Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Lawyer Fails To Differentiate iPad and Galaxy Tab In Court
Several readers sent in a story that's sure to be embarrassing for Samsung. The company has been involved in a drawn-out patent dispute with Apple over similarities between the Galaxy Tab and the iPad. Today, during a court session, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh held up both objects and asked one of Samsung's attorneys whether she could identify which was which. The attorney replied, "Not at this distance, your honor." The distance was roughly 10 feet. The judge then quizzed the rest of Samsung's lawyers. After a brief hesitation, one of them was able to correctly identify the Galaxy Tab.
Two rectangular slabs are supposed to be perfectly distinguishable at 10 feet? Perhaps Apple wants Samsung to make round tablets. How bout trapezoidal? I'm sure that's not patented...
Black slate of plastic with rounded corneers, like every other tablet on the market. Its like trying to identify between name brand and generic cereal by looking at a bowlfull.
That way you have a 50% chance of not being embarrassed.
No matter how you feel about patents, Apple, or Samsung, this is funny.
Also lots of phones look similar, lots of cars look similar, lots of TVs look similar, lots of computers look similar, lots of monitors look similar...
Who cares?
I would have thought the lack of aluminum and the aspect ratio difference and the silver Samsung stamped on it would be indicators.
the lawyer needs to put some damn glasses on or something.
thats like confusing a ford fiesta and a toyota prius because they are both rounded teardrop hybrid cars.
How about turning them on? The one that works is a Samsung.
Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
I wonder if the results would have been any different had the Judge allowed the lawyers to see all 360 degrees of the device, and not just the front. Something tells me the SAMSUNG logo emblazoned on the device would assist in differentiating it from the iPad.
iPad 2 - http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_UTeQhQcvdNU/TPGrM-2_lVI/AAAAAAAAF20/U7xNqZ0as4s/s1600/things-about-apple-ipad-2.jpg
Galaxy Tab - http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_UTeQhQcvdNU/TProAcaIpnI/AAAAAAAAF5M/wtS26PrDbeU/s1600/Samsung-Galaxy-Tab-4.jpg
Can you tell the difference?
:(){
Actually, wouldn't this support Samsungs case? Both devices are apparently physically similar.
I can't tell the difference between a Honda and a Toyota 9 times out of 10, and I drive a Honda. If my GF didn't have a sun roof, and there was no hood ornament, I'd have absolutely no way of distinguishing her silver Corolla from the neighbors silver Civic. What exactly is this supposed to prove?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
...That's the real story here.
Hey, is that a Dell PC you have there? Oh wait, that's an HP. My bad, I was 10 feet away.
50,000 characters used to live here.
I can't tell apart my toaster from my neighbour's at any distance. I don't think the fact that Samsung blatantly copied the look of the iPad package is illegal. It speaks of a total lack of imagination and flattery but is it really illegal? A look isn't patentable, AFAIK. The Galaxy doesn't say "iPad" and "Designed by Apple in California" on the back. That would be a trademark violation.
Maybe if we have a lawyer or two here, they can chime in on this?
Myself, I can't tell the difference between an iPad and a windows 98 tablet computer at ten feet.
And at fifty feet, you could be holding an etch-a-sketch for all I know. I mean seriously, how much detail do you want me to discern from a nearly featureless slab of plastic?
This whole Apple V samsung debate really bothers me. Everyone here knows we need (proper) patent reform across the board. I hate trivial patents, patent trolling, and software patents....but there's just something about Apple being able to keep samsung from selling tablets because their tablet is, *gasp* a rectangular touch screen. Why aren't LCD monitor companies fighting each other in court? Many monitors look the same with trivial differences. All these tablets are are screens with a little computer on the back. I mean jesus christ, what a fucking waste of time and effort.
As others have pointed out, that's a terrible test. I can't tell apart a pair of toasters or TVs or refrigerators unless the brand logo is visible. That doesn't mean they're all infringing, it just means that form follows function. But this judge wanted a bad ass moment like what you'd see on Law and Order.
is now higher. Or not.
Video of some good progressive thrash music
So, this is about the rounded rectangle that Apple patented?
The lawyer should have challenged Judge Lucy Koh to use either of the tables from a distance of 10ft.
Because we all know the usual using distance for using these things is 10 feet.
Anyone who is using the device, planning on buying the device, or even examining the device (it doesn't even need to be on) can tell the difference.
If there are people dumb enough to fork out a few hundred euros/dollars to buy an item without looking at the stats, an image, the box, the brand or the company is a giant idiot. Which is why when buying these sorts of things the standard protocol is to stand less than 10 feet away.
