Feeds

back to article Apple pounces on Samsung doc as proof of 'slavish copy' claims

Apple presented a massive 132-page internal Samsung document that showed the South Korean firm comparing every inch of the iPhone with its early Galaxy S phone in its patent ruckus yesterday. The internal Samsung report, translated from Korean, goes over every aspect of the iPhone and looks at how the equivalent feature of the S …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Anonymous Coward

"Even if that's true though, the copying would have to be an infringement on Apple's actual patents for Apple to win this case. The jury would also have to accept that Apple had a right to those patents – that they aren't invalid because they're obvious or had been done before."

The crux of the matter.

29
3
Silver badge

Wow

Two downvotes already. It seems there are people out there who think it is a good idea for people to go round patenting things that are trivial or have been done before.

That's not what the patent system is supposed to be for. It is supposed to be a framework for stimulating innovation, so that people can profit from things they have put a lot of work into without someone else ripping them off. I personally don't think an icon , or having the form-factor of a rounded rectangle should be covered by this. A circuit design of a microprocessor would be an example of something I think should be patentable. This whole Apple vs Samsung affair just demonstrates how lamentably awry the various global patent systems have gone.

29
3
Facepalm

Re: Wow

So you think if someone designs something they should be able to protect it from copycats but if they are called Apple then they should not be able to protect it from copycats.

4
25
Anonymous Coward

Re: Wow

You miss the whole point. What is being said is that Apple should not be allowed to get a patent on a icon or the shape of a rectangle with rounded corners. Microsoft tried to use this mentality that the basic concept of Windows was patentable (ie the desktop), The idea was that all Gui's were a copy of Microsoft's windows gui. That got no where. I ask you this, if Apple can enforce a patient on a rectangle with rounded corners, why can Microsoft enforce a patent on of Window's GUI, hence shutting down Apple, smart phones, tablets, Linux desktop, etc?

6
0
Anonymous Coward

You miss the point of this forum

It's for the exclusive use of Fandroids to have a little dig at Apple.

There are three prerequisites to owning an Android phone

1. Lack of cash

2. Immaturity

3. Lack of social education

These 3 items put into a formula give the reason why the Fandroid acts and posts and downvotes the way he does. There is also some Pavlovian conditioning involved.

The formula, LC x (I x LSE) = E

E is of course Envy.

3
19
Silver badge
Linux

Re: You miss the point of this forum

I dumped Tivo for the same reason I criticize Apple today.

Some patents are just wrong. They are destructive and anti-social.

Despite all of the fanboy blathering, Apple likes to drop the ball. It's that someone is around to pick up the slack for them. The courts should not be a crutch for Apple to avoid rivals.

Apple should not get to force me to use their crap. It's just as evil when Apple does it (versus Microsoft).

I liked Apple much better when it was on perpetual deathwatch.

3
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: You miss the point of this forum

Prerequisites to owning an Apple phone

1. More money than brains

2. Slave to fashion

3. Insufferably self-important

4. Lack of a sense of humour

No need for a cutesy formula. If you possess the above 4, you're an iThing owner.

13
4
Silver badge
Thumb Down

Re: You miss the point of this forum

I don't own an Android phone and I still dislike Apple and their patent wars.

4
1

This post has been deleted by its author

Anonymous Coward

Re: You miss the point of this forum

Prerequisites to owning an Apple phone

You missed one other point...

5. Successful.

0
7
Trollface

Re: You miss the point of this forum

What a depressingly insipid post. Not only is the underlying content poor, but the dodgy maths is badly expressed and almost entirely unexplained.

As for the prerequisites,

1. Many non- apple products are as (if not more) expensive than the iphone, making this argument both nonsensical and pointlessly materialistic - after all, if it's more expensive it's better, regardless of your requirements, right?

2. I have no idea how the original poster came by the maturity argument nor do I see how it actually has the slightest bearing on objective differences between devices.

3. "Social Education" (or it's apparent lack of) reeks of the incredibly stereotypical high-horse bourgeoisie image associated with apple products which I'd have assumed most normative apple users would prefer to avoid.

I'm not even taking a side, but I hope that post was a troll because if someone actually believes that then I'm genuinely worried for their mental health,

7
0

Not Copying If Apple Does It?

No, the principle is that Apple is claiming a design patent for a confluence of design trends that had already emerged by 2007 and were already popping up all over the place by 2006 because of then-recent advances in radio/chip fabrications, lower-powered screens and economical hardened glass assemblies.

http://bit.ly/O5oiVY

2
0
Bronze badge
Mushroom

Re: Not Copying If Apple Does It?

