Did Apple’s misrepresented evidence paint Samsung as the copycat unfairly?

If you ask Samsung, Google, and the majority of our readers, the Korean maker of the Galaxy S line of phones really got hosed when a jury made a $1 billion decision declaring that the company infringed on Apple software and design patents. While Samsung is seeking to have the verdict overturned due to claims of bias and misconduct, newly released court documents suggest that evidence might have been skewed to favor the maker of the iPhone and iPad.

Specifically, an internal memo from Samsung bigwig JK Shin was quoted as urging his employees to “make something like the iPhone.” Left out was the context in which Shin merely used the device as a point of comparison, saying “when everybody (both consumers and the industy) talk about UX, they weigh it against the iPhone. The iPhone has become the standard.”

Shin goes on to ask his designers to “make their own designs with conviction and confidence,” and to “make designs with faces that are creative and diverse.” Further spoiling Apple’s argument is Shin’s call to focus on screen size as a differentiating factor with statements like “our biggest asset is our screen,” and “it is very important that we make screen size bigger.”

The full statement was not presented to the jury, with Apple instead cherry-picking choice quotes to fit their argument. Would the full letter have changed the opinion of those left with the decision? That’s a hard call. But it certainly presents a different angle on the matter. One that suggests Samsung wasn’t attempting to “blatantly copy” the iPhone as Apple’s legal team has so numerous times said.

[via BGR]

Continue reading:

TAGS: ,



  • ludist210

    To be honest, those two phone screen caps side-by-side do look eerily similar. However, the main UI on Samsung’s home screen is night and day different from Apple’s, which is…basically that screen cap. Ho-hum.

    The phones themselves don’t even look that much alike. I’m still shocked that this lawsuit was ruled in favor of Apple.

    • PC_Tool

      They tried to make the home-screen look as iPhone as possible in the screenshot. The default TW homescreen (factory reset) is *very* different….clock widgets, folders, etc…

    • http://twitter.com/inguatu ingua2

      To be honest, you should probably look up the word “photoshopped” It’s already been proven Apple did this in Germany.

      • PC_Tool

        To be honest…This is not photo-shopped, it is simply purposefully misleading, Something he eluded to in his post.

        The SII is in the app-drawer, and the iPhone is on the home-screen.

        • http://www.facebook.com/archercc Ryan Stewart

          What he/she is referring to is the tablet suit where it was shown that they photoshopped the image of the Samsung tablet to match the dimensions of hte ipad, which is not the case.

          • PC_Tool

            I know what the case in Germany was about.

            I also know it has nothing to do with the image above that the OP was commenting on. :-D

        • DroidDoesnt_2

          Maybe it’s because Samsung promoted the original Galaxy S with the app drawer open to intentionally look like the iPhone: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-kCdF6wrNYk

          • PhoenixPath

            Samsung used it in a commercial and Apple used it in a trial (one tried to fool the public and one tried to fool the Law).

            I’m thinking one does not justify the other in this case, don’t you?

          • DroidDoesnt_2

            Not sure what you are specifically referring to but my point is the reason why you always see the Galaxy S with the app drawer open is bcuz that is precisely how Samsung advertised it, to intentionally make it look like the iPhone….

      • ludist210

        Pretty sure I know what “photoshopped” means because I’m a graphic designer. I “photoshop” things on a daily basis. The graphic on this article isn’t “photoshopped” in the least. Re-read my OP.

        • meliorist

          Even if there has been no cheating to make the phones look more alike, the image is definitely photoshopped. First of all, there’s a perfect white background. Second, there are the rather obviously fake reflections at the bottom of the picture. Third, the reflections on the surface of the phones indicates that they were photographed in different environments (the Samsung shows light coming from the left side, and the iPhone shows light coming from the right, higher up, and more diffuse). Fourth, the Samsung is in sharper focus than the iPhone (or maybe the iPhone was imported from a lower res jpeg).

          • ludist210

            Re-read my OP. I’m not debating whether or not the image was created in Photoshop (because it was).

    • No_Nickname90

      IDK how I misread your comment. LoL!! Sorry. =.P
      I didn’t see the part when you noted the difference of it being the App Drawer and not the homescreen. =.P

  • PC_Tool

    If it’s anything like normal trials, Samsung would have had ample opportunity to refute or, in this case, fill in the blanks, any documentation presented as evidence by Apple.

