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 538006
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lazy lazy lazy
by TechGeek on Tue 9th Oct 2012 23:32 UTC
TechGeek
Member since:
2006-01-14

Apple did indeed claim that Samsung's own documents are proof of its intent to copy the design. Apple filing 1323 found here:

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/can...

Page 16, Line 20:

"Samsung’s documents show that Samsung developed an overall plan to copy Apple’s innovative designs and features so that it could compete with Apple. In September 2007, Samsung concluded that the iPhone’s “beautiful design” and “[e]asy and intuitive” user interface could make it as successful as the iPod, which captured 75% of the global MP player market in
just five years. (PX34 at 38.) Samsung concluded that it “will have to compete with the iPhone in whatever way,” and that the iPhone’s hardware is “easily copied, including its “Touch Screen UI.” (Id. at 37.)"

Reply Score: 6

RE: lazy lazy lazy
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 10th Oct 2012 06:01 in reply to "lazy lazy lazy"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Thanks for the individual filing, but of course this was the case.

Let's see if Jared apologises. I highly doubt so, but I've been wrong before.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: lazy lazy lazy
by jared_wilkes on Wed 10th Oct 2012 15:36 in reply to "lazy lazy lazy"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

This statement is more in accord with everything I said than what Thom has been saying.

It points to the entirety of the Samsung documents. It states that the docs outline an overall strategy. It never says proves. It quotes other docs besides the 2 cited by Thom and PJ (dating from 2007 rather than the 2010 meeting minutes documents).

Or are you suggesting that legal representation should be required to not have faith in their own arguments?

I see nothing hear claiming that the particular minutes from the design meeting are proof that Samsung issued a "copy the iPhone order."

But I do appreciate that you did the work, unlike Thom and PJ, who are being awfully and hypocritically selective about quoting in posts about selective quoting.

Edited 2012-10-10 15:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: lazy lazy lazy
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 10th Oct 2012 16:00 in reply to "RE: lazy lazy lazy"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

You sound like one of those people who keep asking for ever more missing links between ape and man. Each time a new link is found, you shift the goalposts and demand yet another link. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Fascinating.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: lazy lazy lazy
by Bennie on Wed 10th Oct 2012 16:55 in reply to "RE: lazy lazy lazy"
Bennie Member since:
2012-06-14

Semantics Jared. It indeed says "it shows" instead of "it proves". But it's just the same. And indeed maybe they (Apple) did not say something specific about the 2010 document, but more about all presented docs, but at least you could just agree with Thom that this 2010 document at least did not show/prove anything that Samsung was trying to copy the iPhone. What you're now doing is bashing the messenger. Quiet typical for internet jockeys on a damage control crusade.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: lazy lazy lazy
by TechGeek on Thu 11th Oct 2012 14:54 in reply to "RE: lazy lazy lazy"
TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

If you read all of the documents in the case, you will get a pretty decent picture of Samsung's actions. The CEO of Samsung specifically said they shouldn't be copying Apple, they should be looking beyond what Apple is doing now. Apple's lawyers used a lot of quotes out of context and half truths to tell their story. Samsung's lawyers did a bad job (at least IMHO) but that doesn't make what Apple said actually true.

Reply Parent Score: 3