"claiming a design patent for a confluence of design trends that had already emerged by 200***4***"

Fixed it for you. HTC and Samsung had phones that look not dissimilar to the iPhone long before Apple even dreamed of making a phone.

"Remove the feeling that iPhone's menu icons are copied by differentiating design"

That whole sentiment rips Apple's argument - that Samsung were actively trying to copy their phones - to pieces. It's basically "oh shit, it looks to much like the iPhone - lets not do that eh?".

1
0
Silver badge

Re: You miss the point of this forum

I hope the AC above was just trolling, but...

"There are three prerequisites to owning an Android phone"

I own an Android phone. Let's see how I add up:

"1. Lack of cash"

I'm not rich, but I could afford an iPhone/iPad outright if I wanted to, or a contract to get one for "free". I have to say, though, that there are other things I consider more important. I bought a second hand Atrix, costing me about half the cost of a new iPhone at the time, or probably about the same as the previous iPhone model second hand. I also recently bought a cheapo Android tab: I wasn't going to spend the money on either an iPad or a top-end Android tab because it is just a toy (and something to test some of my development projects on).

"2. Immaturity"

In most ways I would say this fits me (I'm always the first to giggle when someone farts), but it has no bearing on my choice of an Android phone. In fact, I would say I am more mature in many ways than the person who goes out and blows all their spare cash on an iPhone: I know that a top-end smart phone is not the most important thing to spend my money on.

"3. Lack of social education"

I don't even understand this. "Social education" sounds like brainwashing to me, but if you mean what I think I would not say I lack it.

There is no envy from me: iPhones/iPads are good peices of kit, but I prefer Android overall. I find it more pleasant to use, and I much prefer the control I have over the device. SWMBO has an iPhone, she loves it, but then she never liked the Android UI. It all comes down to personal preference.

And making generalised personal comments about a large swathe of people you have never met speaks more for your level of maturity and "social education" than it does for anyone else's, and it doesn't help your argument.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Wow

"all Gui's were a copy of Microsoft's windows gui"

Haha, not at all. Somebody needs a history lesson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: You miss the point of this forum

"You miss the point of this forum

It's for the exclusive use of Fandroids to have a little dig at Apple.

There are three prerequisites to owning an Android phone

1. Lack of cash

2. Immaturity

3. Lack of social education

These 3 items put into a formula give the reason why the Fandroid acts and posts and downvotes the way he does. There is also some Pavlovian conditioning involved.

The formula, LC x (I x LSE) = E

E is of course Envy."

Why would anyone envy such f king STUPIDITY! Hardly surprising from and iPhone owner tho.

If you really believed anything you wrote, and assumed that your peers would listen, you would not be and anonymous COWARD! Typical iPhone user, full of shite!

0
2
Coffee/keyboard

Re: You miss the point of this forum

"Re: You miss the point of this forum

Prerequisites to owning an Apple phone

You missed one other point...

5. Successful."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. In your head.

What COWARDS don't seem to realise is that everyone else looks at you with your phone and know that they are going to have to s p e a k s l o w l y a n d c l e a r l y t o e n s u r e t h a t y o u u n d e r s t a n d.

But don't forget point 6. So far up thier own arse they can only talk shite.

And point 7. iPhone is so last decade.

0
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: You miss the point of this forum

@honkhonk34

Well said sir.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: You miss the point of this forum

For the record, while I may not be rich, I paid more for my Samsung phone than it would have cost me to get an iPhone. I was willing to pay that just to have a quality phone that will last me a good amount of time and one that lets me use it any which way I please. For instance, I am currently running CyanogenMod 9 RC2 instead of the stock firmware and am wishing to contribute back to the open source community once I find the spare time.

Furthermore, I can purchase my hardware from any vendor, not just the one, and still use the same software I've already purchased in Google's market. I was so impressed with Android on my phone that I later purchased an Android tablet, the Asus Transformer Pad TF300T, which runs the same software I've already purchased for my Samsung phone. Put simply, I like being able to choose my hardware vendor independently of my software vendor. As long as Apple continues its current strategy of controlling every single aspect of my experience, I will not own an Apple device or, by extension, run OSX or iOS.

I am not a "Fandroid" - just simply a man who likes choices. While I personally may not like Apple, I certainly won't judge you if you choose to use their products, simply because it's your choice.