Of course a bunch of idiot lawyers couldn't tell the difference but ask any technologically inclined person to tell the difference and they would easily do so. The most apparent thing is the single button on the front of the ipad and the four obviously android related buttons on the front of the gallaxy tab. Granted you wouldn't be able to see the android buttons at a distance unless it was on but the indentation of the ipad button should be visible no matter what. Geeze what dumbasses!
That said, too many companies are trying to copy the superficial look and feel of each other's hardware. Even though that has little to do with the underlying functionality, its asking to be sued.
Have gnu, will travel.
There's a word for this article and it isn't news and I, as a nerd, am not interested. The article and ensuing samsung vs ipad back and forth is debate for hillbillies; we've even got the chap from Missouri who couldn't spell moron taking part.
so a rectangular rounded corner shiny case has become something PATENTable ? PATENT ?!?! REALLY ?!?!
Read radical news here
How can a reasonable person expect someone who has never used a tablet before to determine which tablet is which? From 10 feet (with my terrible eyes) I can most certainly tell an iPad/iPad2 apart from a Samsung Galaxy Tablet 10.1. But then again, I've used both of them and know what they look like.
If you are going to copy someone's product, don't carbon copy every detail down to the accessories and even the box. Sheesh.
The question isn't which one is which. The question is, can you reliably tell them apart?
Can you always point to the bigger of the two? Good, you can tell them apart.
Which one is which brand is irrelevant, and I think less of the judge of not realizing this.
I'm sure that they are easily distinguishable from the back.
Also, they are distinguishable where they are sold: Apple Store or !Apple Store.
And no doubt distinguishable by price.
But most of all, they are distinguishable by the operating system they run. You either want to be in the Apple ecosystem (aka Walled Garden) or you don't. And you should be able to buy the tablet of your preference based on this fact. This whole lawsuit is as anti-consumer as it gets because Samsung isn't producing iPads. While they may still be producing the CPU of the iPad, the Samsung product is not an iPad and can't replace an iPad because it doesn't run Apple iPad software. So Apple is trying to kill a product that doesn't directly compete with the iPad because if you want an iPad than no substitute will do.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
then, the judge help up to 21" monitors, and asked the lawyers to identify them
and then, 2 washing machines
and then, 2 cars
and then, 2 keyboards
and then, 2 cameras
and then, 2 non-smart phones
and then....
Somewhere in the process, a point has been proven. Not the intended one, though ?
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Oh, snap!
Apple spokeswoman Kristen Huguet said, "It's no coincidence that Samsung's latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad ... This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple's intellectual property when companies steal our ideas."
Um Idea's cant be protected and How did apple gets its start again? xerox? what was the macs first parts made of?...atari? hmmm....
Of course a bunch of idiot lawyers couldn't tell the difference but ask any technologically inclined person to tell the difference and they would easily do so.
The judge asks for a layman's opinion because the layman is the market.
This kind of demonstration is the bread and butter of trial work. You need be prepared for it because it is going to happen.
Neither product is designed to be used from 10 feet away. The test should be how similar they appear at the actual distance they are used, i.e. arm's length.
for the lawyer to ask if the court would permit viewing the 2 devices from a distance in which a customer or shopper might view them.
If Samsung's lawyers were clearly too stupid request this, then they should be fired.
The only thing I came away with from this is that I better get a Samsung tablet (or anything remotely shaped like an ipad) before Apple forces them off the shelf in my country.
For something to be funny, it has to be based in truth... an Android tablet having run out of power rings far more true than the iPad having failed for some reason.
But part of the point of the lawsuits is that even on, most would be hard pressed to tell them apart...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It's amazing to me to what extremes people can go to justify their tribes. Here we have college educated people who's job it is to show the differences in the products not being able to recognize their own product. If these people can't tell the difference from a reasonable distance then the general public 10' away in Starbucks sure the hell isn't going to.
It's patently obvious (har har) that Samsung set out to clone iPad, the packaging, the icons, the charger, the IO port, etc. They're going to lose these cloning suits and for good reason.
It's sad that Microsoft is now one of the more morally upstanding corporations (by comparison only) in the industry. At least they create things and with Zune, WP7, etc they do it their own unique way instead of just blindly copying like Google (copying the OS) and Samsung (copying the product).
> The distance was roughly 10 feet.
If 10 feet are 100m that would be quite understandable.
