Samsung shop features Apple's App Store, Safari icons on decorative app wall - Page 3

No, it just means that Samsung is large, and cannot be expected to know every detail about everything that it does everywhere. These icons are a small detail, something that really doesn't deserve the amount of attention that it is getting. I also see icons for McDonald's, Skype, FireFox, CNN and NASA on the wall. You think anyone from any of those companies or organizations are going to make a big issue out of their icons being used? It's actually a free promotion. Big deal.

Hello Everyone. Is this Safari icon? Please see below link.

http://nexus404.com/Blog/2011/09/23/...comment-184215

I see a retangular bluish image with a white circle in it. It does not even close to Safari icon on my Ipad2. What do you think?

The three arrows on the left side are pointing to images of the iOS App Store icons. The one image on the right side is the Safari compass icon, though it looks more like what you'd see in OS X rather than on your iPad or iPhone.

Store within a Store... Storeception (sorry, couldn't resist)

And the proof of this claim is where?

Next time compare like with like. Don't do that again.

Are you for real? Do you really believe any of this? If so, I have to question whether you are out of junior high school yet, such is the lack of awareness you exhibit. Yes they should be expected to know and approve every detail of their promotional materials. Did they get permission to use those other companies logos? They should have. If I use them on my company's website, I'd expect to get a letter from a lawyer asking me to remove them.

Directly compete against an Apple store?

Riiiiiight.

Samsung might want to ask MS how their store is going

Let's not forget the most important part: all of those other app logos are, or could be Android apps. Apple App Store and Safari are iOS *only*. This single detail should not have been overlooked.

Even if Samsung had nothing to do with the graphics, this does drive home the point that there is some confusion out there due to how close these products are. Which was Apples point all along.

Even if Samsung had nothing to do with it at all, it still reinforces Apples argument.

I'd love to see this story posted on Engadget or somewhere else where the comments sections are filled with an echo chamber of angry anti-apple neckbeards. If Apple did something like this, half of those guys would be so excited they would need new pants.

Sure there is. It's a Samsung display in a Samsung shop. That means that Samsung is responsible for what goes on there.


You're talking about a completely different situation. A 'contract seller' is not the same as a multinational company setting up its own mini-shop.


Sure it would. But that doesn't mean that they're not liable. That's why companies try to hire competent local managers - because the company STILL has liability if the manager screws up.


That's a foolish comparison.

For CNN, McDonald's, Skype, etc, it's free promotion.

For Apple, it's a competitor shamelessly copying your intellectual property to illegally ride on your coattails.

It's completely possible this is a picture of a Samsung-created store (where's the cash register?), and it's believable that the logos on the back wall, McDonald's, NASA, iTunes, Skype, were put there by Samsung. It's also possible this is the retailer's (Euronics) idea, the retailers display fixtures, etc. . It may not even be a competed area, with the remainder of the last displayed products decor still to be removed. Or the the back wall may be Euronics-controlled and Euronics decor, with the wood-defined display area away from the wall being leased to the Italian Samsung distributor. Dunno.

I don't presume to know how retailers do business in Italy, but I've got a pretty good idea how it's done here. With the current legal hurricane blowing it's perhaps Samsung Korea that needs to ask to have at least any references to Apple products removed from the area of the display. NASA and McDonald's aren't as dangerous to leave up. Their fans are a bit tamer. Apple and Samsung shouldn't be in the same room right now.

ooooops?

So people really believe the highly implausible scenario where Samsung directly put this up to trap consumers who don't know better?

Wow. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of you were young earth creationists.

I don't think anyone suggested such a scenario.

What was suggested is that Samsung is not respecting Apple's intellectual property - and duping unsuspecting consumers is one of the outcomes of their overall strategy. That doesn't mean that this particular sign was intentional.

Rather, Samsung apparently can't be bothered to respect others' intellectual property - which is what Apple has been saying all along.

I've done plenty of display ads. One of the first things you do (at least if you're an honest and respectable company) is to ensure that you're not using unauthorized graphics.

That's absurd.

Intellectual property needs to be respected. When preparing a display like this, everyone involved has the responsibility to ensure that they have permission for ALL the graphics they use - not just the ones that they think will sue them.

As far as I can tell those are app icons

I'm aware. And mismanagement is definitely to blame. But to turn it into blatant IP theft as the majority of comments here suggest is utterly absurd.

