3 ms·

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.