OTOH, if 10 feet are 1m then it would be a serious hindrance to Samsung's defense.
PS: I could do the conversion but I'm old -- and I'm talking on behalf of young Americans, since the USA already adopted the SI. They could have a hard time in understanding obscure units, unless of course they were exposed to braindamaged articles with said idiotic units.
http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/custom/Apple-vs-Samsung-1-Hardware-Design.html
http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/custom/Apple-vs-Samsung-2-Interface-Icons.html
http://peanutbuttereggdirt.com/e/custom/Apple-vs-Samsung-3-Package-Design.html
Apple's "design patent" is not about any single property (like the famous "rounded rectangle") but about the combination of all of these.
I know it's been said, but the different pickups are easy to tell apart. If you were a lawyer working on a case involving the look of these trucks, there's practically no way you would get it wrong if a judge asked you.
The iPad 2 copied features from the Samsung Galaxy Tab, like the front-facing camera and the rear facing camera. If Apple can keep Samsung from selling rectangular tablets, then Samsung should be able to keep Apple from selling tablets with front and rear cameras.
Isn't that pretty much the difference? And, I hate to break it to the Apple fanboys out there, but just because you can make both look the same doesn't mean that they are the same... Sometimes differences under the surface are more important.
A few people, all of them lawyers is not a way to decide whether two objects look the same. You would need hundreds of people with different backgrounds for a representative study. But even if the two devices looked exactly the same, it's still just a fucking rectangle.
It's quite embarrassing that the lawyers can't tell them apart. Working for a company that routinely develops on both iPad and the Galaxy Tab, there are a few clear distinctions that are obvious to anyone who has used both products:
- The iPad has one physical button on the front, the Galaxy Tab has no physical buttons on the front
- The iPad has a smooth metal back, the Galaxy Tab has a brushed metal back
- The iPad charges from the short-edge, the Galaxy Tab charges on the long edge (alright, no so obvious)
Although these may be minor differences, they should be obvious to anyone who's reasonably familiar with both products, especially if they're fighting a patent suit. Have the lawyers even done the most basic research?
Samsung Galaxy: http://bub.blicio.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Samsung-Galaxy-Tab.jpg
Apple iPad: http://areacellphone.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/best_ipad_texting_app.jpg
(1) The two have different width to height ratios.
(2) The Apple iPad has a single concave button in the middle of one of its bezel sides.
(3) The UI is noticeably different
(4) The Samsung Galaxy looks to have a user-facing camera.
Maybe they should have asked a prospective buyer. You know? The people the matter...
It's not surprising that 95% of the posts here boil down to iFans arguing with Android zealots - but I think they're missing the key point.
You'd think a Samsung lawyer would be well-versed enough in the fundamental differences between the two products (such as the aspect ratio) so as not to get tripped up by this question. People here made fun of an earlier Photoshop job, apparently put forth by an European Apple lawyer, where they'd changed the ratio on an image of the Galaxy Tab so it matched that of the iPad. Since it's come up before - why couldn't the lawyer tell the difference between the two when they were side by side?
#DeleteChrome
...by its cover, no?
I would have replied back, From where I'm standing Judge, how many "People off the Street" can tell the difference between brands of Plasma Televisions. They all look the same, and I don't see Sony and LG trying to gouge each others' eyes out over it.
Stupid B****.
Just wait until one explodes or catches on fire.
That's the Samsung.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
> The distance was roughly 10 feet.
If 10 feet are 100m that would be quite understandable.
OTOH, if 10 feet are 1m then it would be a serious hindrance to Samsung's defense.
PS: I could do the conversion but I'm old -- and I'm talking on behalf of young Americans, since the USA already adopted the SI. They could have a hard time in understanding obscure units, unless of course they were exposed to braindamaged articles with said idiotic units.
10 feet is approx 3.3 meters.
Except in Bahrain and Lapland.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
and I did lots of machine-level coding. :-(
Made a few weeks ago: http://www.bonkersworld.net/obvious-similarities/
Everyone is going to the kneejerk, you can't (or shouldn't) patent the basic shape of a tablet.
That isn't what is going on.
Samsung clearly set out to completely clone Apples products, HW, Interface and even the packaging.
In this case, I do agree that Samsung crossed a line.
I'm quite surprised that a team of lawyers cannot distinguish between the device they are being paid lots of money to defend and the iPad. No matter how small the differences they should know the aspect ratios are different and pick up the different shape of the button. Or maybe they all have bad eyesight, it was dark, or the judge was dancing whilst holding them up.
http://osxdaily.com/2011/08/18/tablet-design-before-after-the-ipad/
In this case it appears that form followed Apple...