Yesterday we received a Galaxy S device at work. It was on Woot for $180 and we needed an Android device for testing. When it arrived and I say the box it was in, the first thought in my mind (and it even slipped out of my mouth) as "what a ripoff". The box looked exactly like an iPhone of iPod Touch box. Yes the picture was slightly different, but the placement of everything was exactly the same. Even the picture on the front was the same size as an iPod Touch and had the same icons, etc. When we opened it, it was a little different just because it has a 5" screen instead of a 3.5" screen so it basically looks like someone dropped an iPhone 3GS into a "Honey I Grew the Kids" machine.

Even some of the apps on the phone have the same icons and the same feel. So yes, I think they have crossed a line and are trying to "free ride" on the marketing efforts of Apple.

Reminds me when Microsoft used the Angry Birds logo on a Windows Phone promo, and Rovio said they had no plans at the time to release a Windows Phone version, and didnt give Microsoft permission.

Samsung will learn the hard way, before the iPhone came out, everyone in the phone market just copied eachother over and over, mean there was no advancements what so ever.

If companies can't start innovating, and stop copying Apples, then the only time there will EVER be an advancement in mobile technology is when Apple releases a phone once a year.

And one innovation a year is not enough for an entire market.

No, people believe the highly plausible scenario that Samsung doesn't care (whether their action deceive their customers or not).

Here's what Samsung's first /proper/ touchscreen phone looked like after the iPhone 1 came out, and how they probably though it would stop Apple before they tried.

Here's what a Samsung phone looked like a few weeks before the iPhone.

http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/Aug2007/U700.jpg


Heres what they looked like a few months later.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_SGH-T919

There's a second Safari icon at about eye level.



Maybe whoever took this could get closer pictures?

No, the general tone is more in line with this:

Apple is in a unique position... as they make the software and the hardware.

5 years ago, Samsung was selling smartphones running Microsoft's Windows Mobile... and today they sell smartphones with Google's Android OS.

There's not much innovation Samsung can do... other than a button placement here or there. The software innovation comes from someone else.

As for hardware innovation... Samsung was still making Windows Mobile phones that used a stylus as Apple was developing glass multi-touch screens.

No, it sounds to me like there's 100% innovation Samsung can do. They have zero right now, why not make your own OS, Samsung?

Oh yeah... they have Bada.... I totally forgot about that....

Good for you, Mel. I'm impressed.

These rabid know-nothings who take this as an intentional attempt to pass off Samsung goods as Apple goods are stretching the limits of credibility, IMO.

Seemingly, you think little of iPad customers, if you think that they will buy a Tab, fooled into believing it is an iPad. Or maybe you think little of Apple's marketing and branding prowess if it can be so easily overcome.

I think that you are incorrect on both counts.

This is absolute fantasy. You don't have any idea how retail works it seems. You are just grasping at straws for excuses here.

To be fair, I will give you a better one.

As someone who has actually worked at one of these little "booth within a store" stores, I can tell you it's not only incredibly boring standing there all day, it's usually a one person job. It's certainly not like the regional manager is going to be dropping by.

So if you are searching for alternative explanations, it's far more likely that the single bored employee in charge of the store just printed out a bunch of logos on A4 paper, cut them out and stuck them on the back wall because they had nothing better to do all day.

They probably thought, "Hey, Let's make one of those 'wall of apps' displays I've seen pictures of."

"in Apple ads."

Now you're just blatantly posing hypotheticals as fact to base your arguments on?

You're really getting desperate to earn your pay.

don't forget:

Microsoft
Adobe
Google
East Texas

No, I probably phrased that wrong

My comment is referring to what Samsung probably wants to happen.

Well wasn't that an entertaining read and argument between melgross and Gatorguy

Guess what: you are both right. 1:1. When is the Mud-Match to decide the tie?

The reason why you were both right:

a) Yes... quite stupid on Sammy's part to display this picture prominently on their website, considering the circumstances of the lawsuits that are barring them in Europe. Point for melgross.

b) Yes... questions do need to be asked and answered before passing TOTAL judgement against Samsung. Point goes to Gatorguy.

Truth be known: if this is similar to in-store displays in Euronics locations in Germany, or any other big electronics retailer like Saturn or Media Markt here... well guess what? The retailers do anything they darn well please.