Lastly, I'm posting anonymously for one reason and one reason only - I do not wish to advertise publicly what items of value I own, no matter who makes them.

0
0
Stop

Re: You miss the point of this forum

You don't have to have "more money than brains" to own an iThing.

You simply have to have enough money to qualify to buy it because you THINK you're "rich". Many of my wife's friends have iPhones, iPads, etc - yet have had their houses foreclosed, huge debts, etc.

There is a simple explanation: They're financially stupid. They think it is cool to own an iThing and want to... even though Apple's filings show they PROFIT (average) $150/year per iThing. Every Darn Year It Still Works.

Do the math - 4 year life for the hardware = $600 PROFIT (not gross) into Apple's coffers. It's as overpriced as healthcare is in our USA.

0
0
Joke

Samsung already issued a video statement denying this

on Conan O'Brien's show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YciM_54HzZk

8
5
Thumb Up

Re: Samsung already issued a video statement denying this

Samsung - staying true to the vision of its founder - Stefan Jobes - That last bit had me in stitches :D

0
0
FAIL

"I think of myself as someone who's pretty granular about looking at graphics, and I mistook one for the other."

For a given definition of granular possibly, but to mistake a Samsung for an iPhone the granules must be pretty damn large indeed....

25
4
Silver badge
Holmes

Very Very large granules... forget shape, because if you cant tell an iPhone and an SGS apart when their on a desk in front of you, then you MUST have very bad eyesight...

at the very least they are completely different sizes, the iPhone is TINY and would have probably been the smallest phone on the desk!

20
3
Silver badge

Gosh, for $80,000 I think I could be confused as well. For five minutes anyway.

Frankly I am rather appalled at the tactics employed. If you have to lie and cheat to get your point across, my feeling is that your point is not worth being considered anyway.

If I were a judge I'd make sure any company coming forth with such behavior be fined a hefty amount for contempt of court.

32
2
Silver badge

I agree. The entire trial is a farce - I can just imagine that Apple is now going to bring Apple fan after Apple fan as a "witness", saying how they got confused. The problem is that Apple fans are always like this - they assume every phone with a touchscreen is an "iPhone", every music player is an "iPod", every media player/tablet is an "iPad", every ultra-portable laptop is a "MacBookProAirWhatever". If they see an Apple device with a feature, they assume that Apple are the only ones with that feature, and if they see it on another device, either that device must be an Apple product too, or it was copied. They don't say to people "Oh, I've got a smartphone/mp3 player/ultra-portable", it's "I've got an iPhone/iPod/iPad/MacAirBookProWhatever" because to them, there are no other generic devices. Even the media are at it - it's always someone's "iPhone" or "MacBook", where as other products are "phone" or "laptop"; or shops that have categories for "iPods and mp3 players", "iPads and tablets", "Macs and PCs".

It's all marketing for Apple - and it's worrying that the trial is being fought not by logic, evidence and facts, but by marketing. This kind of RDF logic should be thrown out of court.

It ought to be simple. Apple products are the ones with really blatantly obvious logos. The only way they could make them more obvious is if they lit up - oh wait. (Honestly, I always laugh when I see a band that uses an Apple PC - especially when it's a band that goes to extreme efforts over their look and their image, the lighting effects on the stage - and then ruining it all is a tacky light up Apple logo.)

13
2
Silver badge

Indeed. I'm more likely to mistake an Iphone for a Samsung feature phone...

(If Apple release a 4" Iphone or 5-6" Ipad Mini, are we going to hear complaints that Apple copied Samsung?)

5
2
Anonymous Coward

Lie & cheat?

You have an example of that?

Are you suggesting the individual committed perjury, and if so, please give an example.

Really, you are suggesting some pretty libelous things here, so let's see some facts.

Either references and appropriate analysis of why testimony was false or deceptive, or pull your f*ing head in!

Dweeb

2
17
Bronze badge

@ Pascal Monett

"Gosh, for $80,000 I think I could be confused as well. For five minutes anyway.

Frankly I am rather appalled at the tactics employed. If you have to lie and cheat to get your point across, my feeling is that your point is not worth being considered anyway."

Firstly, I'm not sure where you are getting the "lie and cheat" from... Are you assuming that the witness was lying when she said that she picked up a Samsung phone by mistake out of a number of phones in the middle of a conference table? If so, why? Is it your opinion (based on what expertise?) that it is absolutely impossible to mistake one phone for another at a glance?

or, is it possible that;

Secondly, you are assuming that paying a consultant for testimony (remember that she is no longer an Apple employee) is necessarily and ONLY paying that person to lie? If so, I'll be interested to see if Samsung pays any outside consultants to testify when it's their turn and whether that will affect your opinion.

