or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Designer says Samsung designs "substantially the same" as Apple's
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Designer says Samsung designs "substantially the same" as Apple's

post #1 of 114
Thread Starter 
Apple on Monday brought its first expert witness to the stand in Peter Bressler, who claimed Samsung's designs were "substantially the same" as Apple's, but faltered when cross-examined by the South Korean company's lawyers.

In his testimony Bressler, founder of design firm Bresslergroup, walked the jury through the designs of numerous Samsung smartphones and tablets in an attempt to illustrate their similarities with Apple's asserted patents.

As noted by CNet, Bressler alleged that Samsung infringes on a number of Apple patents.

"My opinion (is) that there are a number of Samsung phones and two Samsung tablets that are substantially the same as the design in those (Apple) patents," Bressler said. He went on to argue the designs are so similar that a consumer could confuse a Samsung product with an Apple device, a theory suggested by a Samsung study of Best Buy customers.

During cross-examination by Samsung lawyer Charles Verhoeven, however, Bressler admitted that he hadn't witnessed customers mistakenly purchase the Galaxy maker's products. The expert was also grilled over the minutiae in design elements between the two companies' devices, and at one point said, "you're asking me to compare peanut butter and turkey." Verhoeven quickly asked which design was which food, to which Bressler replied, "this is a level of detail that the ordinary observer would never be interested in looking at."

Bressler Testimony
Comparison of Apple and Samsung devices. | Source: Apple v. Samsung court documents


Further questioning saw Samsung asserting prior art claims regarding the iPhone's front face which prompted Bressler to note the comparison was an improper analysis of the design patents. He said that all eight illustrations should be used when examining prior art instead of the one view Samsung was comparing against, notes The Verge.

Bressler claims the standard way of looking at patents is to take the design as a whole rather than dissecting it into small parts.

"I believe the ordinary observer should be getting an overall impression of what the design of the phone is," Bressler said. "I don't believe they should be examining teeny details the way you're doing."

Apple v. Samsung will continue on Tuesday with more testimony from Bressler and Apple expert witness Susan Kare, former Creative Director at NeXT and contributor to the first Mac's graphical elements.
post #2 of 114
As the world turns
post #3 of 114
So much for the idiotic samsung lawyers theory
post #4 of 114

Those before and after pictures are really killer. The iPhone one is good too.

 

It's plain to see that they are "substantially the same." The only defence Samsung could use it to say, "Yes it's the same, but that's the only way to do it." But clearly that is not the only way, as their own previous designs show.

post #5 of 114

Its interesting AI doesn't comment on Samsungs line of questioning Brenner about his reimbursement by apple for his involvement in this case.

 

Either way, does Samsung use other tablets as their prior art, where as apple only use Samsung UMPC.  Did samsung actually ever make a XP tablet edition product?

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #6 of 114

I will say whatever Apple wants me to say if they pay me 75,000. Buying off witness and call him a designer?!?!?!?!?!?

post #7 of 114

Nice first post. But do you have any proof the guy isn't telling the truth?

Why exactly are you here other than to slag Apple?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fairness View Post

I will say whatever Apple wants me to say if they pay me 75,000. Buying off witness and call him a designer?!?!?!?!?!?

post #8 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

Its interesting AI doesn't comment on Samsungs line of questioning Brenner about his reimbursement by apple for his involvement in this case.

It's likely not worth mentioning. It is fairly standard practice on cross-examination to inquire into an expert's compensation for his testimony. Experts are paid for their testimony, that is neither new nor surprising, but that does not mean attorneys don't love to imply bias in front of the jury by dredging up that fact on cross.
post #9 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

Its interesting AI doesn't comment on Samsungs line of questioning Brenner about his reimbursement by apple for his involvement in this case.

 

Considering most viewers of AppleInsider are able to view the rest of the Internet as well, I'm a little unsure what your point is... 

Apple Products: So good that their ‘faulty' products outsell competitor’s faultless ones...
Reply
Apple Products: So good that their ‘faulty' products outsell competitor’s faultless ones...
Reply
post #10 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zyniker View Post


It's likely not worth mentioning. It is fairly standard practice on cross-examination to inquire into an expert's compensation for his testimony. Experts are paid for their testimony, that is neither new nor surprising, but that does not mean attorneys don't love to imply bias in front of the jury by dredging up that fact on cross.

