More Photoshopped Evidence In Apple v. Samsung 345
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."
Re:the two pictures were to show features, not siz (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.
Re:the two pictures were to show features, not siz (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:The judges get to see *actual* devices... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The judges get to see *actual* devices... (Score:5, Insightful)
What is the world coming to? (Score:2, Insightful)
Is Apple becoming Microsoft?
Re:What is the world coming to? (Score:5, Insightful)
woo (Score:5, Insightful)
The Clear Reason (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dear Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
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.