    If Samsung chose not to, is that not just another in a long line of examples as to how Samsung’s lawyers well…suck?

    • http://twitter.com/inguatu ingua2

      Koh refused to allow Sammy to omit quite a bit of evidence.

      • PC_Tool

        “Koh refused to allow Sammy to omit quite a bit of evidence.”

        ???

        This makes zero sense.

        First, it has nothing to do with my comment. Apple submitted the evidence. All Samsung had to do was provide proper context.

        Second, I think you meant “admit”, not “omit”…but it still would be completely irrelevant to my comment. (…and while it may be true, it’s actually not Koh’s fault; but judging from your other comments here, you would be unable to accept any reasoning supporting that.)

        • Robert Manser

          Why are you trolling? You’re doing it in everyones post.

          • PC_Tool

            So your one post here is an insult, and *I* am the troll.

            Nice logic, but I do not think that word means what you think it means. Disagreeing with someone is not “trolling”.
            If you disagree with me, fine…tell me how I am wrong.
            If you can’t actually do that, well…I guess all you have left is insults. Why are you trolling?

          • Paul

            Somebody get this guy a brigde lol

          • PhoenixPath

            The OP, with a positive score of 45 on that post, needs a bridge….

          • http://twitter.com/inguatu ingua2

            It’s probably about time you got banned from posting. You post no relevant information. You’re just being argumentative towards everyone here, with a passive aggressive attitude. Fix your cr*p or move on.

        • http://twitter.com/inguatu ingua2

          It makes perfect sense. Again, follow the trial and not your iHeart… tool.

          • PC_Tool

            (just in case you’re not checking for replies to the fake account you created, here’s the response. Have a great life, man. Should be a happy one, judging by the old “bliss” quote)

            Thanks, man. You’re campaign of personal attacks and emotional outbursts say more about you than I ever could.

            FWIW: The only smartphones I have ever owned are Android. Fascinate>Spectrum>Galaxy Nexus. I was helping Sonofskywalker1 back when he was making BlackHole ROM for the Fascinate, and currently check Gerrit multiple times a day to see what they add to AOKP. I built AOKP from source at home on my desktop every Friday until recently when they changed their release schedule to Sundays (I haven’t built since then, trying to figure out when best to do that).
            Just because someone disagrees with you does not make them anything other than at odds with your opinion. You can either choose to support your opinion, ignore all dissenting opinions, or react with emotional outbursts and childish name-calling. There is no question now as to how you react.
            Apple should have lost this case. They did not win it because of Koh. She may be green, and unstable, but this case was a joke form the start and even with a “young” judge, Samsung’s lawyers should have been able to show a Jury just what a joke of a case it was. They failed. It is Samsung’s fault they lost the case. I have given examples of actions on their part that I feel support my opinion and have done my very best to present them without descending into childish game-playing.
            So call me whatever you want. Make your fake accounts. Trash anyone who questions your opinions. Don’t worry about me questioning you ever again though….no, you haven’t “won” anything…you’ve simply proven you are not capable of reason…and I am done “administering medicine to the dead” (Google it).

          • swattz101

            LOL, you might want to do some research before ass-u-me-ing someone is an iFan.

      • shooter50

        sammy? How cute

        • LinuxFrenzy

          Another troll? How cute.

      • David Cramblett

        As I understand it, Samsung was late in filling many things, so they were excluded. I’m not sure we can blame Koh. Lets hope Samsung gets a second chance and does it right.

      • swattz101

        My understanding is Samsung had plenty of time to submit their evidence during the gathering phase, but waited until the last minute. I don’t know if they were trying to do a ploy so that Apple wouldn’t have time to gather more evidence to refute it, but whatever the reason, it back fired. Blame the judge if you want, but it they give you a deadline, then you better sitck to it.

    • http://profiles.google.com/zshazz Chris Cain

      This is exactly what I thought when I read this. The more I read about Samsung’s lawyers, the more I realize they’re completely inept. The only thing I can figure is that these guys were spending their time getting drunk and having parties instead of getting ready for this case, because I simply can’t see how they could be this utterly unprepared any other way.

      Either that, or they are Apple fanboys. :>

      … That’s a joke, by the way.