A very good buddy/client of mine prints and installs just such displays, with one of his clients just down the block from me. Guess what it is? A Euronics. The promotions and displays are all at the whims and fancies of the retailer/owner. These stores are what we call in German "Filialen".... basically wholly owned stores, but with marketing and purchasing ties to a larger conglomerate. Kind of like franchises in America, but with far more control on the part of the owners to do what they want here.

I suspect in this Italian example, it was similar to what happens here in Germany:

• owner goes to a display/large-format printing service; tells them what he wants;
• the idea gets dropped on an intern's desk. At the moment in Germany at least, these people make 400,-/mo. They are NOT designers or lawyers... and even many of the owners are not traditionally trained in graphics. They just bought a large-format printer and a couple of computers. We call them: *Garagen-Grafiker (not a compliment, in light of Apple's origins).
• Owner comes back to take a look at a comp... and very possibly suggests, "why not add some cool icons like those on my iPhone". G-G says OK. Owner asks when he can have it installed.
• Client is king here. What the client wants, he gets... and suffers the consequences fully and alone... if there are even any "consequences". At most: take it down.

That's it. That's how it's very possible that Samsung has absolutely nothing to say about the store in Italy even. Regardless of their display materials being used, surrounded be potential litigious logos... and even when the owner IS potentially trying to confuse the customer. This kind of stuff goes on here in all of retail, every day; whether packaging, posters, or displays. Also, considering my numerous trips to Italy, I would say "suggestive false advertising" is even more of a cultural phenomenon there, than here in Germany.

With the landscape in retail as it is here, I was rather surprised when the German court sided with Apple against Samsung. I could bring dozens of packaging design disputes to court, where my clients have been "copied" to the point where even my hand-drawn graphics were scanned and used. However in general, the court system here looks down on such lawsuits... and it costs a small fortune, with very little in return if you ever win. More like: change the color; or change the graphics. That's all. No monetary recourse... or at least any amount that would be worth your while and time. It may even backlash on ya, and make you a pariah with suppliers or other clients.

Whatever. Just thought I'd bring a little more light on the subject from this side of "The Pond".

*PS. No... my buddy isn't a Garage-Grafiker. He happens to be the 5th generation to own a small printing business here. Both he, his sister, and employees are all professionally trained in Heidelberg and Cologne or Trier Design Schools. Yes: they do their best to be ethical and respect trademarks and copyrights, but again: if the client wants it, he gets it.

"For as long as Apple does not drop mobile telecommunications functions, it would be impossible for it to sell its i-branded products without using our patents..."

Doesn't that quote basically admit in public that many (most? all?) of the patents should be covered under the FRAND system? ( "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory" is essentially a mechanism for protecting competition in particular industries where patents have been granted to a single company that are so fundamental to the industry that they could block out all competitors by refusing to license said patents (or by charging asinine licensing fees) )

BTW, I know standards bodies have influence on what patents get labeled FRAND, but who enforces the terms? Is this enforced by the USPTO? Department of Justice? (in the USA at least)

Well, you know, his only purpose here is as a Google/Android apologist/propagandist, so we can't really expect anything out of him but lies and attempts to derail the discussion onto bullshit arguments so we all ignore the main point.

It would really be better if everyone not engage with him, call him out on his bullshit and leave it at that. "Arguing" with him is pointless: he's not here to be rational or honest, just to distract and mislead.

If Apple uses only the tech covered by FRAND, then yes.

If in addition to using the FRAND tech, Apple uses non-FRAND stuff in "its i-branded products", then no.

On second thought, maybe you are right. Many of the patents should be covered by FRAND. But that is not the real question. The real question is whether ALL of the tech Apple copied from Samsung is covered by FRAND. If even one aspect of that tech is covered by a non-FRAND patent, Apple is in the wrong.

And none of us know the answer, one way or the other.

I wasn't sure about his agenda but when he said that one car manufacturer could copy another car manufacturer as closely as Samsung has copied Apple (GT 10.1 vs iPad 2) without repercussions, then I knew he was absolutely full of bullshit.

Look at the icon in that picture. It's not a Safari icon, but it's a very close duplicate of Apple's AppStore icon. So close that it takes a very close look to tell the difference.

Are you going to now pretend that there's only one way to make an application store icon?


What difference does it make? The app icons are the trademarked property of their creators. Samsung doesn't have the right to use them without permission.