On Monday, Samsung will put an Apple lawyer on the stand and ask them to identify the Samsung or Vizio HDTV from 50 feet away.
Then they will turn both TVs on and ask which is which.
Samsung will then ask if Sony should sue Vizio.
Repeat with Samsung and Kenmore front-loading washer/dryer.
Repeat with Samsung and Kenmore refrigerator.
Repeat with Dell and HP laptops.
Repeat with cordless phones, ipod speakers, harddrives, etc. at appropriate distances.
Then they will place the iPad and the GTab three feet away and turn them both on and ask the Apple lawyer which is which.
This will demonstrate that there is more difference between the tablets than there is between just about any two HDTVs on the market today from any brand.
It will also make the point that form follows function. And it will demonstrate that if the only thing that differentiates your product is its appearance, you don't deserve protection.
How can Samsung be so ill equipped at defending themselves, One quick google search and I can find prior art made by Samsung that looks exactly like the ipad yet was released by samsung 4 years prior to the ipad 1 http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/samsung-digital-picture-frame-stores-pics-movies-music/ Front on display (like the court case) this looks exactly like an ipad, dimension wise it could be rather different, but apple isn't complaining about the size are they? Its the look and feel they 'claim' to have developed.
Well, that's just great. Hundreds of years of wasting money on lawyers for adversarial cases, and it turns out that you can just get the judge to fight your case for you, if she's a fatherfucking Apple fangrrl. Excelsior!
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Riiiight.... I'm not gonna argue os here, just hardware.
So, let's back up a bit here. What did 'smartphones' look like before the iPhone? Various screen sizes, clunky thinkness/form factor and a alpha numeric keyboard of some sort. We all know history, iPhone comes along, all touch based and it sets the precedent for things to come. Apple invented that. No one else did, especially not Samsung.
Then the iPod Touch follows about 8 months after. Note around this time, if you search everywhere on the web, for Samsung's tablets or anyone else's (like Archos, etc) all look like something between a Sony PSP and a Nokia 770. Yes, all rectangle, but just not the Apple glass touchscreen with a black bezel and metal band around the edge.
Now, few years later, Apple extrapolates out the form of *their* invention for a natural progression, the iPad. Somewhere in between all this, patents are filed for how the device looks and functions. Note: form + function == *design*! Apple purposefully designed their device. Their physical thing. They didn't copy a HP TabletPC or Sony Ericsson or Nokia. They made their own design and they popularized it and people loved it. Go back to 2010 and look at the Samsung Vibrant. Glass front, no keyboard, black bezel, chrome border. Hmm, I've seen that before somewhere in 2007.. Galaxy Tab, same thing.
Now, let's look at the packaging of a Galaxy Tab. White box, picture of device on it. Gee, where have I seen that? Open it up, same unpacking experience as the iPad/iPhone - device up front, other stuff underneath. Btw, Apple patented their packaging - all the way back in 2007! And speaking of packaging, even Samsung's USB charger adapters look like Apple's, except, get ready for it - they're black and not white. Looking at the USB cable, same. Black not white, but same connectors on both ends.
If you want more evidence of rip off, search around the web a few weeks ago for the picture of the Samsung store. Look hard - pictures of Apple's app store and Safari icons on the wall. That's pretty blatant - even Microsoft doesn't do that (altho they did have a lot of pc ads with Mac laptops, but anyway). After all this, in my mind, it's pretty clear that Samsung would rather copy, on multiple levels, one of the most successful brands out there instead of paving their own way. Plain and simple. They're also damaging the Android ecosphere with all this crap. Android needs to have devices for it that push the envelope, not copy designs years old.
This whole Samsung copying thing goes way deeper than just the 'rectangular touch screen'. It crosses multiple products and up to physical storefront. It is undeniable that it's rip off. Plain and simple. Patents do need to be reformed, but this is not an example of it in my mind as it has nothing to do with software, where the real ridiculous shit is goin on.
id say "Your honor this is not a trademark or copyright lawsuit its a patent lawsuit. Apple is attempting to reargue Apple vs Microsoft trying to shoehorn under patent law what it was unable to do under copyright law. Its trying to reargue "look and feel" . How many ways can you express a black rectangular touchscreen computer? So You cant tell them apart at 10 feet...so what? Most tablet users do not use a 10 inch screen 10 feet away. "
They even copied "You've holding it wrong" response!