 

It was worth mentioning, as that is the angle that Samsung was using as a foil.


For AI to ignore that completely, and frame him solely as a design expert, is disingenuous.  

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #11 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

 

It was worth mentioning, as that is the angle that Samsung was using as a foil.


For AI to ignore that completely, and frame him solely as a design expert, is disingenuous.  

 

I think it's quite reasonable to assume that any Expert Witness will most likely be compensated as part of the arrangement by which they appear at the Court. They're not first-hand parties to the case, therefore they have been contracted to provide their expert opinion by one side or another. If you read the term 'expert witness' you can assume they're paid but that doesn't mean they're biased on account of and because of that payment (which would be perjury anyway if they were).

post #12 of 114
Ridiculed paid hack, next.
post #13 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

So much for the idiotic samsung lawyers theory

It's all in the details!

They have the Big Mac, I have the Big Mic. They have sesame seed buns. Mine have no seeds...

The average consumer wouldn't fret these little details... You're asking me what?... Of course they taste the same! The hamburger is a form led by the industry!

What does it matter if my buns are square or have rounded corners!?!
post #14 of 114

2006

Samsung Picture Frame

700

 

 

2010

Apple iPad

 

700

 

:|

post #15 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by CogitoDexter View Post

 

I think it's quite reasonable to assume that any Expert Witness will most likely be compensated as part of the arrangement by which they appear at the Court. They're not first-hand parties to the case, therefore they have been contracted to provide their expert opinion by one side or another. If you read the term 'expert witness' you can assume they're paid but that doesn't mean they're biased on account of and because of that payment (which would be perjury anyway if they were).

I do not care if he is reimbursed.


Its disingenuous for AppleInsider to ignore that, when it was a major part of the oppositions cross examination

Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #16 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

I do not care if he is reimbursed.


Its disingenuous for AppleInsider to ignore that, when it was a major part of the oppositions cross examination

 

Appleinsider also neglected to mention that Samsung's attorney is receiving monetary compensation. So is Apple's counsel. And so is the judge. For that matter, so are the jurors.

post #17 of 114

700

700

 

 

J. Ive, Dieter Rams wants his designs back.

post #18 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

Its interesting AI doesn't comment on Samsungs line of questioning Brenner about his reimbursement by apple for his involvement in this case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fairness View Post

I will say whatever Apple wants me to say if they pay me 75,000. Buying off witness and call him a designer?!?!?!?!?!?

Irrelevant. Expert witnesses are almost always compensated by one side (in a few cases, both sides pay, but that's quite rare). It does not negate the testimony in any way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

It was worth mentioning, as that is the angle that Samsung was using as a foil.

For AI to ignore that completely, and frame him solely as a design expert, is disingenuous.  

AI ignored a lot of irrelevant details - like what color the guy's shirt was, what he had for breakfast that morning, and the bra size of his wife.

It's standard practice for the attorneys to bring it up and it's standard practice for everyone else to ignore it because it's meaningless. If they attorneys were able to demonstrate that the expert's opinion were invalid, they would have to do that directly. Simply taking money from one side doesn't prove it.

Of course, if they did what you are suggesting, then you'd have to invalidate most of Samsung's defense since Samsung employees are receiving money from Samsung. Apple is backing up their opinion with documents and photographs while Samsung is simply saying "that's not what happened". I guess we should not let them speak since they're biased, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoPM View Post

Spot on.
This case needs to be handled by an international court!
There is absolutely no doubt that this biased bitch koh is going to hand Crapple the "victory".
South Korea 5ting!

Your evidence that she's biased? In fact, she's been quite tolerant of Samsung's blatant violations of her orders. She could have essentially awarded Apple the victory already due to Samsung's jury tampering, but chose not to.

And why would an international court handle a U.S. patent case? Since when did the U.S. cede domestic affairs to an international court?

And why did you sign up simply to spew anti-Apple garbage when you clearly have no understanding of legal realities?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #19 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric475 View Post





J. Ive, Dieter Rams wants his designs back.
Explain for me how those devices look anything alike? I'm sure not seeing it.
post #20 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Explain for me how those devices look anything alike? I'm sure not seeing it.

