Jeez, Apple, this is starting to really look bad. Just a few days after it was revealed that Apple filed misleading evidence claiming that the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10,1 shared the iPad’s physical dimensions in a German court comes word that they’ve done it again in the Netherlands, this time with Samsung’s Galaxy S smartphone.
As part of their global intellectual property battle with Samsung in the mobile and tablet markets, Apple has filed another case against Samsung in the Netherlands, arguing that Samsung’s Galaxy S series of smartphones rip off the design of the iPhone 3G.
The move could see a complete ban on all Galaxy smartphones and tablets in the EU.
As part of Apple’s evidence, though, they have once again manipulated an image of a Samsung product to make it look identically shaped to the iPhone 3G.
In particular, they have adjusted an image of the Samsung Galaxy S to be identical in size to the iPhone 3G… despite the fact that it is actually a much longer phone than the iPhone.
Samsung’s lawyers are pissed, claiming that Apple has been “manipilating visual evidence, making Samsung’s devices appear more similar to Apple’s.”
“It surprises me that for the second time incorrect presentations of a Samsung product emerge in photographic evidence filed in litigation,” said Mark Krul, lawyer and IP law specialist at Dutch firm WiseMen. “This is not appropriate and undermines Apple’s credibility both inside and outside the court room.”
A lot of people, including us, said the first resizing was just a mistake, and maybe the second one is too, but it certainly doesn’t make Apple look any better in front of the courts.
What’s even weirder about this is that according to Apple’s own court filings, they admit that the Galaxy S has some “non-identical elements, such as the slightly larger dimensions.”
Come on. This is a serious case, worth hundreds of millions of dollars. If Apple’s intentions are honest, the least they could do is double check the image resizing work of their paralegals. I refuse to believe no one involved in this case on Apple’s size hasn’t actually held a Galaxy S smartphone in his or her hand: the difference in dimensions is obvious. Get your shit together, Apple.
[image via Webwereld.nl]
John Brownlee is a writer for Fast Company, and a contributing writer here at CoM. He has also written for Wired, Playboy, Boing Boing, Popular Mechanics, VentureBeat, and Gizmodo. He lives in Boston with his wife and two parakeets. You can follow him here on Twitter.
51 responses to “Apple Files Doctored Evidence Against Samsung Again, This Time About Galaxy S”
“As part of Apple’s evidence, though, they have once again manipulated an image of a Samsung product to make it look identically shaped to the iPhone 3G.”
All circles are identically shaped but they may be different because of dimensions and the same can be said of many things.
I think the point Apple is trying to make is that the design and aesthetics are so similar that they are a copy. In their defense just because something is bigger it does not make it different in any appreciable way. I would bo no less guilty of copying an iPhone or iPad just because I made mine a few millimeters larger.
In the text of the evidence Apple does talk about the differences in size so it isn’t as if they are choosing to alter all facts to suit the case but instead seem to be showing how amazingly similar the devices are from a design standpoint.
You guys have to be kidding with this crap. Yeah, the army of patent lawyers Apple has hired are intentionally misleading the courts with a doctored photograph. LOL As if the judges will sit there and go, yep, it looks like the iPhone, ban it! I am sure there are many technical drawings, as well as pictures, technical write-ups, and yes, actual devices being compared… I’m fairly sure they don’t pass judgement on potentially billion dollar patent violations by looking at a picture.
And by the way, how much does it cost to hire lawyers for this international patent battle? Are you thinking that Apple has decided they don’t have the patents so they are going to go to court, and spend all this money, with the strategic plan of photoshopping the competitors devices? Am I the only one that thinks this is utterly absurd?
When a judge throws this out of court because Apple is falsifying evidence, then you write this article.
Raise your hand if you don’t know anything about patent law… (I’m looking at you John Brownlee).
Even if true, it’s still irrelevant to the case. A copy of something that is 1/6 smaller in one dimension is still a copy. The idea that one could copy a product and then just change the aspect ratio to make it “not a copy” is flawed.
I don’t see the big deal. If someone made a 3 story copy of a Mickey Mouse doll it still would be infringing on the design, even if the original was 12 inches high. The point is ALL about the design and aesthetics.
