Samsung designer says smartphone inspired by 'bowl of water,' not the iPhone

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
In an opposition filing on Friday, Samsung argued the Apple v. Samsung jury should hear testimony from Hyoung Shin Park, principal designer of the contested F700 smartphone that the company's attorneys want to use as proof of non-infringement on Apple's design patents.

Park, a senior designer at Samsung, gave testimony claiming the design patents for the F700 were applied for in December of 2006, well before the first public announcement of Apple's iPhone. Most important are the designer's statements regarding the handset's design inspiration, which she claims came from a bowl of water and not from any Apple patents.

According to Friday's filing, first reported by CNet, Park's testimony will explain that the F700's design features were borne out of function. The features include "a rectangular housing with four evenly-rounded corners, rounded edges on all four sides, a large, flat clear glass cover over the entire front face without ornamentation, a curved bezel that extends towards the back of the phone, an oblong speaker slot at the top of the front flat face, and a single optical jog button at the bottom of the front face."

Apple filed a motion to exclude Park's testimony as well as any testimony regarding the F700, and has thus far been somewhat successful with a court ruling stating the handset does not constitute prior art. The Court did say, however, that evidence pertaining to the F700 would be "admissible for other purposes, including to rebut an allegation of copying."

The Cupertino company's attorneys argued that testimony relating to issues of alternative design and funcitonality would be both a "waste of time" and "prejudicial," noting that Samsung already had a chance to present the F700 during cross-examination of Apple's expert witness Peter Bressler.

From Apple's motion to exclude:
Going into the creation history of an alternative design is clearly intended to skirt the Court?s previous rulings. Going into the design history of the F700 in particular is extremely prejudicial because the risk is high that the jury will consider the F700 as evidence of independent development, invalidity, or non-infringement regardless of whether or not Samsung encourages them to do so. In short, there is no permissible purpose for which Samsung can introduce Ms. Park?s testimony on the F700 that is admissible.
Samsung F700
Design patents for Samsung's F700 smartphone were applied for in 2006, before the original iPhone was announced.
Source: Apple v. Samsung court documents


Samsung countered by saying Park's testimony would not duplicate Bressler's, nor would it be a waste of time. The company goes further, pointing out that not allowing the Park testimony would "fundamentally undermine Samsung's functionality defense, as no other witness will offer the same testimony."

The F700 was recently associated with the "leaking" of excluded court evidence by Samsung regarding a Sony-styled iPhone. A statement accompanying the excluded demonstrative slides said, "The Judge?s exclusion of evidence on independent creation meant that even though Apple was allowed to inaccurately argue to the jury that the F700 was an iPhone copy, Samsung was not allowed to tell the jury the full story and show the pre-iPhone design for that and other phones that were in development at Samsung in 2006, before the iPhone."
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 73
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,306member
    I am searching for a funny comment about the design coming from a bowl of water but I simply can't ... Lies really are not funny I guess.
  • Reply 2 of 73


    Hyoung South Park? What?

  • Reply 3 of 73


    A bowl of water? Can Samsung get any more desperate to show it's not copying & ripping off Apple designs?

  • Reply 4 of 73
    nagrommenagromme Posts: 2,834member


    The F700 dumbphone is not mimicking Apple.


     


    But some post-iPhone Samsung smartphones and tablets ARE mimicking Apple, from the icons to the hardware details to the charger to the packaging. Some are REALLY close to the iPhone 3G, for instance, and not nearly as close to their own F700.


     


    The F700 stuff seems like a waste of time.


     


    I fully believe that the F700 design was inspired by something floating in a “bowl,” though.

  • Reply 5 of 73
    Was the bowl of water half empty or half full?
  • Reply 6 of 73
    jcallowsjcallows Posts: 142member


    she got her inspiration after hitting her head on a toilet bowl

  • Reply 7 of 73
    s_xps_xp Posts: 3member


    Yeah, someone left their iPhone next to a bowl of water and Mr Samsung copied what he saw in the reflection.

  • Reply 8 of 73
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,197member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    I am searching for a funny comment about the design coming from a bowl of water but I simply can't ... Lies really are not funny I guess.


     


    Perhaps something about "the design came to me as I sat in the lavatory"?

  • Reply 9 of 73
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,197member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by S_XP View Post


    Yeah, someone left their iPhone next to a bowl of water and Mr Samsung copied what he saw in the reflection.



     


    OK, that got the biggest laugh from me today. Hahaha... hee, hee...

  • Reply 10 of 73
    pendergastpendergast Posts: 1,358member
    The F700 looks very little like an iPhone, and is a completely different type of phone (slider). Later Samsung phones do, however, look a great deal like various iPhones.