 

I think the rectangular shape with semi-rounded edges is self-explained and self-expressed in the photos.

post #21 of 114

I honestly believe that in the long run, it's Apple who will win most of the patent lawsuits that actually matter. No matter what those lawyers say, there's no way  that a judge is going to ignore the plain clear fact (that you can clearly see in the photos even with zero knowledge about the matter) that Samsung is in some way too heavily inspired by Apple's design choices.

post #22 of 114
OK, I have a serious question. If Samsung can be sued for design infringement, then why don't refrigerator, microwave, washing machine/dryer, vacuum cleaner, DVD/Blu-ray player, TV manufacturers, etc. sue each other into oblivion for similar designs?
post #23 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Your evidence that she's biased? In fact, she's been quite tolerant of Samsung's blatant violations of her orders. She could have essentially awarded Apple the victory already due to Samsung's jury tampering, but chose not to.

 

Because then her bias would have been too obvious. Fear not, she will award Apple the victory soon enough.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

And why would an international court handle a U.S. patent case? Since when did the U.S. cede domestic affairs to an international court?

 

Because Samsung is not a US company (yes, companies do exist outside of the country of god and guns).

It is clear the Samsung cannot expect fairness in the current US.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


... when you clearly have no understanding of legal realities?

 

We might not know the details of US "law", but we know unfairness and racial bias when we see it!

 

South Korea 5ting!

post #24 of 114

I think that's because that particular industry doesn't really seem to care. They knów that it happens, but they all need it in order to sell a reasonable amount of devices. And the high-end brands that have their designs copied don't care because they have very different types of clients.

 

Besides, their technology is also very patented and probably heavily licensed :)

post #25 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric475 View Post

I think the rectangular shape with semi-rounded edges is self-explained and self-expressed in the photos.
Very poor attempt at trolling. Sorry.
post #26 of 114

Is it just me or does the question asking whether the design expert had actually witnessed anyone mistakenly purchasing the Samsung product thinking it was an Apple product objectionable? The witness is not an expert in the observation of retail point of purchase habits, but an expert on design. Yes I see that may be the crux o the matter, whether the design similarity has actually in fact led to any confusion on the part of the consumer, but this witness might never have had an opportunity to witness first hand any one purchasing wither device. 

 

That is like asking a structural engineer their assessment of the ability of a structure to withstand (fill in some natural disaster here) and then to follow up by asking him whether or not he has personally witnessed a building collapse under the conditions he described. You don't need to have lived through a first hand earthquake for example to calculate the impact such an event would have on a structure. 

 

Maybe what they should do is take everyone in the court house and run them through a test where each product flashed briefly on a screen and they have to push a button indicating whether it was a Samsung product or an Apple product on screen and then count up how many people got it wrong and how long they hesitate while trying to decide. Studies like that are done all the time to measure lots of things so should not be hard to do.

post #27 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Very poor attempt at trolling. Sorry.

 

If you only want to see what you want then be my guest. Just because we disagree on the photo makes me a troll, huh? Really?

post #28 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

OK, I have a serious question. If Samsung can be sued for design infringement, then why don't refrigerator, microwave, washing machine/dryer, vacuum cleaner, DVD/Blu-ray player, TV manufacturers, etc. sue each other into oblivion for similar designs?

Because none of those manufacturers have design patents that are as detailed as Apple's. Furthermore, none of them revolutionized their industry the way that Apple did. For refrigerators, microwaves, etc, they really DID get to the current design via a natural progression - or at least everyone thought so and never bothered to patent their designs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post

Is it just me or does the question asking whether the design expert had actually witnessed anyone mistakenly purchasing the Samsung product thinking it was an Apple product objectionable? The witness is not an expert in the observation of retail point of purchase habits, but an expert on design. Yes I see that may be the crux o the matter, whether the design similarity has actually in fact led to any confusion on the part of the consumer, but this witness might never have had an opportunity to witness first hand any one purchasing wither device. 

An expert must be certified as an expert to be able toe express an OPINION. Anyone (expert or not) can state facts that they observed. It is certainly allowable to ask someone what they've observed. Of course, Apple could then ask him how much time he spent hanging around the cash registers of big box stores to show that even if people were mis-buying Samsung products every day he probably wouldn't have seen it.