Thirdly, I'm assuming that the UK has similar laws regarding perjury to the ones in the US. Lying to the court under oath, even in a civil case, is taken VERY seriously here. You would pretty much have to assume that that $80K -- plus a few more -- would get eaten up in legal fees in defending herself before a criminal, not civil, court. And any lawyer that was found to have suborned a witness like that would stand a VERY good chance of being disbarred. A desperate-enough one might try it in a low-end case, but in a very public, high-profile one like this with lots of eyes watching every move -- not likely.

Fourthly, I'm hoping that no one who is accusing Apple of cheating by paying consultants was in the "I-shouldn't-have-to-serve-jury-duty-because-I'd-lose-MONE-E-E-E-Y-Y-Y!" side of the argument last week. Because that would just be... well... "hypocritical" is such a judgemental word, isn't it...? Personally, I see a difference between providing a professional service (specific expertise in a field with a limited pool of acknowledged experts) and serving a public duty (jury duty, where no specialized knowledge is required to begin with and where there is a large, non-specialized pool from which to choose.) The one where expertise is required and a limited number of experts exist is a different case from one where there is an, essentially, unlimited pool of equally-qualified/unqualified (take your choice) candidates from which to choose. It's supply-and-demand at work.

3
5
Facepalm

Re: @ Pascal Monett

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Mistook_His_Wife_for_a_Hat

0
1
Bronze badge
Coat

@Pascal Monett

Frankly I am rather appalled at the tactics employed. If you have to lie and cheat to get your point across, my feeling is that your point is not worth being considered anyway."

You're clearly not from the west side of the pond, are ya? 'Round here, those tactics are de rigeur for the for this time of year (that being the political season).

2
0
Bronze badge
WTF?

Re: @ Pascal Monett, @ Mike Moyle

You have got to admit that paying someone what amounts to more than twice the annual salary of your average punter before the Taxman gets his grubby paws on it (translated to €, and compared to life here in the polders) seems a bit on the ....excessive side for a "simple" expertise court appearence.

I can see where compensation for preparation time, travel costs, and accommodation for a court appearance of an expert comes in.

But this amount is ridiculous, and would, at least with your average punter, raise eyebrows just a bit.

7
0
Silver badge

Dear Mike Moyle

I have a Samsung Galaxy phone.

I have seen plenty of Iphones since they came out.

I am just a layman, no expert in any way, but I am pretty convinced that there is no way to confuse the two, even at a glance. In any case, that is indeed my opinion, whether you like it or not.

As far as paying for expert testimony, I do absolutely agree that expenses should be covered, but I feel that $80 thousand covers a lot more expenses than is justified. Another case of society's current impossibility to be reasonable with money. Supply and demand is not an excuse for being outrageous.

And as far as perjury is concerned, please allow me to laugh. Proving perjury in such a statement is scientifically close to impossible and everyone knows it. As far as lawyers' integrity is concerned, I refer you to the educational experience of Microsoft vs DoD, where we all learned just exactly how much straight-faced lying was possible in court, even with all your eyes watching, denouncing and, at times, positively frothing at the mouth with indignation. I don't remember any lawyers having been disbarred after that one.

Go ahead and get all uppity with your UK justice system if you want, I don't see that it is reacting any more strongly to this. If it was, Apple would have already gotten a rap on the fingers for wasting court time with a useless testimony. Oh, so a so-called expert mistook the two phones ? What does that prove in court ? Honestly, what does it prove ?

Nothing.

0
0
Silver badge
Gimp

What I don't get

"Even if that's true though, the copying would have to be an infringement on Apple's actual patents for Apple to win this case. The jury would also have to accept that Apple had a right to those patents – that they aren't invalid because they're obvious or had been done before."

So why are they going through the whole witness process trying to prove samsung stole the design when the design may not even be valid.

Wouldn't it be faster, and make more sense to confirm the patents are valid first?

As it's the best sample arguement I can think of. Right now they are taking Schrodinger to court for killing his cat, but they haven't opened to box to see if the cat exists yet.

18
1
Holmes

Re: What I don't get

"Wouldn't it be faster, and make more sense to confirm the patents are valid first?"

Well...yes, but that would derail the legal gravy train...

