Samsung shamelessly steals Apple's iPhone 3G design – again

[*LTD*]

Everything from trade dress to connectors, commercials to store displays.

Remember this?

Here's the latest.

http://www.macgasm.net/2012/01/03/samsung-shameless-steals-iphone-3g-design/

http://www.bgr.in/manufacturers/sam...e-samsung-galaxy-ace-plus-vs-apple-iphone-3g/

Slavish copier Samsung shamelessly steals Apple's iPhone 3G design – again

Today Samsung has announced the iPhone 3G Galaxy Ace Plus. The phone looks exactly like the iPhone 3G, and clearly illustrates Samsung’s game plan moving forward. Samsung’s product plan for 2012? Become an official Apple counterfeiter, and care not one iota about doing it.

It’s official, Samsung is a honey-badger and couldn’t care less what the courts say, what international law says, or even what Apple claims. Samsung is completely content with stealing designs, commercials, and other creative from its competitors. Sadly, I say this while I sit here looking at my Samsung television, wondering exactly who they ripped off for that design. I guess my next TV will come from LG or Sony, or any other company not named Samsung.

Having taken Samsung four years to pull off an iPhone 3G, one would think that they wouldn’t have bastardized the original design so much. I guess that’s giving Samsung too much credit, considering they copy to begin with.

--------------------------------------------------------

What's interesting to note is that while the industry at large follows Apple in a lot of ways - right down to attempting to ape (poorly) their vertical integration strategy (Hi, HP!) - for some reason it's always Samsung that we see time and time again crossing the line. Not Motorola, not HTC, not LG. It's always Samsung we're hearing about. So when Joshua Schnell says: "Samsung’s product plan for 2012? Become an official Apple counterfeiter, and care not one iota about doing it", there's more than a little bit of truth to it.

Why is it always Samsung? And do note that for the most part it isn't Apple that notices it and brings it to everyone's attention via legal filings made public, but the industry at large (including the admin staff right here at MR.) The connectors, the commercials, the fully-endorsed and "certified" Smart Cover ripoff, etc. All of this is far too conspicuous to miss, no matter what your level of experience with tech.

Admittedly, it's flattering for Apple, and perhaps someone at Samsung really believes that is a justification for what they're doing. After all, Apple's designs are so effective that they stand the test of time. the iPhone 4S still looks the most elegant among all smartphones. The 3GS' design, brought over from its predecessor, outsold most newer Android models.

All very impressive, and Samsung seems to be making a smart choice (perhaps one of the reasons they've risen to become the premiere purveyor of Android devices?) But this is getting a little ridiculous. Why not copy Motorola? Call it the LAZR or PHAZR something . . . then again, Moto has all the cachet of a tractor.

 

[rdowns]

Samsung is a honey-badger

They are so NOT bad-ass.

 

[*LTD*]

They are so NOT bad-ass.


YouTube: video

I really don't think a "honey"-anything is bad-ass.

 

[roadbloc]

I didn't realise Apple had a patent on a curved rectangle black design.

 

[NT1440]

I didn't realise Apple had a patent on a curved rectangle black design.

No patent is that ludicrously simple, I suggest heading over to patentlyapple.com and find out exactly what patents (especially multi-touch ones) are being infringed.

Its amazing to me that people don't want to look into any of these cases, its very clear that apple has patented the hell out of their implementations. That doesn't make things like design or multi-touch closed off, it just means that other companies have to actually work from the ground up rather than steal now and hope for a small settlement later.

I'm amazed at how detailed Apple's patents are, unfortunately people think its as simple as "well, we own the idea of two or more inputs on a touch panel".

Read up friends, its really fascinating stuff.

 

[smoledman]

No patent is that ludicrously simple, I suggest heading over to patentlyapple.com and find out exactly what patents (especially multi-touch ones) are being infringed.

Its amazing to me that people don't want to look into any of these cases, its very clear that apple has patented the hell out of their implementations. That doesn't make things like design or multi-touch closed off, it just means that other companies have to actually work from the ground up rather than steal now and hope for a small settlement later.