It's really a moot point. Samsung's own documents state that the #1 reason for returns of their products at Best Buy was because people thought they were buying an iDevice and bought Samsung instead. That's going to carry a lot more weight than someone who probably doesn't hang out at Best Buy's cash register - and even if he did, the consumers didn't realize their error until they got home.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #29 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Furthermore, none of them revolutionized their industry the way that Apple did.

 

LOL

post #30 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


... was because people thought they were buying an iDevice and bought Samsung instead. That's going to carry a lot more weight than someone who probably doesn't hang out at Best Buy's cash register - and even if he did, the consumers didn't realize their error until they got home.

 

These consumer must be really dumb (if the whole thing is not a lie by Applekoh) -- they must be Americans.

post #31 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric475 View Post

700

700

 

 

J. Ive, Dieter Rams wants his designs back.

 

What...?

Apple Products: So good that their ‘faulty' products outsell competitor’s faultless ones...
Reply
Apple Products: So good that their ‘faulty' products outsell competitor’s faultless ones...
Reply
post #32 of 114

Samsung went from geek to sheik after the iPad came out. Their tablet attempt looked like a large Sony PSP (Probably copied that too), and their phone was a complete abomination. Based on these pictures, I can't believe they are even having a trial. Guilty as charged. Let's move on.
 

post #33 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoPM View Post

 

These consumer must be really dumb (if the whole thing is not a lie by Applekoh) -- they must be Americans.

 

It's easy to underestimate what Americans will say to exchange a product and save face. Look up the kind of things Walmart accepts as returns.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrodriguez View Post

2006

Samsung Picture Frame

700

 

 

2010

Apple iPad

 

700

 

:|

 

Digital Picture frames, have Flat Panel computer monitors as prior art, which those in turn have CRT flat screens as prior art. Digital Photo frames, and most computer screens aren't touch screen devices. Some later picture frame and televisions(not computer monitors) are WiFi enabled. But these devices are not something you stick in your pocket, nor are they battery operated. There are design compromises you make if a device is going to sit on top of the fire place than you would for something that you'd use to read in your bed. The backs of photo frames and televisions are often boxy plastic things.

post #34 of 114
Well according to CNET it was malfunction, not iPad confusion that caused people to return their Galaxy Tabs. Is that supposed to make Samsung feel better? It's not that your tablet is a ripoff it's that it sucks. lol.gif

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57487895-37/malfunction-not-ipad-played-greater-role-in-galaxy-returns/
post #35 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

 

What...?

What?

post #36 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric475 View Post

I think the rectangular shape with semi-rounded edges is self-explained and self-expressed in the photos.


On one angle under a certain lighting they look similar the way a cloud can look like Snoopy but they are copying Rams's designs. They aren't even the same devices, competing for sale, or even in the same millennium. It's amazing the straws you'll grasp at.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #37 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric475 View Post

700

700

 

 

J. Ive, Dieter Rams wants his designs back.

 

Did he misplace them?

 

Ask him to look under the carpet as well.

post #38 of 114

There's a difference between inspiration and blatant copying. 

post #39 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

OK, I have a serious question. If Samsung can be sued for design infringement, then why don't refrigerator, microwave, washing machine/dryer, vacuum cleaner, DVD/Blu-ray player, TV manufacturers, etc. sue each other into oblivion for similar designs?

 

My take on this would be this:

 

Most Fridges are nearly the same for a long time.


Apple invents a Fridge that's a perfect sphere that opens into two hemispheres.  Food stays fresher, longer, is easier to find, uses less energy, has more recycled content, looks great in the kitchen, and revolutionizes kitchen design as builders incorporate this new round element.


Same old market, but totally revolutionized, with impacts into other markets (like home design).  Apple "steals great ideas" as they say they do by considering all angles of every aspect of everything "Fridge", but in the end makes something in total that no one else has done.

 

They patent the sphere, the left-right nature of the storage, the space-savings, etc etc.


Then Samsung makes their new sphere-Fridge, with nearly the same choice of exterior metals, handles, power-cords, etc (but all sort of cheaper and lousy-er).

 

The rest is obvious....

post #40 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


On one angle under a certain lighting they look similar the way a cloud can look like Snoopy but they are copying Rams's designs. They aren't even the same devices, competing for sale, or even in the same millennium. It's amazing the straws you'll grasp at.

It's amazing that you're able to discount these designs when Ive has said otherwise.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Designer says Samsung designs "substantially the same" as Apple's