Samsung takes excluded evidence to the media, gets reprimanded
Samsung was dressed down in court on Tuesday after the company leaked evidence excluded from the proceedings to media outlets and issued an out-of-court statement saying the exhibits "would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design."
The comment refers to the exclusion of a deposition taken from former Apple designer Shin Nishibori which outlined a conversation he had with the company's Senior Vice President of Industrial Design Jonathan Ive over what an iPhone would look like if it were made by Sony, reports PC Magazine.
"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," Samsung said in a statement. "The excluded evidence would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design. Fundamental fairness requires that the jury decide the case based on all the evidence."
In a follow-up report from CNet, presiding Judge Lucy Koh was made aware of the evidence leak by Apple attorneys and ordered Samsung to file a brief explaining who wrote the statement and who green-lit its dissemination. The judge was reportedly "audibly irritated."
AppleInsider first discovered Samsung's "Sony-styled" iPhone evidence when the company presented its trial brief last Friday, but the design and deposition were ultimately excluded from the trial.
From Nishibori's deposition in May:
According to Financial Times reporter Tim Bradshaw, who tweeted the court proceedings on Tuesday, Samsung argued that Apple didn't invent the rectangular screen, a view most recently asserted by the company's Chief Product Officer Kevin Packingham.
While Apple argued the iPhone "changed phones forever" during its opening statement, the Galaxy maker noted Samsung parts account for some 26 percent of an iPhone and asked, "who's the real innovator?"
The comment refers to the exclusion of a deposition taken from former Apple designer Shin Nishibori which outlined a conversation he had with the company's Senior Vice President of Industrial Design Jonathan Ive over what an iPhone would look like if it were made by Sony, reports PC Magazine.
"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," Samsung said in a statement. "The excluded evidence would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design. Fundamental fairness requires that the jury decide the case based on all the evidence."
In a follow-up report from CNet, presiding Judge Lucy Koh was made aware of the evidence leak by Apple attorneys and ordered Samsung to file a brief explaining who wrote the statement and who green-lit its dissemination. The judge was reportedly "audibly irritated."
AppleInsider first discovered Samsung's "Sony-styled" iPhone evidence when the company presented its trial brief last Friday, but the design and deposition were ultimately excluded from the trial.
From Nishibori's deposition in May:
Samsung is not allowed to bring up the prototype or associated arguments during the trial.First, Jonathan Ive talked to me. "Well, Shin, I have something to talk to you about." He said, "You can do this as an aside of your job and enjoy - I want you to enjoy doing this. But if Sony were to make a iPhone, what would it be like? Would you make it for me?"
According to Financial Times reporter Tim Bradshaw, who tweeted the court proceedings on Tuesday, Samsung argued that Apple didn't invent the rectangular screen, a view most recently asserted by the company's Chief Product Officer Kevin Packingham.
While Apple argued the iPhone "changed phones forever" during its opening statement, the Galaxy maker noted Samsung parts account for some 26 percent of an iPhone and asked, "who's the real innovator?"
Comments
Finally! This case has made it to trial. Where’s my popcorn?
And rightfully so.
Samsung is accused of copying Apple's design and violating Apple's patents. The issue of where Apple got the idea is totally irrelevant. Either Samsung is guilty or they're not - regardless of the source of Apple's inspiration.
And what's with these guys? One court tells them to stop destroying evidence before a case - yet they do it anyway in the Apple case.
Now, a judge tells them not to release information and they do it anyway.
Do they really think they're above the law?
No one is begrudging Samsung for saying "How can we out Apple Apple?" So far I've seen nothing that indicates that Apple stole Sony's IP to create the iPhone.
Samsung is ridiculous, destroying documents and leaking court info. Are they trying to lose? How unethical. Obviously something to hide.
Does Apple?
Because they certainly behave like it by twisting and manipulating the rules to the very fringes of legality at times.
Either way... Hopefully this will put and end to all of this seemingly anti-competitive nonsense.
Truly an unbelievably arrogant company. Can't believe they think they can get away with things like this in the US.
/shakes head
Out Apple Apple?
What does that even mean?
the Galaxy maker noted Samsung parts account for some 26 percent of an iPhone and asked, "who's the real innovator?"
What about the people who made the screws, plastic, metal and glass? That has to account for over 50% of the phone. Technically, Apple doesn't even own the iPhone.
And for Samsung, what about all the miners who dug up all that rare earth elements that makes up Samsung's electronics, "who's the real innovator?". It's the miners! The Chinese miners are the real innovators for every electronic device ever created.
In all seriousness, who writes this stuff for Samsung?
The only thing that I hope it puts an end to is posts like these from you and your type.
But given how recalcitrant you are, I am not holding my breath.
This is clearly a case of Contempt of Court. You can go to prison for that - indefinitely. Someone should too, Samsung have been playing this case (and others) in the media to poison the public against Apple and for Samsung. I hope the Judge smacks them down - hard.
Why don't you explain what Apple has done that's the equivalent of violating a direct order from a judge - not once, but twice?
To out do Apple at their own game.
Um, still Apple. You had these parts and still had to copy. That is like a steel mill saying "Steel makes up 26% of {insert car company here}, who is the real innovator?"
That's the law game. To quote the movie Training Day, "it's not what you know it's what you can prove."
I guess I still have no idea what that means: what 'game' is Apple playing that Samsung is trying to emulate?
PS: Not at all trying to be obtuse or clever.
Not quite. Its more like mazda throwing a Ford engine, transmission and Ecu into a car and calling it theirs. Raw material vs Engineered Microcontrollers, circuits. Big difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbansprawl
Saying IF Sony made an iPhone, what would it look like is saying if Sony made something which they in fact had never made. Therefore, there's no copying a non-existent product.
Well, it's even worse than that. By that point in the middle of the last decade, Apple already had iPhone designs which looked a lot like what would eventually become the iPhone 4 - the rounded corners, flat front and back, bezel size, home button, side switches, the works. It appears one of their designers then decided to conduct a thought-experiment, "What would this design look like in Sony drag (circa 1983)." So they added a few old skool Sony-styled buttons and switches to it, and that little Sony-esque knob.
None of which I might add ever made it into either the original iPhone, the iPhone 3G or the iPhone 4.
So it's hard to see what if anything this has to do with Samdung's fairly obvious copies of the original iPhone's design. Apple's old iPhone prototype done up in Sony drag is completely irrelevant to the case. Sammy copied the first released version of the iPhone, which is completely different from those earlier iPhone 4-esque prototypes, and neither the original iPhone nor the iPhone 4 shared any of the unique design elements from the Sony-decorated prototype.
Now, the funny / tragic thing is, the Sony-blinged iPhone design not only looks better than any phone Sony has ever actually released, it looks more like a classic, well-designed Sony product than anything the entire company has produced in about two decades. Which probably explains why Sony is circling the drain while Apple is one of the most valuable companies on earth...
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbansprawl
Saying IF Sony made an iPhone, what would it look like is saying if Sony made something which they in fact had never made. Therefore, there's no copying a non-existent product.
Samsung is ridiculous, destroying documents and leaking court info. Are they trying to lose? How unethical. Obviously something to hide.
Indeed. These kind of design exercises are common. If Ishiburi worked on Ive's team it would be completely typical for him to assign such a project. "Design this, but in the style of that" etc.
This is excellent evidence to the effect that Samsung doesn't actually "design" things in the same way. They take what they see in the market, try to copy the parts that seem to work the best and roll all those, (or as many as they can), into their product. That isn't design. It isn't a proper design process.