Print 50 comment(s) - last by koli.. on Aug 24 at 4:23 AM

Apple has creatively doctored another photo to try to make Samsung look guilty of design patent infringement.  (Source: Apple via IDG)

Apple CEO Steve Jobs says his company is a master of stealing ideas. Apparently it's also becoming masters of using Photoshop to provide potentially perjurous doctored exhibits in court.  (Source: Sydney Morning Herald)

Using doctored images, Apple succeeded in convincing a German judge to ban sales of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany.  (Source: HiTech)
You're viewing it wrong!

Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL) chief executive and co-founder, Steven P. Jobs has bragged about his mastery of stealing ideas from others, stating [video], "Picasso had a saying - 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."

I. Apple Alters Reality With Photoshop

But stealing other competitors' ideas isn't the only thing Apple is good at.  Of late it's shown itself to be a burgeoning master of Photoshop.  It was caught in Germany doctoring images (playing with perspectives and stretching pictures) to make its competitor's product look like its own.

Now Apple has been caught yet again engaging in egregious editing images -- quite literally "stretching the truth" -- in the Netherlands.

The Netherlands court filing came as part of Apple's legal crusade [1][2][3][4][5] against Google Inc. (GOOG) and its hardware partners.  Unable to compete against Google's Android operating system on the free market, Apple has come up with the creative solution of trying to use lawsuits to remove Google from the market altogether.

In this particular case, Apple's victim was Samsung Electronics Comp, Ltd. (SEO 005930).  Apple accused Samsung of "slavishly" copying the iPhone 4.  It sued trying to ban Samsung's widely successful Galaxy S smart phone family from the market in the Netherlands.

But it appears, in reality, that it was Apple who was "slavishly" copying and pasting the Galaxy S into Photoshop.  The Galaxy S is a bit larger than the iPhone 4 (122.4 by 64.2 mm) and looked decidedly different, so Apple had its work cut out for it in order convince a judge that the phone was "copying" the iPhone's patented look -- a key claim in its case.

So it shrunk the Galaxy S down to iPhone size -- 115.5 by 62.1 mm.  It also cherry-picked an image of the iPhone 3G, a defunct model it has not produced since 2009, as that model had more rounded edges -- like the Galaxy S -- and unlike Apple's current production iPhone (the iPhone 4).

A careful read would reveal flaws in the visual exhibit -- Apple did at least admit in the text, that the Galaxy S has "some non-identical elements, such as the slightly larger dimensions."

But consider that the claims of design patent infringement are critical to the case, and that the picture came on page 77, it's possible by that point that a weary justice might not be reading the small print very carefully.  

II. Images Played Key Role in Sales Ban

The recent incident, like the previous photoshopping, was identified by Dutch IDG publication  IDG quotes Mark Krul, a lawyer at the Dutch firm WiseMen and a specialist in IT and intellectual property law, who says the visual evidence was critical in a German court's decision to ban Samsung's tablet sales in the European Union via an ex parte injunction.

Mr. Krul was astonished that doctored images appeared in a separate filing, stating, "It surprises me that for the second time incorrect presentations of a Samsung product emerge in photographic evidence filed in litigation. This is not appropriate and undermines Apple's credibility both inside and outside the court room. Apple has certainly some explaining to do, if only to clear itself from the appearance of improper behavior."

The EU court has since changed its ruling to only banning sales in Germany.  And Samsung is actively fighting to reverse that ban.  A Samsung lawyer in the EU, Bas Berghuis of Simmons and Simmons, accused Apple of "manipulating visual evidence, making Samsung's devices appear more similar to Apple's."

A legal expert who spoke to IDC anonymously said that in patent law cases often visual exhibits are the main thing judges look at, as they're considered the point that the plaintiff wants to emphasize -- more so than the text.

While the discovery of its "creative" alterations may be bad news for Apple's legal chances, on the plus side its legal team may be able to find jobs for themselves as graphics designers, should they lose the case.  After all, they're building a pretty impressive portfolio of work, already.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By JasonMick (blog) on 8/19/2011 4:12:05 PM , Rating: 5
Calling the judge insane when he makes a decision you don't agree on is hardly a legal defense.

If a judge rules that the natural color of the sky is green, I don't care how much rambling explanation he presents, I know he's wrong. There is such a thing as the "obvious", even in the court of law.

The Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the iPad look nothing alike, other than that they're thin rectangular tablets. Anyone with eyes can see that.

I don't think Apple can patent "thinness" or the rectangle, sorry.
And realistically given the HP tablet uses a stylus and a desktop OS and is almost 2.5 times as thick and 2.5 times as heavy as the iPad 2/Galaxy Tab, if the judge were to hold that HP tablet along with the iPad 2 and Galaxy Tab, it'd probably encourage the view that the Galaxy Tab is more similar to the iPad 2 than that HP tablet is.

I'm sure you could put both on some curve of weight/thickness v. time and match both the TC1100, the Tab, and the iPad 2.

Remember, the Tab is lighter and thinner than the iPad 2.

The fact that you're trying to defend Apple's ludicrous claims is appalling.

By Theoz on 8/22/2011 1:47:51 PM , Rating: 2
In Germany, infringement and validity are separate trials. Thus Apple can win on infringement and later lose the patent on invalidity (i.e. no "inventive step" which is the European equivalent of obviousness). That said, it is very odd to me that a judge would issue a preliminary injunction in a case such as this with validity very much in doubt.

"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller

Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki