4 ms·

"the fact that Samsung tries to confuse the public that their product is pretty much an iPad/iPhone" I don't think that is a fact at all. Tricking people into

"the fact that Samsung tries to confuse the public that their product is pretty much an iPad/iPhone" I don't think that is a fact at all. Tricking people into buying your product isn't exactly a winning strategy. Most retailers who are selling these items have a no questions asked return policy. It wouldn't work. Besides, the box for the galaxy tab 10 has Google and Samsung clearly written on the front. Unless you somehow think that "Apple" is a code company name for "Samsung" ....well... I don't know...in that case you've fooled yourself. Also, they're not cloning anything. It's a completely separate operating system. And it's definitely not cheap.

Someone 15y ago
If you accept the idea that there may be people who see someone using an iPad without knowing it is an Apple product, that "Google" or "Samsung" logo does not say anything. I accept that idea because I know not everybody is as obsessed with technology as the average reader of HN. I also think that, by the time that customer sees the box, it likely is too late. Who is going to say "did I buy that?" at that moment (if they actually actively look at the box at all)? I do think there are some examples of blatant copying, but I also think the difference between blatant copying and the combination of inspiration and copying out of necessity because it is the only useful approach is subtle, very subtle in cases. It will be hard for judges to define where the border between the two lies.
- grannyg00se 15y ago
  "who see someone using an iPad without knowing it is an Apple product" But some non tech people who see someone using any tablet will think it's an iPad because Apple is the dominant player in the market. Other companies can't be held responsible for people's assumptions. Nor should they be forced to go out of their way to distinguish themselves from the dominant player for the sole purpose of reducing confusion. Or should they? I don't think so. I think there has to be some basic responsibility on the part of the consumer to at least look at the box.

Someone 15y ago

If you accept the idea that there may be people who see someone using an iPad without knowing it is an Apple product, that "Google" or "Samsung" logo does not say anything. I accept that idea because I know not everybody is as obsessed with technology as the average reader of HN. I also think that, by the time that customer sees the box, it likely is too late. Who is going to say "did I buy that?" at that moment (if they actually actively look at the box at all)? I do think there are some examples of blatant copying, but I also think the difference between blatant copying and the combination of inspiration and copying out of necessity because it is the only useful approach is subtle, very subtle in cases. It will be hard for judges to define where the border between the two lies.

grannyg00se 15y ago
"who see someone using an iPad without knowing it is an Apple product" But some non tech people who see someone using any tablet will think it's an iPad because Apple is the dominant player in the market. Other companies can't be held responsible for people's assumptions. Nor should they be forced to go out of their way to distinguish themselves from the dominant player for the sole purpose of reducing confusion. Or should they? I don't think so. I think there has to be some basic responsibility on the part of the consumer to at least look at the box.