Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 8th Oct 2012 22:11 UTC
Legal Previously redacted documents presented in the Apple-Samsung case do not support Apple's claims that Samsung issued a 'copy-the-iPhone'-order to its designers. It's pretty damning. Apple has very selectively and actively deleted sections of internal Samsung documents and talks to make it seem as if Samsung's designers were ordered to copy the iPhone. With the unredacted, full documents without Apple's deletions in hand, a completely different picture emerges: Samsung's designers are told to be as different and creative as possible. There's no 'copy the iPhone'-order anywhere, as Apple claimed. Instead, it says this: "designers rightly must make their own designs with conviction and confidence; do not strive to do designs to please me (the president); instead make designs with faces that are creative and diverse." I guess my initial scepticism about the documents was not uncalled for. What do you know - lawyers twist and turn the truth. Shocker, huh?
Permalink for comment 537942
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

"And this is just in documents - you should hear the Apple lawyers talk, where they further emphasised that Samsung specifically ordered its design team to copy the iPhone.


This is the fourth time you've said this, and this time you've clearly asserted there is a quote. Please provide this quote where Apple states there was an order to copy the iPhone and that this document is proof of it, please.
"

Are you intentionally being silly or are you really that ignorant?

Apple's ENTIRE CASE is built around this very premise. Apple argues that Samsung *wilfully* copied/infringed Apple's designs, trade dress, and software patents. That's Apple's CENTRAL reason to start this court case. Are you arguing this is untrue? Are you arguing that Apple started this case because of other reasons?

If so, I - and I imagine the rest of the world, including Apple itself - would love to know which reasons they are.

Reply Parent Score: 4