Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
EU Iphone Patents The Courts Apple

More Photoshopped Evidence In Apple v. Samsung 345

Posted by timothy
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

More Photoshopped Evidence In Apple v. Samsung

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19, 2011 @10:05PM (#37150426)

    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.

  • by ArsonSmith (13997) on Friday August 19, 2011 @10:07PM (#37150434) Journal

    If you're claiming that two items are nearly identical and then to do so you show a picture of them the same size when they are significantly different sizes. then yes it is a problem.

  • by siddesu (698447) on Friday August 19, 2011 @10:21PM (#37150506)
    Confirmation bias [wikimedia.org].
  • by Derekloffin (741455) on Friday August 19, 2011 @10:51PM (#37150636)
    Being a judge doesn't magically make a person immune to subconscious bias.
  • by kurt555gs (309278) <kurt555gs@ovi.cSLACKWAREom minus distro> on Friday August 19, 2011 @11:14PM (#37150728) Homepage

    Is Apple becoming Microsoft?

  • by Dyinobal (1427207) on Friday August 19, 2011 @11:29PM (#37150794)
    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.
  • woo (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nomadic (141991) <nomadicworld@nOSpaM.gmail.com> on Friday August 19, 2011 @11:30PM (#37150798) Homepage
    Finally an objective test to see if you're an Apple fanboi. If you think there is nothing wrong with skewing the aspect ration in a court filing, you're a fanboi, period.
  • The Clear Reason (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Iconoclasism (1660709) on Saturday August 20, 2011 @12:47AM (#37151062)
    Apple just didn't feel that the evidence that it was submitting against Samsung was pretty enough; it really required photoshopping to be acceptable.
  • Re:Dear Apple (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sjames (1099) on Saturday August 20, 2011 @01:22AM (#37151126) Homepage

    The Samsung F700 was introduced so close to the same time as the iPhone that neither could actually be a copy, you just can't rush out a finished phone in a month, no matter how good you are.

    The simple fact is that everything is a derivative of what came before. Both companies were exposed to the same precursors, had the same goal and the same markets. They had the same components available for use in their product. They existed in the same societies with the same sense of aesthetics. It's hardly a surprise that they came up with very similar designs.

    The same argument applies to the pads. The pad design has been envisioned a bazillion times, including the thing that Captain Kirk would periodically sign on the bridge of the enterprise. We then saw an update to the vision on TNG (it was even called a PADD) The only thing preventing them was the basic technology behind them. We needed cheap enough and large enough touchscreens, powerful and thin batteries, and components that were efficient enough to allow decent battery life and not overheat in spite of having no room for airflow. It's no surprise that when those base elements became practical one by one, that the aesthetic of the time, the desires of the market, and the constraints of technology would come together to produce similar devices.

    Interestingly, if we are to believe ANY of Apple's marketing claims, we must conclude that the devices are worlds apart. Apple claims that their product is the one and only everywhere but in court where they claim that there is another product just like theirs.

  • Re:woo (Score:5, Insightful)

    by itsdapead (734413) on Saturday August 20, 2011 @04:13AM (#37151652)

    And anybody who thinks that the current spate of "black slab" touchscreen tablets and phones were original creations and not derivative in any way from the iPad/iPhone has a bigger reality distortion field than Steve Jobs. Whether it makes sense for the courts to try and draw the line here is another matter - there doesnt seem to be much evidence of people going out to buy an iPad and coming home with a Galaxy.

    Also, anybody who thinks that re-sizing two images out of dozens (when the sizes of the devices are given accurately elsewhere and the claims dont even hinge on size) - or showing a screen one click away from the homescreen - will get Apple's case thrown out should go and read Groklaw to see how much piss can be extracted from a court without repercussions.

    Finally (note to the editors) anybody who describes merely re-sizing an image as "Photoshopping" is in no position to lecture people about overstating their claim.

    NB: Lion Server is a joke, 100% mark up to get Lion on physical media is a ripoff, I'm not ready to give up my DVD drive just yet, and I'd like to be able to upgrade my own hard drive please. So don't call me a fanboi.

"It's ten o'clock... Do you know where your AI programs are?" -- Peter Oakley

Working...