      • PC_Tool

        Koh paid ‘em off…from the money Apple paid her. Ya know, since she’s obviously an Apple paid shill…

        (The scary thing is, there is at least one poster in this topic that might actually believe this…)

        #nohopeforthehumanrace

        (Yes, I know this isn’t twitter…)

        • jaybow

          Idiot.

          • PhoenixPath

            Stay classy, bro.

      • swattz101

        I’m wondering if they were trying to do some sort of play, submit something at the last minute so that Apple wouldn’t have time to research info to refute it. Whatever they were trying, it backfired.

  • AppleWins

    The case should have been declared a mistrial, the whole this was an epic mess from the beginning.

    • jbo1018

      It sure as he’ll should be now that the jury foreman has spoken on the record many times stating he completely disregarded the judges instructions and used his personal experience and not evidence to decide the trial. The major one to me though is he failed to mention during jury selection that he was in a lawsuit with a company that Samsung is the parent of.

  • Magnus100

    And Samsung lawyers where doing what while Apple was lying up a Tsunami? Can’t believe Samsung lawyers are so profoundly incompetent, unless Apple has bribed them!

  • http://www.facebook.com/scottctompkins Scott Tompkins

    I’m sorry, but the failure to punctuate the entire context of those messages was a direct failure of the Samsung legal counsel… to add to the long list of other failures.

    But don’t get me wrong… the result of the trial was likely the result of jury incompetence.

    • Guest

      And don’t forget Gel Hogan’s vendetta with Seagate – Samsung’s biggest investor.

      • Scott Tompkins

        Another failure on part of the Samsung legal counsel to allow him on the Jury to begin with.

      • Marvin Nakajima

        I think that’s turned around.. Samsung is the investor in Seagate.

    • http://twitter.com/inguatu ingua2

      Don’t be sorry, you didn’t follow the trial close enough. Koh needs to be disbarred.

      • Scott Tompkins

        Maybe so, but you can’t blame Koh for Samsung lawyers failing to contextualize the strongest arguments against them.

        • TalkingMoose

          You don’t know that. Koh may not have allowed the rebuttal. People are condemning Samsung’s lawyers without knowing what they’re talking about. Granted, that’s nothing new for the internet…

          • Scott Tompkins

            So, you are implying that Koh changed the entire process of civil trial law for this case, and denied Samsung the right to defend themselves… interesting, go on…

          • http://www.facebook.com/archercc Ryan Stewart

            Well, it looks like, at least within legal procedure, she has issues. For example, her refusal to overturn her injunction on the tablet despite a judgement that it didnt infringe. Samsung had to take it to an appeals court, who then had to remand it back to her. She also started shouting when a lawyer appealed her exclusion of much of the evidence subimitted by Samsung, didnt verify that the jury actually follow the instructions, etc. The comment about the Apple lawyer being on crack, etc.

            She is inexperienced and its showing. Not so much a conspiracy but a relatively high profile case falling into the lap of a person who is new to being a judge. Two years in county, then two years as a district judge.

          • Scott Tompkins

            I don’t dispute what some would describe as Koh’s apparent bias in this case… she made a lot of bad calls that made things hard for Sammy… but that doesn’t absolve them of any fault…

            I don’t remember hearing of Koh blocking the larger portion of the out-of-context quotes Apple used to make it look like senior management was instructing their designers to copy the iPhone… try as I might, I can’t blame Koh or the Jury for this…

          • PC_Tool

            “For example, her refusal to overturn her injunction on the tablet despite a judgement that it didnt infringe.”

            The case had moved on, out of her jurisdiction by that time.

            “Samsung had to take it to an appeals court, who then had to remand it back to her.”

            …Samsung had *already* taken it to an appeals court…which is why she could not overturn the injunction…

            Koh definitely made some questionable choices during this trial, but the injunction not being over-turned was not a mistake on her part. Samsung went to appeal before trying to get the injunction over-turned…something they definitely should have known not to do.

          • TalkingMoose

            @Scott Tompkins , you miss the point. It’s not anything specific that she did, it’s that people are blaming Samsung’s lawyers based solely on speculation. The fact is, we don’t know why they didn’t rebut. Could it have been the judge? Could it have been some other reason? WE DON”T KNOW. If we assign blame without knowing all the facts, we’re every bit as bad as that horrible jury who handed Apple a $1B victory because they couldn’t be bothered to pay attention to the details of the case.

