To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Hmm... Are Samsung's lawyers so incompetent
Read FULL text. CARRIERS TOLD SAMSUNG THAT THEY LIKE IPHONE.
In other words, boss stated that iOS/iPhone is DE FACTO standard in UX, by witch Samsung UX will be judged.
But if you compare lines that cover "creativity" and those that compare to "iOS/iPhone" you get clear picture.
We are here (UX that do not sell). We ARE judged against iPhone. Give me something good, easy to use, and creative.
(It's like a mob leader asking for a hit: "I'd hate to see anything happen to him. If he would just go away, that would solve our problem. But I wouldn't want him dead. Now, how are you going to solve our problem?" --Objection, that can't be submitted as evidence of ordering a murder! To the contrary, it's evidence that he wanted him alive!)
That wouldn't be grounds for not admitting the evidence, but it would be the defences argument about how to interpret the evidence. Legal trials do not reach the same level of proof as mathematics.
I am confused. Are you saying something about some documents or are you saying something about what Samsung actually did?
If the latter are you saying that Samsung did not try to make their products look and work like Apple's down to and including the packaging, peripherals and retails stores? Perhaps you think that so many Samsung's designs, products, packaging, peripherals and retails stores all look uncannily like Apple's because of an accident or because of coincidence. Is it really too hard for you believe that a company as ruthlessly focussed (and I mean that in a good sense) as Samsung decided that it had to stick with Apple as closely as possible in a market that seemed to be reeling from one massive change to another so quickly and in which only Apple seemed to have the key to making big profits?
Personally I think it made a lot of sense for Samsung to do what it did when the iPhone disruption hit the smart phone market , i.e. copy Apple's products and playbook as closely as possible. It worked. As a result Samsung carved out a large and profitable market for itself and established itself as the main player in the Android phone market. The other Android OEMs floundered, and continue to largely flounder, in Samsung's wake. Samsung played the let's 'copy Apple card' and as a result have established themselves as the high profile Android OEM big hitter, they have got a legal slap on the wrist as result (is anyone really surprised?) but it was worth it from their point of view. Now they can try to differentiate their products from Apple's and we will see how good their designs are. There are rumours that they are working with Google on new tablet to go after the iPad.
I find the outrage and indignation about all this hard to fathom. Apple came up with a game changer with the original iPhone. It left the phone OEMs reeling as they had been churning out at best mediocre design for years and now suddenly they have to embrace a new design paradigm, a new OS in Android and try to catch Apple in terms of brand awareness and design quality. The most ruthless about responding to the iPhone was Samsung, they did the only thing that was open to them in the short term in order to avoid being left permanently behind which was too mimic Apple as closely as possible. They pushed that strategy hard as far as they could go until they got busted. Is any of this surprising or news to anyone? Does anybody think Samsung or Apple would have been better served by doing anything different.
So now post trial the Android OEMs like Samsung have to avoid making their stuff too blatantly like Apple's - so what?




Member since:
2005-06-29
Right, because dry legal documents are clearly just as powerful as a lawyer's arguments.
It's clear from these unsealed documents that the story Apple's lawyers told the judge, jury, and media - namely, that Samsung issued a 'copy-the-iPhone'-order - was bullshit. Made up. A fairy tale.
That's scummy. Of course, it's just regular lawyer stuff - but we still have a right to the truth - and it's clearly not on Apple's side.