"Apple's senior barrister Stephen Burley asked Justice Annabelle Bennett to prevent Samsung from selling any "tablet device" during the injunction period."
Taken from:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-14/samsung-free-to-launch-another-tablet/3572318
To sum up the Judge told them to piss off and be happy with the injunction as it is until the real case comes up.
The law is not there to merely be a business tool to stifle competition. There was a tablet market before Apple even if it was a small one, and keeping others out unconditionally is unfair.
It's a pity Australia can't reverse the incredibly fucking stupid US patent laws we adopted as part of the "free trade" agreement - that one where for instance the USA can export beef or products containing beef to Australia but it's forbidden the other way (same with sugar, steel, wheat and a few other protected industries).
I'd like permission to treat my counsel as a hostile witness...
Yeah, they copy everything - technology companies having their products ripped off down to the component level have many times tried to sue the likes of Samsung and DaeWoo only to be thrown out in the self-serving Korean court system. Looks like Samsung is finally having to eat it with the Galaxy tablet... but the thing is for the first time I don't think they should have to. Surely the design is an obvious copy, but the design isn't "functional" so why should it be a patent issue to begin with? If the design is purely decorative then why should the patent system even be concerned with it? I mean come on, this is up there with software and fonts in the "why the hell is this patentable?" category.
what it looks like close up, because they can't get one due to the injunction.
I think the lawyers should hold up a white iPad and a 10-inch Samsung LCD and see if the judge can tell which is which.
that's equally nonsensical, is it equally funny?
there are laws against copying look & feel for products in general, with explicit exclusions only for some markets. Computing devices isn't one of the exclusions.
B: It's lame. Have some frickin self-respect, Samsung.
I bet samsung really regrets hiring that Murdoch guy now.
> 10 feet is approx 3.3 meters. Except in Bahrain and Lapland.
Thanks for making the involved quantities more clear.
Since I started this on a sarcastic tone, please allow me to offer a glimpse of real data, too: 10 feet is about 3.3m only in a handful of countries throughout the world. For the others, the vast majority, 10 feet is what you get with 5 humans, or chicken or two dogs and the beautiful girl that owns them.
Using feet suck. It always sucked but seemingly you can force everyone to talk BS if you're a king.
No not my left your left.
Simples.
Having just finished a project where I was deploying to Galaxy and iPad devices, if they're turned off they do look almost identical; same form factor, about the same thickness and they're both black glossy screens. The only clear difference, and it might not stand out at 10', is the iPad home button at the bottom. At 10', and especially if that was covered up, it would be very hard to differentiate.
image in the article: http://www.reuters.com/resources/r/?m=02&d=20111014&t=2&i=515466282&w=460&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=BTRE79C1QZ900
erm...where's the home button on the iPad? It's not visible in that image.
Are they all idiots? I thought the Galaxy was 16:10, and the iPad 4:3. You should be able to see the difference from a mile away.
That being said, the style is pretty much identical, and I guess that is the complaint. Every other company has some distinguishing feature (except maybe HP, but they don't count), whereas Samsung broadly follow the iPad design. It was a stupid thing to do, and now they have to pay for it. Mind you, it is not the only stupid thing they have done...
The reason they can't be distinguished is because tablets are completely generic and shouldn't be patentable anyway.
Asking someone to differentiate between two tabs is like asking to differentiate between two different sheets of toilet paper. They all look the same, because they are generic.
The whole point of the comparison is to prove a trend. Samsung's trend of copying Apple.
With the trend proven, it lends subjective credibility to the claimed patent infringements: if Samsung is copying design, they probably copy all the rest too.
It's a psychological ploy to make a jury favor one side or the other. This is why jury trials are useless in these kind of legal matters: it really doesn't matter if Samsung copied Apple's design or not, the patents in question, I don't remember which exactly, but if I recall correctly referred to input methods and fabrication processes on the tablet's touch screen.
It makes no sense comparing style in order to prove those patents were infringed, but a jury can easily be fooled, because it's composed of mostly nontechnical people, either in technology or laws.
Luckily, there's a judge that can rule on the legal merits of the accusation.
Lets wait and see.
If they make round tablets then they could get a killer product placement in the sequel to Tron Legacy.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Does that really matter, at all, in this context?
Though of course it's completely legal for companies to pursue injunctive measures against their competition, I am ambivalent; is it ethical for corporations to use patent infringement merely as an anti-competitive tactic, or should these disputes be settled in the marketplace, where they belong?