Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

More Photoshopped Evidence In Apple v. Samsung

Posted by timothy on from the artist's-conception dept.

jfruhlinger writes "It seems that Apple can't stop Photoshopping evidence in its EU lawsuit against Samsung. We already saw that the company used trickery in its side-by-side comparison of the iPad and Galaxy Tab; now it appears that it's fudging the comparison between the iPhone and Galaxy S as well."

11 of 345 comments (clear)

  1. Dear Apple by Kagetsuki · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is a flat screen with icons. No, you didn't think it up first. Now sit back down.

    1. Re:Dear Apple by Riceballsan · · Score: 5, Funny

      No RMS didn't patent smell different, he licensed it under GPL so that all hard core OS enthusiasts can use it.

    2. Re:Dear Apple by mysidia · · Score: 5, Funny

      For some reason... I think it would be more funny if Apple tried to photoshop evidence in a suit against Adobe.

      You know what i'm saying? Using their own product against them <EG>

    3. Re:Dear Apple by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Funny

      It just goes to show something that we've known for a long time, but people on Slashdot like to deny. Apple users really are creative professionals...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  2. That's also not the default home screen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    They also rearranged the Galaxy S's home screen so that it'd look more like the iPhone. Apple, I mean, not Samsung.

    Go ahead, take a look at the real thing. That looks nothing like an iPhone.

    For one thing, it supports widgets, which the iPhone doesn't. (Apparently the idea that people might want to get weather information on their phone still evades Apple.)

    Another good hint is the home button on the screen Apple's using, which probably doesn't appear on the home screen.

    1. Re:That's also not the default home screen by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 5, Informative

      I did the lighting for a number of the TV commercials for the Galaxy S. The apple screen shots are pretty close to the 'official' home screen layout approved by T-Mobile and Samsung.

      e.g. http://galaxy-s.t-mobile.com/

      I think the lawsuit is stupid but Apple didn't really game the homescreen in any way. That's an approved Samsung screenshot.

  3. Re:the two pictures were to show features, not siz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But you're not trying to prove that the sequoia copied the fiat. This is the equivalent of fiat making their small, cheap car look as spacious as the largest toyota in an add. Except, there it'd be false advertising, here, its falsifying evidence.

  4. Re:the two pictures were to show features, not siz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    +4 Misinformative?

    From TFA for those that can't be bothered to read:

    But the picture of purported Galaxy S has been resized about 6%, making the Galaxy S appear smaller and more similar to Apple's phone. The height of the purported Galaxy S that Apple displays matches the iPhone exactly. The aspect ratio has not been measurably altered.

  5. Re:What is the world coming to? by Dyinobal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No apple is just terrified of the same thing happening to them in their new markets as what happened with PCs vs Macs. I'd be afraid of superior cheaper products as well if I was them. Rather than innovate and try to stay ahead of the competition they'd rather throw lawyers at the problem.

  6. Re:the two pictures were to show features, not siz by tibman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That picture is selective. Not all tablets looked like that pre-ipad. For example, take a look at my old visionplate: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y104/tibman/VisionPlate/DSCN0921.jpg

    Looks almost exactly like an Ipad.. except it predates the ipad by many years.

    --
    http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
  7. Re:if the Fiat were a smaller dupe of the Sequoia by mysidia · · Score: 5, Informative

    Then yes, Toyota would have a case. The relative size doesn't matter really. If it's similar, it's similar.

    When we are talking about design patents, yes, Scale does matter.

    In addition, if it can be shown that the design has certain utility, the patent of the design is invalid. Design patents can be invalidated if the design has practical utility (e.g. the shape of a gear).