          • swattz101

            Sounds like a combination of things led to the eventual verdict. From Samsung being late on submitting documents to Judge Koh leaning just a little toward Apple, to the Jury Foreman interpreting the Jury instructions for everyone. The stars just lined up for Apple.
            However, the Samsung lawyers failed. There is no question that the lawyers could have done a better job. Why didn’t they file on time? Why didn’t they rebut the emails better? Was there not enough information in the emails that Apple submitted? As @TalkingMoose pointed out, we don’t know the exact reason, but I wonder if it has to do with the information Samsung was not allowed to submit. If Samsung would have done a better job, they may have been able to overcome the other issues.

  • Rdfry

    That is because Apple is a lying cheating ripoff of a company and is continuing the delusional ways of Steve Jobs.

  • No_Nickname90

    Samsung clearly let this go through to show how much of a lyer Apple really is. They knew they’d be able to get the case over thrown. They also want to show how CROOKED that judge was. I bet there will be more evidence to show that Samsung didn’t copy Apple. Little by little all these things will come out and people will see Apple for what they really are.

    Well that’s my 2 cents on the matter.

    • Teh_Babyarm

      The judge wasn’t crooked; at least on this. She can’t tell either side how to present their case.
      And if this was Samsung’s strategy, they deserve the $1 billion penalty because that’s just freaking stupid.

  • Teh_Babyarm

    Wait, wait, wait. Samsung was tried in absentia?
    No, I’m pretty sure they had lawyers present throughout the trial. That sounds like terrible counsel to me.

  • LawrenceMcatee

    I just want to tap the home button so f*cking bad and say “look iDiots”

    • PC_Tool

      I know, right? I have to believe Samsung’s lawyers showed both devices on their home-screens…and didn’t let Apple have this as the only side-by-side they saw.

      …not that I actually have any faith in Samsung’s lawyers.

      • LawrenceMcatee

        Yeah all the galaxyta/ipad comparisons are set the same way! Drives me nuts!

  • DavidVarghese

    Samsung did infringe on some of Apple’s patents, expecially the icons, but Samsung’s lawyers should have done a better job of fighting against the patents and counter suing… Get new lawyers Samsung!

    • http://twitter.com/MRND384 Nieves Diaz III

      dude stfu….ur just a sheep going along with the herd with nothing to back up ur claims. go troll somewhere else.

      • DavidVarghese

        Lol? You alright? I own the Evo LTE, and I’ve been with Android since the release of the HTC Hero… Just telling the facts bud.

        • TalkingMoose

          What facts? You see an effect and assume a cause. You don’t know what Samsung’s lawyers tried and what they didn’t. You don’t know what the judge allowed and what she didn’t. So unless you’ve a copy of the court transcript in front of you, you’re not talking facts, you’re talking assumptions

          • DavidVarghese

            I can tell you this because my mom has an iPhone, and my brother a S3. I can see many similarities (visually) of what Samsung allegedly copied from Apple. The similarity was uncanny. This was Samsung’s battle to lose, but I found it hard to believe when Samsung didn’t get any of their counterclaims acknowledged or recompensed. That’s what I meant in my original comment, and that’s what I meant by facts.

    • burgosma

      Especially the icons? Really? Yikes.

    • MelchiahX

      I think the problem was only having 25 hours of proving you’re innocent on a case this complex. Its much easier for the plaintiff (Apple in this case) to scream foul and pretty much make any accusations against Samsung. Think about it the more Apple throws against Samsung the more time they need to defend themselves. Honestly this whole trial was fucked from before it even started. You have a California based court (Apple’s advantage) then have a Korean judge that has already sided with Apple before (Apple’s advantage) and to top it all off you have the entire American media backing Apple up (unfortunately this is mainly due to Apple’s share holders securing their profits). Point is this…judge Koh was not right for this trial. The placement of such a trial wasn’t right either. Finally, a trial of this magnitude requires much more than 25 hrs for proving or disproving evidence. Apple was a winner going in no matter what Samsung did. FFS the jury foreman clearly stated that he told the jurors to ignore the prior art evidence Samsung brought in because “they didn’t have time.” How exactly didn’t they have time? they had no time limit of any kind. This foreman was clearly biased (not saying he’s paid by Apple or even likes Apple… what I’m saying is he had a personal agenda, perhaps wanted his 15 minutes of fame as clearly shown in all the interviews he made And even he admitted that being in this trial was his life’s greatest achievement).
      Anyways, this jury decision is sure to be overturned, there’s just too much evidence to prove a lot of stupid decisions made by both judge and jury.

