledge hammer against its real competition in the tablet space. if you have the better product people will buy it if they don't like your product they will not buy it
 
That whole lawsuit is stupid anyways. Not surprising that Apple doctored the evidence.
 
I also like how they show the tab in the application menu instead of on the desktop. Of course and APP Libarary is going to look like a bunch of shortcuts, I don't really think that should be protected, and its completely different then Apples default screens being a bunch of shortcuts and an Android device filled with widgets.
 
flip them over - i'll bet you can tell which one is which - hmmm which one has an apple on it?
 
Can't say I'm surprised to be honest. Apple is shady anyways. But wow 10 posts and no Apple fanbois yet?
 
If they don't lose this case then my belief in intelligent life on Earth is done.
 
I know that many Apple users became hardcore MacTards because they were in essence protesting Microsoft's former heavy handedness and business practices. I now wonder whether these people will somehow overlook the sins of their favorite company. This is getting out of control and I hope common sense will rule at the end.
 
Hey guys my cordless phone looks like an iPhone, it has speakers and buttons laid out in a grid!
 
amdgamer said:
I know that many Apple users became hardcore MacTards because they were in essence protesting Microsoft's former heavy handedness and business practices. I now wonder whether these people will somehow overlook the sins of their favorite company. This is getting out of control and I hope common sense will rule at the end.
Click to expand...

This question has long since been answered.

If MS tried half of what is standard practice for Job's and company the emo-rage across the net by Apple fanatics would be epic.
 
Am I wrong here or don't you think Samsung's lawyers would have pointed these out.
 
I think the real issue here is that this is all about apple's registered design of this

000181607_0001_3_source.jpg


Does no one else see this whole thing as a joke?
The rest of the pictures and further details on this registered design are here take a look if you want a good laugh.
 
Great, I have a shoebox like that so I guess I can expect a legal letter from Apple in the mail. :(
 
Spidey329 said:
Am I wrong here or don't you think Samsung's lawyers would have pointed these out.
Click to expand...

The way this court works is the complainant files with the court and a judge makes the decision without notifying the defendant. In this case Apple filed a complaint with the court against Samsung, the judge decided to slap an injunction on the sale and import of the Galaxy Tab to all of Europe. Samsung didn't receive notice that they were even being sued until the ban was in effect.

Samsung will appeal the decision on August 25th. If the judge's decision is overturned then Apple has to foot the bill for the entire court cost (their own and Samsung's) and give Samsung compensation for the loss of sales and whatnot.

This particular court case was partially reversed today because the Dusseldorf District Court doesn't have jurisdiction to ban the sale and import of anything to other countries. The ban is still in effect in Germany.

Apple has certainly been displaying dickish behavior but the judge in this case should have his bullshit detector re-calibrated if he takes anything a plaintiff or defendant says at face value. He should have walked down the street to a store and compared the two things independently.

 
LOL. I like how they removed the defualt touchwiz widget-heavy load-out with a grid of icons like the iPad.

Yes, aple, you had to make the GTab square and booring with photoshop to make your case. Apple fail is fail.

My Gtab 10.1 kicks ass.
 
bear jesus said:
I think the real issue here is that this is all about apple's registered design of this

000181607_0001_3_source.jpg


Does no one else see this whole thing as a joke?
The rest of the pictures and further details on this registered design are here take a look if you want a good laugh.
Click to expand...
How generic can one get? I realize that the patent offices will register pretty much anything these days, but yikes!

I'm gonna open paint now & start making generic shapes with "glass sheen" lines to submit to the patent office. :rolleyes:
 
This needs to stop. Now that we have good touchscreens, every device is just a screen with a bezel, no real visible buttons (except maybe one on-off button). There are only so many different combinations of a screen and bezel that you can have.
 
zg75 said:
Worth reading on this topic ven considering the source:

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...evidence_in_eu_ipad_case_against_samsung.html
Click to expand...

Why would you post a link from an Apple fan site? You know it has to be slanted journalism.

Apple Insider said:
Among the design elements Apple describes as unique to the iPad are:

- a rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners;
- a flat, clear surface that covers the front of the product;
- a visible metal frame around the flat, clear surface;
- a display that is centered on the clear surface;
- under the clear surface, a neutral margin around the sides of the display;
- if the product is switched on, colored icons within the display.
Click to expand...

