You may have heard, Apple is suing Samsung for copying their design. And on the one hand, I do think that that the Samsung Galaxy S looks remarkably like the iPhone 3GS. Infact I have said to people, when they've asked me what phone to get, "The GalaxyS is very much like a Desire, but looks just like an iPhone 3GS". But that was a way of saying "it's a very plain looking minimalist black phone", which is different from the Desire and other phones which have cool things like optical track pads and rugged countered bodies. I wasn't saying, "It's the same materials, angles, size, aspect, and has got the Apple Logo on the back", because I don't believe any of that is true. Still... they do look very very much alike so that's a maybe.
The lawsuit though also includes the Galaxy Tab's, which apparently looks identical to an iPad. This, is stretching it a bit. Sure, they do look a *bit* alike... in that they're... well.. panels. HTC phones have a distinct look from the iPhone, the Desire is case in point, and since HTC well pre-date Apple with the whole touchscreen phone thing, the idea of having a flat phone with a touchscreen covering the whole of the front... can't said to be copied from Apple. Yet if the Desire was all one colour... and that colour was black... with a bit of chrome here and there... the HTC Desire would look as much like the iPhone as the GalaxyS. So... have Samsung and Apple both copied form HTC's 90's evolutions? Maybe... maybe... but I think not. I think in fact, it's probably, to anyone but Apple, quite obvious that you cannot claim to have invented the design of 'a rectangular shape with rounded corners', because if you can, 'etch a sketch' would like a word with you Apple. Nor could anyone possibly claim to have invented 'square icons with various colours and rounded edges' (yes, they've included the icon menu in the suit too).
It's also fairly unlikely that anyone accidentally confused a GalaxyS for an iPhone and bought the former by mistake. Everyone who bought the GalaxyS will tell you their reason quite happily - the iPhone is far far to overpriced and the Android alternatives are just as good. IE, if the GalaxyS didn't exist, HTC would just have sold more Desire's and Desire HD's.
The tech press I feel have been a bit biased with their photo imagery. They've used shots like this to show how the 3GS UI is identical to the iPhone's:
And of course... they do look very much alike eh? The only thing is... while that's the iPhones main (and only) interface, the one you're seeing on the Samsung is not its' main screen. In fact on Android, you don't go scrolling through pages and pages of Apps anywhere near as often as on an iPhone - the App Tray is essentially an Options menu for your main screen, where you're picking out of it what you'd like to drop into your main Interface. This would be a more accurate depiction of the GalaxyS's User interface:
But strangely none of the tech press have chosen this, the default view for this phone, as the image to make the comparison against.Worse with the Galaxy Tab though - the photos of the hour are along these lines:
That's a very creative way of hiding the size and aspect difference of the two tablets, also neatly omitting that from every angle but the front, which for *all* tablets *must* be a rectangular screen with a bezel, so how different is it likely to be beyond the buttons (which are different) and the presence of more things (like the camera that the Tab has)?
Also with the power of Photoshop, other reporters haven't even attempted to be creative to hide the differences:
Anyway.. the tab is of course much smaller, a different aspect ratio, has flat edges, different buttons and ports, a prominent rear camera (this was before the iPad2), so if they're not claiming their very specific design depends on on any of those aspects... we really are saying *any* rounded cornered rectangle.So, if Apple are successful in this legal action, they'll be able to go on to sue anyone using rounded rectangles. Ikea are screwed (possibly using a helpfully uniformed allen key), and homeowners everywhere should rush the square off the edges of their tables and place mats - rounded square mats on a rounded square oblong! Are you mad! It's like you're asking to be sued!
And let us not leave out the most obvious of offenders in what is *clearly* a shape/form owned by Apple, the slate board. Once a staple classroom tool of British and American classrooms, it is clear to me that since these 'obvious cheap copies' of the iPad iconic design (which is totally origin and fresh and the origin of its own shape) act in no way as proof that the simplistic design in question is simply just an obvious and functional form, that *all* developments and business growth that has come about since the establishment of schools, now owes Apple a portion of all earnings made since.
I mean look at them! All rectangular and panelled. Look that bevel around the edge. The OS let's it's down of course - that's how you can tell it's a copy. And the build is lower quality, but it's pretty obvious who they're trying to look like. Disgusting. But what a compliment to Apple eh? So iconic and fresh are their designs, far beyond they were even founded, governments hired mystic sages to peer into the future at what I'm sure would be great expense to peer at the shapes of their devices and relay it back to their paymasters for duplication. Incredible effort - what flattery.
Now Apple don't limit themselves to one legal case at a time of course, and in the interest of fairness, the other one they've started recently week is against iHub. See *this* is a valid case. A company is selling a USB hub with the Apple logo on it and... umm.. no... that's it - it's just got an Apple logo on, selling on the basis that some people might be persuaded to buy something simply because people will be able to see it's got an Apple logo on it.
The key point is - they're using the Apple Trade Marked logo, purposefully attempting to deceive the consumer into thinking this product is associated with or made by Apple. If that were a full apple, there'd be no case here either - you can't copyright clear packaging, the letter 'i' (especially if you weren't the first to use it in the Apple tradition), or a rounded square. As nice as it looks, and as much as we associate Apple with 'looking nice', they can't sue anyone for also 'looking nice'. So if Samsung ever make a phone bearing an Apple with a bite taken out of it - Apple have a case to make. Until then, don't be silly!__
Phil
Read. Comment. Subscribe.
