
Samsung might not have tried to copy the iPhone - mtgx
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57527568-71/so-it-looks-like-samsung-might-not-have-tried-to-copy-the-iphone/
======
wklauss
This is linkbaiting at its best.

Groklaw is arguing that he cannot find the actual phrase that the media used
over and over again in the documents but the jurors didn't decide on the case
over that phrase (I'm not getting into the actual verdict or my personal
opinion on it), nor they decided according to what the media said on those
days.

They did based on what Apple and Samsung attorneys argued on the trial, and
they both presented a lot of evidence to make their own case.

Whats more, even Groklaw admits "I didn't grab all the exhibits, simply
because it got incredibly expensive. But I have almost all of them, certainly
the ones that seemed most interesting".

Id admire that he is willing to sit through the paperwork but this is beyond
pointless. If something was said that was not on the evidence records and
somehow misrepresent the situation I'd assume that Samsung lawyers would jump
on it. Same for Apple.

If Groklaw is making the case that the media did a poor job and started using
and reusing a phrase that was not on the records, well, thats a problem for
the media but not, as CNET suggests, a problem with the veredict itself.

~~~
tatsuke95
> _"They did based on what Apple and Samsung attorneys argued on the trial,"_

Or did they based on what some over-bearing jury foreman argued, a man who
wanted to prove a point with patents, and has a reasonable bias against
Samsung? I think that's the point Groklaw are making. The more they dig in,
the more it looks like this guy has and continues to have an agenda.

That said, how did the Samsung attorneys not weed this guy out pre-trial? That
was a huge blunder.

~~~
thirdtruck
It looks like he failed to provide relevant information during jury
questioning.

That, and the lawyers from both sides have only limited time to investigate
_all_ of the candidates.

We can see clear bias now, after the fact. Samsung had to weed through a much
larger haystack that featured much more obvious bias that they _did_ catch.

------
wmeredith
I don't see how anyone can defend Samsung seriously. I'm sure there is
minutiae in the case that could be disputed. However, in the light of evidence
like the comparisons in this imgur album [<http://imgur.com/a/by8Xq>], saying
that Samsung didn't copy the iPhone as well as the rest of Apple's trade dress
seems silly.

~~~
viraptor
Considering the pictures start with 1) app icons 2) app menu which well...
just makes sense the way it's done - wall of icons design was around forever
(win ce phones at least) 3) comparing google maps to google maps - it's not a
great way to prove anything.

(the other pictures of external design are pretty similar though, no
disagreement there)

~~~
jakobe
There are many ways in which you can implement a grid of icons without exactly
copying Apple's style. So why are there exactly 4x4 icons you can move left
and right, above a bar with 4 fixed icons?

Same for Google Maps: why is the search field above the maps gray, rounded,
and has a light gray x inside a circle to clear? This is not an arbitrary
search field. This is not a typical "Google Maps" search field. There are
millions of different styles of search fields, why take exactly the same
search field as on the iPhone?

~~~
nollidge
> So why are there exactly 4x4 icons you can move left and right, above a bar
> with 4 fixed icons?

Because the screen is a certain size and icons need to be big enough and small
enough, up-down scrolling would be less ergonomic (longer swipes to switch
pages), and there are a few features you always want access to, respectively.

How else would you do it?

As for the maps picture, I have a feeling that's faked, or that it's Google's
mapping app, in which case consistent interface would be downright expected.

~~~
randomdata
From what I remember of that image, it was a Photoshop job where the exact
same screen was found in Apple's marketing materials, but it was posted on
Samsung's official website for the device for a period of time.

------
magoon
Also submitted to evidence was an internal Samsung document which reviews
Samsung's way vs Apple's way, and it made quite a compelling case that Samsung
put forth significant effort in copying Apple's form and function.

I'm sure much of the "evidence" can be debunked in such a way as this article
has, but taken as a whole I think Apple's case was convincing.

If you want to see other good examples of wholesale copying, go to a brick &
mortar computer store (such as the new Microsoft Store) and view how all of
the PC laptops have island key keyboards, aluminium or similar metal casings,
cameras on top, drop hinges, and massive button-less touchpads.

~~~
fieryscribe
Do you have a link to this internal document?

~~~
magoon
[http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/8/3227284/samsungs-
directions...](http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/8/3227284/samsungs-directions-
for-improvement#3639115)

Particularly interesting is the last slide, #126, which includes in its
Directions For Improvement "Remove a feeling that iPhone's menu icons are
copied by differentiating design"

~~~
fieryscribe
Proof of copying is an instruction to differentiate the design so it doesn't
seem like they're copying?

------
praptak
_"Groklaw suggests, rather shockingly, that Apple's lawyers might have been a
little selective in how they presented some of this evidence to the court, by
picking little parts of it that offered a different shade of nuance."_

Obviously it was their job to present the evidence in this way. Samsung's
lawyers should have countered that with the full picture.

~~~
demetris
I imagine the “rather shockingly” clause was a misplaced attempt at irony. I
cannot think of any other reason the author would put that there.

------
RexRollman
I have no doubt that Samsung copied Apple, I just disagree with how the
copying is being treated by the courts.

------
mratzloff
I don't see how intention matters in a patent dispute anyway.

------
37prime
CNET might not have tried hiring intelligent writers.