I'm amazed at how detailed Apple's patents are, unfortunately people think its as simple as "well, we own the idea of two or more inputs on a touch panel".

Read up friends, its really fascinating stuff.

Actually Apple's multitouch patents are so broad that Android & WP should be shut down due to blatant infringement.

 

[BreakGuy]

What's wrong with a bit of competition in the market? Only inspires Apple to outdo Samsung in future, right?

 

[kdarling]

Today Samsung has announced the iPhone 3G Galaxy Ace Plus. The phone looks exactly like the iPhone 3G ...

I don't think "exactly" means what you think it means. Those shapes are very different, especially the back side contour:



Of course, it helps to not try to hide the differences by flipping them around like BGR did. Wouldn't be as click-worthy.

No patent is that ludicrously simple, I suggest heading over to patentlyapple.com and find out exactly what patents (especially multi-touch ones) are being infringed.

We constantly review Apple's patents here. They rarely cover what people think they cover, which is again because most tech sites live off clickable headlines, not facts.

Got one you're interested in? Ask away!

 

[smoledman]

What's wrong with a bit of competition in the market? Only inspires Apple to outdo Samsung in future, right?

It's not competition, it's outright IP grand theft. How can you be so brazen?

 

[BreakGuy]

It's not competition, it's outright IP grand theft. How can you be so brazen?

Listen, if Samsung have stolen intellectual property from Apple, I'm sure Apple would have no issue in filing a lawsuit against them... has this been done? No, so clearly no infringement has occurred. Get over yourself.

 

[smoledman]

Listen, if Samsung have stolen intellectual property from Apple, I'm sure Apple would have no issue in filing a lawsuit against them... has this been done? No, so clearly no infringement has occurred. Get over yourself.

Apple sues Samsung again for copying iPhone design

 

[BreakGuy]

Apple sues Samsung again for copying iPhone design

That's for the Galaxy S... irrelevant to this particular issue. And I'm sure Samsung would have done some research into Apple's patents to avoid future lawsuits.

 

[0000757]

It kind of looks like an iPhone 3G...kind of.

Then again, a lot of things look like other things. If anything, apple copied the Roku box for it's Apple TV Take 2 design. I think we should all look at that!

Roku HD

Apple TV

I know what you're thinking. They sorta look the same but it doesn't look like Apple "copied" Netgear.

What about TVs?

A Sharp Aquos

An LG LD350

They kinda look the same, but it doesn't look like it was copied.

Well that exactly applies to comparing the Ace Plus to the 3G. They sorta look the same, but it doesn't look copied. Besides didn't Apple admit Samsung is a bigger threat than they are?

 

[kdarling]

Re: Samsung Tab:



As for tablets and prior art, I think that Samsung's defense lawyers could simply Google for the dozens of fan-drawn tablet concepts that predate the iPad back to the beginning of the century, many of which had surprisingly similar design cues:



Looking at those, Apple can hardly claim that their design is unique or unobvious, when every teenage boy in town drew something like it.

 

[juliusaugustus]

It is a low end phone so I don't think a lot of work would go into the design.

 

[vitzr]

Every aspect of the Samsung is copied from Apple's design and list of components.

Can you believe that Samsung was so bold, it blatantly features this partial list of components?

1) battery
2) keyboard
3) display
4) circuit board
5) phone module
6) ringer
7) battery charger
8) USB cable
9) CPU
10) Operating System

Oh, those voracious thieves...

Apple needs to destroy them if for no other reason than to complete the job Steve started.

Nothing is quite as thrilling for Apple than to wipe out any potential competitor, by any means possible.

 

[juliusaugustus]

Every aspect of the Samsung is copied from Apple's design and list of components.

Can you believe that Samsung was so bold, it blatantly features this partial list of components?