      • DavidVarghese

        lol, dead on.
        I’m not too fond of our judicial system, but they should have the trial in a place where both sides don’t have the upper hand… lets say… Russia. lol..
        Think about it… a US jury,hearing that a Korean company is infringing on an American company’s patents… It was biased from the start.

  • indio7777

    Pc_tool…living up to his name:
    http://www.examiner.com/article/judge-leaks-apple-lawsuit-documents

    Within the document, Apple admitted that the sale of Samsung’s Android devices were unlikely to harm the iPhone’s market share, but rather take it from smaller handset manufacturer’s such as HTC, Motorola, and LG. 

    The documents were redacted, regardless.

    • PC_Tool

      Was there a point to this besides the childish attempt at an insult?

      No, really…I am trying to see what Apple’s view of Smartphone sales has to do with anyone’s comments here, much less my own.

      Do tell…

      • indio7777

        My point was that months after this was leaked, also demonstrating incompetence on the judge’s behalf, part of the lawsuit was to demonstrate a financial impact on Apple’s bottom line. The company who brought the lawsuit already admitted that there was little if any impact.

        You’re claiming Samsung’s lawyers are inept, but here is a blatant example proving koh’s blunders. You and I weren’t there, but you put the blame of a lawsuit that shouldn’t exist in the first place and dishonest tactics of Apple back on Samsung.

        Get it?

        • PC_Tool

          “you put the blame of a lawsuit that shouldn’t exist in the first place and dishonest tactics of Apple back on Samsung.”

          …you just posted that. I can’t even…I mean…I don’t…

          Are you reading the same posts I am? Do you have me confused with someone else? Perhaps in another topic? On another site??? ….because I can tell you (and the proof is right here, in these comments) that I have *never* blamed Samsung for the existence of this lawsuit.

          Get it? No… No I do not.

          FFS man….get a grip.

      • http://twitter.com/inguatu ingua2

        no, you’re really trying to be a passive aggressive troll.

  • CalypsoArt

    Ok kids, here is good info on the patent wars. It addresses what happened to Vlingo and so much more. I’m sure we are able to read more than the blurbs on websites.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/08/technology/patent-wars-among-tech-giants-can-stifle-competition.html?hp

  • olbp

    If Samsung didn’t like the clipped quote, all they had to do was bring in the full text as rebuttal. Didn’t even have to get the court’s approval for that. Not in the USA, anyway.

    • PC_Tool

      Bingo.

      • PC_TooI

        I’m blindly going to follow the gods of mac, and wave a few big words around to make myself look impressive. i am also going to make hundreds of anti-android posts on an android forum because i have no real friends and my parents have locked me in the basement again. i am so lonely….

        • PC_Tool

          Epic. Ingua2 created a fake account with a capital “i” instead of a lower-case “L”. Clever.

          Thanks, man. You’re campaign of personal attacks and emotional outbursts say more about you than I ever could.

          FWIW: The only smartphones I have ever owned are Android. Fascinate>Spectrum>Galaxy Nexus. I was helping Sonofskywalker1 back when he was making BlackHole ROM for the Fascinate, and currently check Gerrit multiple times a day to see what they add to AOKP. I built AOKP from source at home on my desktop every Friday until recently when they changed their release schedule to Sundays (I haven’t built since then, trying to figure out when best to do that).

          Just because someone disagrees with you does not make them anything other than at odds with your opinion. You can either choose to support your opinion, ignore all dissenting opinions, or react with emotional outbursts and childish name-calling. There is no question now as to how you react.

          Apple should have lost this case. They did not win it because of Koh. She may be green, and unstable, but this case was a joke form the start and even with a “young” judge, Samsung’s lawyers should have been able to show a Jury just what a joke of a case it was. They failed. It is Samsung’s fault they lost the case. I have given examples of actions on their part that I feel support my opinion and have done my very best to present them without descending into childish game-playing.