Sounds like every touch screen device ever created long before iPad was released.
 
This is a little more clear than the first photo since it's attachable keyboard is removed:

(the nub is a removeable pen, it's flush otherwise)
tc1100slate.jpg


- a rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners; -CHECK
- a flat, clear surface that covers the front of the product; -CHECK
- a visible metal frame around the flat, clear surface; -CHECK
- a display that is centered on the clear surface; -CHECK
- under the clear surface, a neutral margin around the sides of the display; -CHECK (I think at this point irrelevant)
- if the product is switched on, colored icons within the display -CHECK if I doctor it up like Apple does and just fill my desktop with icons

Thoughts Apple? That product is 8 years old now.
 
OldPueblo said:
This is a little more clear than the first photo since it's attachable keyboard is removed:

(the nub is a removeable pen, it's flush otherwise)
tc1100slate.jpg


- a rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners; -CHECK
- a flat, clear surface that covers the front of the product; -CHECK
- a visible metal frame around the flat, clear surface; -CHECK
- a display that is centered on the clear surface; -CHECK
- under the clear surface, a neutral margin around the sides of the display; -CHECK (I think at this point irrelevant)
- if the product is switched on, colored icons within the display -CHECK if I doctor it up like Apple does and just fill my desktop with icons

Thoughts Apple? That product is 8 years old now.
Click to expand...

It goes beyond that if you read translations of the complaint and take a look at the other articles I linked. Samsung's box and box art, custom UI, etc all seem to be modeled on Apple's stuff. Like them or not, it gets a little creepy. This most recent complaint talks about the Galaxy Tab 10.1 rev 2 which takes a lot of design cues from the iPad 2. Rev1 looks quite different and was killed in its cradle by Samsung in an announcement immediately following the iPad2 launch and the iPad2 was given as the reason.
 
No they are modeled on the common sense of the industry which Apple has also copied. I guarantee you things have been boxed like that well into the past, things as old as Windows Mobile have been using icons in a grid, and Apple gets to control box art now?

If anything I should sue Apple for people constantly harassing me asking if I'm using an iPhone/Pad/Pod when my devices look nothing like Apple products. Their basic claim is they've spent all this money to be recognized, and they've gone overboard and have nothing to fear.
 
They don't get to control boxes and box art, the stipulation is that Samsung is copying them to a certain extent one the box and box art (what's called Trade Dress) as well as the product design (there are Android tablets that don't look like the iPad and are not under legal threat) and the UI layer (called TouchWiz), that, when combined cause confusion in the marketplace that financially benefits Samsung and I think it's hard to argue that that isn't the case. I say this having had devices from both manufacturers in question here and being a fan of both.

OldPueblo said:
No they are modeled on the common sense of the industry which Apple has also copied. I guarantee you things have been boxed like that well into the past, things as old as Windows Mobile have been using icons in a grid, and Apple gets to control box art now?

If anything I should sue Apple for people constantly harassing me asking if I'm using an iPhone/Pad/Pod when my devices look nothing like Apple products. Their basic claim is they've spent all this money to be recognized, and they've gone overboard and have nothing to fear.
Click to expand...
 
By the by the old school HP tablet doesn't really enter into this for a number of reasons, not least of which the keyboard, resistive touch screen/stylus combo, keyboard, plastic surround with additional plastic ring surround/bevel which are not a full screen-area glass pane with a metal ring around the bevel, etc. The very basic top line sentences outlining the design in these documents are always super detail-free and sound ridiculous and they then get into details further in. And as I said before this gets into Trade Dress and specific design elements.
 
Actually just about every tablet "looks like" the iPad according to Apple's criteria. Touchwiz looks like Touchwiz, if it looked like the iPad OS then why can't I do the same things on the iPad that I can with Touchwiz? Why do you have to do different things to get the same look? If I open up the control panel on my XP machine I get a grid of icons, does that mean Windows XP copied the iPad? It's cherry picking to get money.
 
zg75 said:
By the by the old school HP tablet doesn't really enter into this for a number of reasons, not least of which the keyboard, resistive touch screen/stylus combo, keyboard, plastic surround with additional plastic ring surround/bevel which are not a full screen-area glass pane with a metal ring around the bevel, etc. The very basic top line sentences outlining the design in these documents are always super detail-free and sound ridiculous and they then get into details further in. And as I said before this gets into Trade Dress and specific design elements.
Click to expand...