And notice how this example picture uses a screen on the larger Samsung that doesn’t match the first two images. Again, scaling shouldn’t matter one bit when it comes to IP issues at stake. It’s not like Apple manipulated the actual Samsung content.
And who’s to say, maybe Apple’s lawyers wanted to show specifically then when the offending unit is scaled to match the iPhone – the look is nearly identical. I’d sooner believe that as a hypothesis instead of Apple’s lawyers being incompetant.
The issue Apple’s raising isn’t the dimensions of the Samsung product, but rather the trade dress copying in the UI. This really is a non-issue.
With design patents and trade dress, it is the ornamental aspects and look of the item as a whole that count, not the dimensions.
I think this is stupid. It might just be how it has been put on the image, not resized in a technicality. Come on! Apple isn’t stupid, they’d realise that people would notice if they did it on purpose. I don’t blame them suing, because most smartphone manufactures have even admitted that the iPhone is what started it all. All smartphones and tablets on the market today have things on or in them that where Apple’s ideas. Also, Apple is being tough, because they don’t want a repeat of the 80’s, where Apple went to ruin because of Microsoft in question stealing the “look and feel” of Mac OS from the 1984 Macintosh. They have become really successful from a lot of hard work and innovation and Apple and Steve Jobs does not want to be in a position as they where in 1997.
This is just going to give another reason for all the Android and Windows Phone loving people on Engadget to start hating on Apple.
My guess: slow news day.
I think Apple shouldn’t be filing any doctored photos. It makes the case (at least to me) sound like bullshit and/or Apple really doesn’t have a case. And yes, I do think Apple (or any other company) would manipulate photos if they thought the reward would be greater than the risk.
Given that we are not seeing the court documents but what someone is telling us is the real thing, my cynical side is wondering if both articles are BS.
Some site figures out they can get tons of hits and links with a good juicy antiApple story, so they post their claim. It goes so well they do again a few days later. Yeah someone might pull that stunt.
The same “mistake” twice? Come on! The hordes of Apple designers and graphic artists who are employed to make everything look perfect don’t make mistakes like this unless they are told to. Falsifying evidence just wrong, and a in its self crime in many parts of the world…
My guess: despite all the “Look at me! I’m an intellectual!” posturing in his bio, Brownlee lacks any sort of critical thinking skills.
what a BS… what kind of “news” is this? :D
After experiencing losses in the courtroom, Samsung had taken to defending itself from Apple’s multi-patent infringement suit to the media. This is nothing more than crisis PR. It’s the oldest trick in the book: discredit the evidence of your enemy. And Samsung, which had feigned surprise at Apple’s injunction move in Germany, has shown itself to be a master of this strategy – not that it always works. Truth will out eventually & an impartial judge will evaluate & make a ruling based on evidences presented in his courtroom & not on bogus ones being regurgitated in “news sites”. I expected more smart thinking from Cult of Mac. Just because it “was reported” somewhere doesn’t mean it’s factual and truthful.
+1,000,000
And that separates him from other Cult of Mac writers how?
tinyurl.com/2df4ccp
tinyurl.com/2a7usxg
tinyurl.com/2df4ccp
Intellectual posturing? WTF? where? and how is that better than randomly insulting strangers on the internet to make yourself look good?
size doesn’t matter.
Are you trying to say that if i build a life-sized phone that looks similar to the iPhone 3G then i’m not violating any copy right or patent law??
ofcourse if i try to mass market my giant size iPhone 3G-lookalike, i will get sued.
same goes for Samsung G S II
not to mention the user interface and interaction in Samsung G S II copied and violated many of Apple iPhone’s patent.
Desperate bid to win an overstretched case.
If they had any real evidence that anyone cares about they wouldn’t need to Photoshop evidence.
tinyurl.com/2df4ccp
6% (see http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/107… ) is 1/16th, not 1/6th …
Either way, they did doctor the pics. That brings their credibility into question. If I were the judge I would be insulted for them to think I was stupid. Why do that at all? Because they’re Apple and they can do anything they want.
http://bit.ly/dI3hcF
Apologies. My point is the same though. A copy that’s uniformly distorted in one dimension is still a copy.
tinyurl.com/2df4ccp