    Samsung and their ilk like to make a straw man argument that "Apple can't patent a rectangle". Other smartphones are rectangular, yet they don't look like an iPhone any more than the F700.

    The phones that seem to be infringing go a step or three farther. They're not just rectangular; they're rectangular with a black face, a chrome bezel, similarly placed button(s), near identical icons and layout, near identical non-standard accessories, similar packaging, etc. It's the COMBINATION of all that that is the problem.
  • Reply 11 of 73
    Ah, I rember it well. The first time I dropped my iPhone into a bowel of water all I could see was a Samsung phone with my name on it.
  • Reply 12 of 73

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nagromme View Post


    The F700 dumbphone is not mimicking Apple.


     


    But some post-iPhone Samsung smartphones and tablets ARE mimicking Apple, from the icons to the hardware details to the charger to the packaging. Some are REALLY close to the iPhone 3G, for instance, and not nearly as close to their own F700.


     


    The F700 stuff seems like a waste of time.


     


     



     


    Which is why the court refused to allow Samsung to admit it as prior art

  • Reply 13 of 73
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,383member


    Uh oh, the half empty, half filled water.  Hack psychologists use that.


     


    I think that an engineer is going to use a bowl that is filled with water because water is cheap enough.


     


    But I am still trying to figure out why they simply just say that from the back of the phone it looks very much like the back of an iPhone 1st gen,  only a lot thicker.


     


    One thing about Apple product designs that become big sellers is that they are usually iconic, just like the early Motorola handsets that first came out were iconic during the 70's.  Boy did everyone that had one seem cool and important.  


     


    What I laugh about are the people that use cell phones to look like they are doing some important business deal, when in fact, all they are really doing is find out if they can hear someone through the bad cell connection.

  • Reply 14 of 73
    principal designer, AI......

    (As far as I can tell, the company has no principles).
  • Reply 15 of 73
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,306member
    drblank wrote: »
    Uh oh, the half empty, half filled water.  Hack psychologists use that.

    I think that an engineer is going to use a bowl that is filled with water because water is cheap enough.

    But I am still trying to figure out why they simply just say that from the back of the phone it looks very much like the back of an iPhone 1st gen,  only a lot thicker.

    One thing about Apple product designs that become big sellers is that they are usually iconic, just like the early Motorola handsets that first came out were iconic during the 70's.  Boy did everyone that had one seem cool and important.  

    What I laugh about are the people that use cell phones to look like they are doing some important business deal, when in fact, all they are really doing is find out if they can hear someone through the bad cell connection.

    Is meaningless rambling treatable I wonder?
  • Reply 16 of 73
    Is meaningless rambling treatable I wonder?

    Oh, don't mind him... he occasionally draws a blank... ;-)
  • Reply 17 of 73
    dimmokdimmok Posts: 359member


    Im confused.....Isnt the Android (Google) OS responsible for the way the icons look on all Android devices?? Not Samsung in reality??


     


    Confused in Wisconsin.

     

  • Reply 18 of 73
    pendergastpendergast Posts: 1,358member
    dimmok wrote: »
    Im confused.....Isnt the Android (Google) OS responsible for the way the icons look on all Android devices?? Not Samsung in reality??

    Confused in Wisconsin.

     

    Most android OEMs use a "skin" on top of Android, which in essence acts as an GUI on top of the normal OS. HTC has "Sense", Moto has "Motoblur", Samsung has "TouchWiz", etc. They all look different. While Android at one time looked a lot like iOS, over time it has diverged. Samsung, however, has designed TouchWiz to emulate iOS as much as possible, which is central to this case.

    You can see the difference in user interface between a TouchWiz device like the Galaxy S line and "vanilla" Android like the Galaxy Nexus (which doesn't have a skin).
  • Reply 19 of 73
    dimmokdimmok Posts: 359member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post





    Most android OEMs use a "skin" on top of Android, which in essence acts as an GUI on top of the normal OS. HTC has "Sense", Moto has "Motoblur", Samsung has "TouchWiz", etc. They all look different. While Android at one time looked a lot like iOS, over time it has diverged. Samsung, however, has designed TouchWiz to emulate iOS as much as possible, which is central to this case.

    You can see the difference in user interface between a TouchWiz device like the Galaxy S line and "vanilla" Android like the Galaxy Nexus (which doesn't have a skin).




    Thanks! Great info. Now it makes sense to me.....

  • Reply 20 of 73
    xrcxxrcx Posts: 117member


    It was probably the reflection of an iphone in that bowl of water that inspired her.

Sign In or Register to comment.