          So call me whatever you want. Make your fake accounts. Trash anyone who questions your opinions. Don’t worry about me questioning you ever again though….you haven’t “won” anything…you’ve simply proven you are not capable of reason…and I’m done “administering medicine to the dead” (Google it).

          • AppleWins

            I deal with the same thing. I have a parade of iSheep who follow me and troll my comments wherever I post.

  • Havoc70

    No Apple Misrepresents the truth, that just is not possible
    /sarcasm

  • Brian S.

    That is important information. And it certainly makes a difference.

    One comment about the evidence though: If I would have heard that the boss was urging employees to make something like the iPhone I certainly would have thought it was being used as a reference point for a standard…

    Edit: Now that I think about it if Shin had said “Make a phone that copies that iPhone” or “Make a phone that looks exactly like the iPhone” then that would indicate Samsung was trying to copy Apple. I think that if Samsung wanted to copy the iPhone they have the capability to make an exact duplicate, it is already being done in other parts of the world.

  • Aslan Bollin

    Answering the article title,
    Of course they did, but unfortunately Samsungs lawyers were to stupid to say something.. you know… DURING the trial…….

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jamille-Browne/1184321457 Jamille Browne

    is this really a serious question?

  • AnGeLFaCe77

    samsung copied apple. Apple has been copying android for the past 2 years.

  • InspectorGadget80

    YES FOR THE LAST TIME N THEY PAY THE DUMB BTCH with lots of cash/free iphones and macs, also the ijury they paid them too

  • Albert Naranjo

    Grasping at straws Samsung. Pay up. Move on… and next time create something original.

    • http://twitter.com/inguatu ingua2

      Notes were original.. screens original… actually, why don’t you spend some time looking up what Samsung has done as a company, compared to Apple. You do realize Apple buys most of their tech from other companies and is essentially a systems integrator? Good.

  • NIGHTSCOUT

    I think the most important thing, is for us consumers to take the right side. As long as we never buy Apple products, eventually Apple will fall.

  • anthonymcneil85

    I think that Verizon is somewhat at fault for this because they did not have the iPhone and were basically saying that ‘some of these Samsung devices look like an iPhone’. That is how they advertised it in the stores. If Apple has the patents they can defend them but after the case was finished alot of things came out that seem like the ruling may be overturned but we will see.

  • mikedo2007

    Yep and I suspect bribery and selecting juries that are Iphone fanboy/fangirl.

  • http://www.facebook.com/greg.jerdan Greg Jerdan

    I can’t stand Apple. This is like Sony or Panasonic sueing another TV manufacturer because the shape/size of the screen is the same. or the channels change the same way. I bought an GS3 a month ago and just bought a SG Note 10.1. Had Samsung not been around, I would have bought an HTC or Motorola. I don’t lke the interface of the Apple anyway plus don’t want to deal with Itunes.

  • EDNYLaw

    I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, Samsung’s lawyers must be terrible. If Apple was cherry-picking quotes, the Federal Rules of Evidence state that the full document must be admitted into evidence if they are going to present it as evidence. So if context mattered and devastated Apple’s arguments, Samsung should have read the relevant parts to the jury in full. I’m not defending Apple, in fact I’m appalled at most of their behaviors, but Samsung apparently hires the worst lawyers on the planet or they had the most bias judge on the planet. Judge Koh made some pretty bad calls in my opinion, but no judge disregards the Federal Rules of Evidence, especially one so heavily used as documentary evidence. This is Law School 101.

  • endinyal

    In a short, concise, well-thought out answer… No.

    Scamscum (and it’s whiny supporters) are just having a hissy-fit.

  • mirage03

    I guess common sense is not applicable during a trial… all you need is an excuse or argument no matter how weak it is just to keep the trial going.. lol.. even if some contexts were left out, couldn’t the quote be disproved by the defendant? I don’t get it.. did apple win because of the quote? Is this the basis of their win Lol.. are they 9 years old?

  • master94

    duh answer to the title

  • Zenstrive

    Battle of Nations…waged using patents.

  • NIGHTSCOUT

    Lucy, you suck as a judge.

  • arnaldonyc

    If that’s true, why didn’t Samsung refute by reading the entire letter in full context when presenting their case?