1) battery
2) keyboard
3) display
4) circuit board
5) phone module
6) ringer
7) battery charger
8) USB cable
9) CPU
10) Operating System

Oh, those voracious thieves...

Apple needs to destroy them if for no other reason than to complete the job Steve started.

Nothing is quite as thrilling for Apple than to wipe out any potential competitor, by any means possible.

Samsung should try using telepathic communication and mind control to avoid patent infringement Though in all honesty I would pay full price for a device that did that.

 

[vitzr]

Samsung should try using telepathic communication and mind control to avoid patent infringement Though in all honesty I would pay full price for a device that did that.

Great idea

The real experts on smartphones in this forum, have convinced me that if not for Samsungs success in stealing ideas & copying Apples iPhone down to the last detail, the company would go out of business in a matter of weeks.

Furthermore rumor has it that Samsungs TV's will suffer a massive decline in sales beginning immediately based solely on the rumors of the new Apple TV. Facing a collapse of that magnitude, it's a sure bet that Samsung Industries (the parent company) will cut it's loses and shut down all operations by the end of this month. Saving them the humiliation of another barrage of Apple law suits.

It serves them right ... Ha..Ha..Ha..

 

[juliusaugustus]

*LTD* Apple makes great products but you gotta understand something. Modern touchscreen phones wouldn't exist without the Lg Prada, various linux multitouch handhelds, Neonode n1, Nokia 7710, Sony Ericsson devices, Windows Ce devices, Palm Os going all the way back to the original IBM Simon which was the first touchscreen smartphone. I'm not argue which implementations were better because better is relative just that every innovation and every milestone is built on the work of someone else. Also it isn't what a company did to the market that is important it is the continued innovation of that company that is important and so far Apple has been doing nothing but upgrading the specs of their devices rather than doing anything truly revolutionary they are pretty much just riding the success of their existing products.

 

[ChazUK]

FFS Samsung. Stop recycling the F700 design...

 

[0000757]

FFS Samsung. Stop recycling the F700 design...

Image

If it ain't broke, don't fix it;

 

[smoledman]

Apple owns the patents, if you don't like the game then change the patent system but don't blame Apple for playing. Don't be a playa-hata.

 

[turtle777]

Oh teh noes. They did it again ?

Well, that's what they do best, I guess.

-t

 

[skier777]

Apple owns the patents, if you don't like the game then change the patent system but don't blame Apple for playing. Don't be a playa-hata.

They own the patents to the iPhone but not to cell phones generally. Just like someone posted above, two TV's are likely to look very similar without infringing on patents, just because TV's look a certain way now and phones do too.

 

[kdarling]

Apple owns the patents, if you don't like the game then change the patent system but don't blame Apple for playing. Don't be a playa-hata.

Apple's problem is that they don't have substantial utility patents, i.e. ones which smartphones cannot do without. Nokia did, though, and Apple had to back down and settle with them. Being a mobile pioneer, Motorola no doubt has some good patents as well, and Apple should stay clear of stirring up that hornet's nest.

Apple mostly has design patents, which are not worth anywhere near as much as utility patents in the long run... and apparently not much in the short term either, except for that EU Community Design version in Dusseldorf that got a preliminary injunction (however, see below).

All Apple's litigation has been geared towards throwing quickie road blocks against their competition, and that will not help them in the future:

"In Germany and Australia, it's increasingly likely that Apple will owe Samsung damages due to improperly-granted preliminary injunctions. While Apple can afford this, it's an embarrassment and courts will be more hesitant than ever to grant Apple preliminary injunctions, at least in those jurisdictions."

Apple doesn't even have good trade dress arguments, because they don't advertise their devices by their style or packaging or all the other visual things that trade dress requires (which is why all those pictures posted here about such things are meaningless). Instead, they advertise mostly about their available apps... which is great for sales, but doesn't help them legally.

The upshot is that Apple has gotten into a position where most of their design patents are being thrown out, and they've forced their competition to bypass their few utility patents (bounce-back, etc) so they become useless in a fight.