5 ms·

"Was Samsung trying to get people to confuse its phones with iPhones and buy them by mistake?" Yes, that's what Apple are suggesting. FWIW I can offer you some

by sbuk 14y ago

"Was Samsung trying to get people to confuse its phones with iPhones and buy them by mistake?" Yes, that's what Apple are suggesting. FWIW I can offer you some anecdotal evidence. Shortly after the original Galaxy S (GT-I9000) was released, my partner (who was by then using Android) saw the advert for it and said "crikey, that's a bit close to the bone, isn't it?" refering to it's similarity to the iPhone. She said this before any of the brouha-ha had started. Again it's purely anecdotal so take it at face value.

Blara 14y ago
But she didn't say: "Look a new iPhone" so in other words she saw that it was in fact not an iPhone?
- sbuk 14y ago
  That's not the point. That people need to do a double take to realise the thing wasn't an iPhone is bad enough IMHO. Samsung look to have gone out of their way to actively make the Galaxy S look similar enough to the iPhone that there is confusion. I cannot accept that the near facsimile is through "inspiration" or is coincidental. This document, contrary to what other posters have said, does not resemble a market product analysis. It's an evaluation of what they think they can get away with copying. It's very definately a smoking gun.
  - vidarh 14y ago
    It is the point legally, though. Copying in itself is not illegal. It takes other elements, such as explicitly violating design patents or making a product that is similar enough to confuse consumers before it becomes illegal. And in this case I have a hard time seeing how phones that have "SAMSUNG" plastered all over the top would confuse consumers...
    - sbuk 14y ago
      "Copying in itself is not illegal" Yes, it is! That's what all those design patents, copyrights and registered trademarks are all about. It's morally abject too. As a designer, I see no issue with Samsung taking the iPhone, along with other phones, and examining it to see how they can do a better job. I see no issue with them being inspired by Apple. The plagiarism here is blatant though.

by sbuk 14y ago

Blara 14y ago

But she didn't say: "Look a new iPhone" so in other words she saw that it was in fact not an iPhone?

sbuk 14y ago
That's not the point. That people need to do a double take to realise the thing wasn't an iPhone is bad enough IMHO. Samsung look to have gone out of their way to actively make the Galaxy S look similar enough to the iPhone that there is confusion. I cannot accept that the near facsimile is through "inspiration" or is coincidental. This document, contrary to what other posters have said, does not resemble a market product analysis. It's an evaluation of what they think they can get away with copying. It's very definately a smoking gun.
- vidarh 14y ago
  It is the point legally, though. Copying in itself is not illegal. It takes other elements, such as explicitly violating design patents or making a product that is similar enough to confuse consumers before it becomes illegal. And in this case I have a hard time seeing how phones that have "SAMSUNG" plastered all over the top would confuse consumers...
  - sbuk 14y ago
    "Copying in itself is not illegal" Yes, it is! That's what all those design patents, copyrights and registered trademarks are all about. It's morally abject too. As a designer, I see no issue with Samsung taking the iPhone, along with other phones, and examining it to see how they can do a better job. I see no issue with them being inspired by Apple. The plagiarism here is blatant though.