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?
Thread beginning with comment 537940
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
jared_wilkes
Member since:
2011-04-25

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.

Reply Parent Score: 1

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

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

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?


And? It's you who is being silly. You have claimed that this document has been presented as proof of a copy order. This is quite specific and different from the purpose of the ENTIRE CASE. You've claimed there are specific comments by Apple lawyers suggesting that this document was presented as proof of a copy order. You didn't claim that Apple sued for copyright, patent, and trade dress infringement; you didn't claim that this was the reason for the trial on such charges. You claim Apple presented this document as proof of an order to copy the iPhone. You claim they made specific statements saying exactly that. You cannot provide any quotes of any such statements because they do not exist.

Reply Parent Score: 2