Now you are talking technology, Apple is talking looks.
 
OldPueblo said:
Now you are talking technology, Apple is talking looks.
Click to expand...

I'm talking both :) The old school HP tablet above doesn't look like an iPad, the Galaxy Tab 10.1v2 definitely does. Samsung chose to use similar materials in a redesign based on the iPad2 in combination with a new box and UI layer that ape aspects of Apple's. Doing all of these things together led to the lawsuit. They wouldn't have a case on single items from this list, but the list together is damning. They aren't suing people who just have a grid of icons, they are suing someone who has a grid of icons modeled after iOS icons (including a phone icon that is a white phone at a 45 degree angle on a green background, a music player icon that is the iTunes icon in pink instead of blue, etc., etc., etc.), running on a revised tablet that now looks a lot like an iPad2 (v1 did not) in a white box with a similar cover shot and textual elements placed on a riser tray inside that box etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.
 
zg75 said:
I'm talking both :) The old school HP tablet above doesn't look like an iPad, the Galaxy Tab 10.1v2 definitely does. Samsung chose to use similar materials in a redesign based on the iPad2 in combination with a new box and UI layer that ape aspects of Apple's. Doing all of these things together led to the lawsuit. They wouldn't have a case on single items from this list, but the list together is damning. They aren't suing people who just have a grid of icons, they are suing someone who has a grid of icons modeled after iOS icons (including a phone icon that is a white phone at a 45 degree angle on a green background, a music player icon that is the iTunes icon in pink instead of blue, etc., etc., etc.), running on a revised tablet that now looks a lot like an iPad2 (v1 did not) in a white box with a similar cover shot and textual elements placed on a riser tray inside that box etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.
Click to expand...

It looks like an iPad per Apples description, that's all that matters since this is their lawsuit. In reality, knowing what is and isn't iPad is a test that nobody can fail because it's incredibly obvious that one has an Apple logo, runs a certain OS, and looks a certain way. Similar does not mean copied, especially when the market is saturated with similar designs (it is), and similar designs existed before the iPad even. So Samsung wanted it to be thinner to be more competitive, how does Apple own thickness? The concept of thinner/lighter has been around for far longer than Apple. They are defeating themselves with their own argument really, either similar is fine or it's not. If it's not, then Apple itself has already done exactly what they are suing for are hypocrites (big surprise).

Let's take this out of the realm of theoretical and place it firmly in reality. If I go to Best Buy or any electronic store to buy an iPad, am I going to have a hard time finding it on the shelf? Will I cry endless tears being surrounded by white boxes with tablet shapes on them and be unable to accomplish my goal of getting an iPad? Oh wait, this one says Apple right here. Oh look, it's also on the price tag. Oh hey, a store guy is also here to help me in case I am so literally retarded that I cannot figure out which is the iPad. Apples argument is a load of shit and no intelligent person can agree with it.

If you put an iPad and the Samsung tablet (or any of them all together) then you can tell immediately which is the iPad, unless you've never seen an iPad before. If that's the case then why the hell does it matter?!?!? If I don't ever WANT to have an iPad, why do I need to know what it looks like?!? If I DO want an iPad, then of course I will know what it looks like and have the brain slightly larger than the average animal that is required to read and know how to find something on a department shelf. Apple is in effect insulting our collective intelligence's here.

Find me how many people have taken home a Galaxy Tab and have opened it only to be surprised that it is in fact not the iPad that they were sure they were buying. You and I both know that's not going to happen. And even if it actually did happen on the rarest of occasions when our moon is aligned with a sacred tree in south America, no legislation can save such retards from themselves.

In conclusion, what gives Apple the right to dictate how anything can be marketed, sold, boxed, etc? Nothing unless it's a direct copy. And it's clearly not.
 
OldPueblo said:
In conclusion, what gives Apple the right to dictate how anything can be marketed, sold, boxed, etc? Nothing unless it's a direct copy. And it's clearly not.
Click to expand...

But... but the Galaxy Tab's box is the same. It has a picture of the product on it. Apple does that, so that's definitely not allowed.
 
WTS iPad : $499

6984W.jpg



FAQ:
Q) How do I know this is a real iPad? It is so hard to tell these days!
A) You know because it has a white box, four rounded edges, icons, and a touch screen. Who else would dare design such a device?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top