14
2
Happy

Re: What I don't get

The jury is made up of Normal People, not patent experts. Normal people struggle with the intricacies of patent law, but can easily understand arguments of the form "X is (or isn't) a copy of Y".

So far so what, but then you find yourself a clever lawyer who can seed the idea in the jury's heads that:

IF X is (or isn't) a copy of Y THEN you must find that the patent has (or hasn't) been infringed.

You are then onto a winner. Conversely, if your lawyer has to rely on tedious and incomprehensible patent arguments, then the outcome is much less certain.

It's a kind of appeal to emotion combined with a variant of the Chewbacca Defence.

3
2

Re: What I don't get

This might not be about Samsung alone. This may also be about making others think twice about copying. Because if Apple is willing to go after a company that is one of their *suppliers*, ...

Just a thought that crossed my mind.

1
1

Re: What I don't get

At the moment Apple have the stand, so it is highly unlikely that they will argue for a patent's validity - they are taking it for granted. The issue of validity will most likely be raised by Samsung once they are up.

1
0
Stop

Confused about what they are buying.

I don't get this.

It's one thing to see a pile of items on a desk, reach for one, and pick up the 'wrong' thing because they look similar, but surely it's a whole different thing to suggest that people are walking into phone shops, wanting to buy an iphone and saying.

'Yeah, i want that phone, you know, the black one that's all screen, apart from the button at the bottom. yeah, the one with square-ish icons, and lots of rounded corners' .... and then being given the samsung, and not knowing the difference.

What i find to be much more likely is that someone (who falls in to the category of those who 'may be confused about what they are buying') walks into a phone shop, looking for an iphone, sees the iphone stand, and says 'i want one of those'.

If there were phone shops that had one section that was all just alternating samsung phones and iphones, then yes, people might buy the 'wrong' thing, but has anyone been in a phone shop recently? they are generally quite segregated, especially the iphones in their "hey, were too cool to mix with the other phones" sections.

I wish they would all just grow up. Yes, iOS is loosing ground to Android, but the iPhone is still outselling any individual Android phone, buy some distance (aren't they?) Can't apple just be happy with the fact that the have the best selling individual phone in the world right now? Apparently not.

27
2
Headmaster

Re: Confused about what they are buying.

Losing ground.

If anyone needs me I'll be in the angry dome...

6
1
g e
Silver badge

Re: Confused about what they are buying.

For $80k I'd pick up the wrong one first and then go 'Oh my they are SO similar!'

16
4
Silver badge
Stop

Unfortunately you don't have $80K of credibility

and expertise in icon and GUI design. Maybe 50 cents if they were feeling generous.

2
3
Law
Paris Hilton

Re: Unfortunately you don't have $80K of credibility

"Unfortunately you don't have $80K of credibility and expertise in icon and GUI design"

After revealing how blind or dumb the guy is I'm assuming any credibility and expertise this guy had won't be worth crap now.

12
2

This post has been deleted by its author

Re: Confused about what they are buying.

I believe I've seen reports of the Galaxy S3 outselling the iPhone, but other than that, spot on.

3
2

@ squizzar

Where's the Holly Harper icon when you need one?

0
1
Headmaster

Re: Confused about what they are buying.

I wish they would grow up and quit doing this too, but I understand why Apple is doing this. I don't know about GB patent law, but from what I understand of US law if the patent owner doesn't vigorously defend a patent and it becomes ubiquitous then they essentially give up the right to the patent. Same thing with trademarks, if they don't defend them from the beginning and later decide they must because it is actually costing them money then their opponent can demonstrate that they haven't been defending and win through that argument. An example would be Xerox, the original developer of the gui, can't sue any other companies for aspects of their gui that were patented because they haven't done so for an extended time. If someone has a better handle on this, feel free to correct me as I'm not an expert on this by any definition.

2
1
Silver badge

Re: Unfortunately you don't have $80K of credibility

Hey, you completely failed to notice that the "guy" is a she, what does that do for your credibility?

The mistake by Apples expert was mentioned as an anecdote allong side of an exhaustive comparison of the designs.

2
5
Thumb Up

Re: Confused about what they are buying.

There can't be any buyer confusion since, as Apple already admitted earlier in the trial, iPhones are always on a separate display from other phones at cell phone stores.

2
1
Silver badge

Re: Confused about what they are buying.

I don't buy this at all. Nobody buys a Samsung instead of an iPhone by accident!

Cars basically look the same, and I've never heard of anyone going out to buy a Ford and accidentally coming back with a Toyota!

10
2

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.