Apple attorney: Instead of innovating, Samsung chose to copy iPhone and iPad

“An attorney for Apple told a jury Tuesday that rival Samsung faced two options to compete in the booming cellphone market after Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone to critical acclaim in 2007: Innovate or copy,” Paul Elias reports for The Associated Press.

“Attorney Harold McElhinny claimed Samsung Electronics Inc. chose to copy, making its smartphones and computer tablets illegal knockoffs of Apple’s popular products,” Elias reports. “Samsung ‘has copied the entire design and user experience’ of Apple’s iPhone and iPad,” McElhinny told a 10-person jury during his opening remarks at the closely watched patent trial.”

Elias reports, “Cupertino-based Apple filed its lawsuit against Samsung last year and is demanding $2.5 billion in damages, an award that would dwarf the largest patent-related verdict to date… ‘In some sense, the big part of the case is not Apple’s demands for damages but whether Samsung gets to sell its products,’ said Mark A. Lemley, a professor and director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science, and Technology. A verdict in Apple’s favor could send a message to consumers that Android-based products such as Samsung’s are in legal jeopardy, Lemley said.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Apple’s products came first, then Samsung’s:

Samsung Galaxy and Galaxy Tab Trade Dress Infringement

Here’s what Google’s Android looked like before and after Apple’s iPhone:

Google Android before and after Apple iPhone

Related articles:
Apple aims for total war, salted earth in Samsung patent infringement fight – July 31, 2012
Apple-Samsung jury picked to decide U.S. patent trial; Google engineer fails to make final cut – July 30, 2012
Samsung exec whines: Apple’s trying to patent the rectangle! – July 30, 2012
Apple: Google warned Samsung against slavishly copying our products – July 25, 2012
Apple v. Samsung jury to learn of Samsung’s destruction of relevant evidence – July 25, 2012
Now Samsung slavishly copies Apple’s Mac mini – June 1, 2012
Samsung Mobile chief ‘designer’ denies that Samsung’s instinct is to slavishly copy Apple – March 23, 2012
Slavish copier Samsung shamelessly steals Apple’s iPhone 3G design – again – January 3, 2012
Slavish copier Samsung uses girl actress from iPhone 4S ad for Galaxy Tab 8.9 spot (with video) – January 2, 2012
Now Samsung’s slavishly copying Apple’s iPad television ads (with videos) – December 30, 2011
Judge: Can you tell me which is iPad and which is yours? Samsung lawyer: ‘Not at this distance your honor’ – October 14, 2011
Why are Apple’s icons on the wall of Samsung’s store? – September 24, 2011
Apple to Samsung: ‘Blatant copying is wrong’ – April 18, 2011
Apple sues Samsung for attempting to copy look and feel of iPhone, iPad – April 18, 2011
Samsung’s ‘Instinct’ is obviously to make Apple iPhone knockoffs – April 1, 2008

23 Comments

  1. its not a patent law case

    it is a copyright and trademark case

    patents are systems or drugs or inventions

    copyright for products is look, design, etc.

    not a clear cut scenario

    yes, samsung did copy apple – but are they legally allowed to ape Apple’s designs into a product of their own?

    frankly, surprised to see this go so far

    there are cars that look similar but you don’t see them suing each other over design cues

    the public and frankly snobness knows who made the design of any particular product first and that product retains the cache no matter who copies in anyways

    1. No, actually autos follow a design theme. They do not copy. If you build a auto that is a near copy to Mercedes, BMW, or Caddy, the companies would be all over that company. Autos are themed and retain the image that allows consumers to identify the. Company. BMW has a look that you can identify it from any angle. N

      1. You nailed it. I recall in the 60s or so some outfit made custom fiberglass front ends that fit the VW Beetle. These were tooled to very closely resemble Rolls and Mercedes front ends. They were quickly put out of business.

    2. Damn publish button. No company of premiumn products want direct -or near direct- copies of their products. Would BMW be happy with an inexpensive knockoff of their three series? It would hurt the profit and the appeal of that vehicle. This is exactly what Apple stated and continues to state. They produce a product that represents Apple that people can easily identify with and is/was in 2007 to date. Apple informed Samsung, Google, and others that innovation is good, just make your different so it is not easily identify as a Apple design. As in auto will and does carry over in electronics. Let Apple do a near drift copy of a Samsung product and see what happens. A company should make it own design theme so you know who made it just like autos.

      1. Jeep and whoever owned Jeep at the time filed against GM for making the first Hummer front end look like a Jeep.

        I’m pretty sure GM made some cosmetic changes to the Hummer.

        1. Yes, I do recall that. Also Ferrari would often start legal action against kit car companies that copy their look. One was called the Warlock and the based car was the Fiero. Seven were made for the James Bond movie- yellow in color.

  2. “there are cars that look similar but you don’t see them suing each other over design cues”
    True — but you would if one car maker copied another right down to the square inch — such as having a green phone icon, with the phone in white going from top left to bottom right.

  3. I want Samsung to get what they have coming to them for the copying of Apple they have done, now I get the feeling that no matter the outcome, the judge won’t give Apple a ban on Samsung products and will give Samsung a large and painful slap on the wrist. Samsung has come out with great stuff before, so I don’t understand why they took Apple’s designs to back closet, shut the door and wrote down everything could, and put it back on the shelf. I guess they thought that because they were building the parts for the iPhone and iPad, they thought they were entitled to the designs as well.

  4. That is BS. I hhave a freind that bought thos RR front ends for VWs. He made about a hundred of them over the years for a lot of folks. There was never a suit. No one in their right mind would confuse a beetle with a big ass chrome grill for an actual 25 ft long RR. I am pretty sure RR enjoyed that every time someone saw one of those funky beetles they
    thought about the name RR. You can still buy them by the way.

Add Your Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.