[headShrinker]

My brother's first reaction when he saw my galaxy S was 'Wow, they don't even pretend they don't copy Apple anymore.' The phone has an uncanny similar look to the iPhone 3G. I think Apple had a legitimate case and don't understand all the Samsung love here. Apple wanting to see samsung's upcoming model to see if they are again copying, so they can get a jump on the lawsuit? I say 'fair'. Samsung copied the shit out of that phone design, and much of the OS skin. Uncanny resemblance. Samsung, wanting to see Apple's upcoming products? "On what grounds?"

[Joeri]

The question isn't whether samsung decided to build iphone-like phones. Everyone can see that they did, the galaxy devices look way too similar. The question is whether they directly copied it, and apple has legal protection. I don't think they do. I don't think you can claim that samsung directly copied the iphone, either in general or in specifics.

First, in general. Did apple invent the "all touch" category? No. The earliest all-touch smartphone with on-screen keyboard is IBM's Simon, from 1992: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Simon . Did Apple then invent finger-friendly glossy UI's with capacitive touch screens? No. See for example the LG KE850 (prada phone), which was first demoed a year before the iphone: http://www.oopshi.nl/images/ke850-prada-oopshi-nl.jpg . Note that LG threatened to sue Apple for copying the prada phone's design: http://www.applematters.com/article/the-iphone-lawsuits/

The iphone's grid layout that launches apps is merely an evolution in a long history, starting at the newton, through palm, back to apple: http://www.applegazette.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/inter... . I used to have a palmpilot pro, and you can clearly tell that the iphone's designers learned a lot from that UI. So, when talking about the general design, there's nothing in there that originated in the iphone. So, if there's nothing that apple can claim ownership on in the general case, let's look at specifics.

Apple isn't suing for the general UI design, because they learned early on that it isn't protected when they tried the same thing to protect the mac interface (which they themselves copied from Xerox): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microso... . Instead they're suing for the distinctive design of the icons on the iphone. And, well, I don't think they're copied. Inspired by, yes, but direct copies they are not: http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4dadf745ccd1d5aa3f1... .

If anything can be learned from all of this it's that history is written by the winners, and that everyone stands on the shoulders of giants. If it were me, I'd do away with patents entirely. No point to them really, not if you look at how preciously little there is that's actually original in any innovative product.

[chicagobob]

Here is another analysis that I think is much more balanaced than any of the ones you linked to: http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analys...

Here is his conclusion:

"Taken as a group, it feels like a remarkably solid case — Samsung can’t just up and countersue Apple with its own patents and hope to walk away with a handshake and a cross-license because of the various trademark, trade dress, and design patent claims. How the company decides to deal with those issues remains to be seen; there’s no question in my mind that Samsung designed TouchWiz to look and feel as much like iOS as possible, and then marketed it as such. . . . . . . Depending on the strength of Samsung’s promised reply and countersuit, my guess is that Apple might be willing to eventually settle the patent claims but will push the trademark and trade dress claims as far as it can — if Apple loses those it’s open season on the iOS aesthetic. You can bet Steve Jobs and Tim Cook aren’t about to let that happen."

[Joeri]

First of all, I didn't link to any analysis, just to a bunch of screenshots. Screenshots aren't balanced one way or the other.

But, on the link you posted. The conclusion in that article is actually a fair conclusion to make. It's just not one I agree with. The trade dress claim hinges on consumers being confused between the products, and I don't see it happening. If you can find me one person, anywhere, who bought a galaxy thinking it was an iphone, I'll admit fault and move on.

Any way, my point was more generic than that. Basically, I think everything that's in the iphone had been done before, so the only thing apple can lay claim to is the combination, not any of the parts. Take for example the white slanted phone on the green glossy background. On the face of it, it sounds ironclad, since it's an unusual and unique style of phone icon, right? But, then you look at the skype icon from 2006, and surprise, it's clearly the same icon, except with a round border. You could just as easily argue that apple copied skype's phone icon when they designed the iphone icon. Given enough time, and google image search, you can do the same thing for every one of the iphone's icons, and for any part of its design.

In the end, you end up at the heart of the matter: how different does a phone have to be before it's no longer infringing according to apple? If samsung changes two icons and uses a gray bezel, does that magically make it ok, even if it would still have the "feel" of an iphone? Sounds wishy-washy logic to me. Still though, I do wish samsung hadn't copied the iphone to such a degree. It cheapens a phone which could have stood on its own merits.

[cookiecaper]

I don't think the phones are that similar. Certainly they're not similar enough to cause confusion for anyone under 40. I have seen the comparison and the Galaxy, while it obviously took some hints from the iPhone (as did all subsequent smartphones), has a distinct feel and shape. I know the difference immediately between and iPhone and a Galaxy.

[danudey]

I've seen more than a few people in shops or on transit that were using their iPhones, and it was only when I tried to see (out of curiosity as an app developer) what apps they were using that I noticed they were actually Samsung phones.

As someone who's very tuned in to the tech scene, mobile device trends, and the like, as well as a big fan of my iPhone (having owned each one since they came to Canada), the fact that I, from two or three feet away, would completely mistake a Samsung phone for an iPhone means that there's more than just a passing similarity.

Beyond that, consumers generally don't understand the differences. They see two smartphones that look pretty much identical (as far as they know), with similar packaging, form factor, and icons, the salesman tells them that they're essentially the same phone, and one of them is cheaper, they might well pick the Samsung phone over the iPhone, despite their intention being to buy an iPhone specifically.

Yes, consumers will do this. Apple's concern here, though, may be that people will be confused by the issue, whether they end up buying Apple's products or not.

[gonzo]

> Certainly they're not similar enough to cause confusion for anyone under 40

blow me, hipster scum. :-)

[carussell]

Everyone realizes there are multiple forms of the Galaxy S, right? There's the i9000 international version which quite heavily resembles the iPhone, the Vibrant and the Fascinate/Mesmerize (SGH-T959, SCH-I500, respectively), which maintain a strong resemblance, but have the four soft keys, the Epic (SPH-D700), which departs even more in looks, and the Captivate (SGH-I897), which basically looks nothing like the iPhone, excluding consideration for all the TouchWiz junk. (I'm using US nomenclature here, if you can't tell.)

As of this writing, there exist quite a few comments in the threads derived from the parent which go something like, "What? They don't look the same to me.", and, "Surely you're drunk! They're so the same.", with absolutely no mention of the specific models being argued about. Dumb.

[bad_user]

I have both, and I don't think they are too similar. Surely they've got the same form, as in large display, no keyboard, but the iPhone wasn't the first phone with this design. Otherwise the look&feel is different.

[rimantas]

I beg you, please name the phone with this design which was released before iPhone. Just take a look how different Galaxy S is: http://images.intomobile.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Sams...

[Aylw]

LG Prada phone.

Plus, the border of the original Galaxy S is black, makes a significant difference. Not much room for innovation in a candy-bar touch screen, really.

I'd side with Samsung on the legal argument, as well. Apple is known as very secretive, Samsung announces products FAR ahead. Saying that Apple hasn't announced their products essentially penalizes Samsung for being open about what they have in the works, and announcing and showing their products early. If Apple plans to release the iphone5 this summer (and if history is an example, they do), wouldn't this be the same argument that Apple used?

I'm not a lawyer, but punishment based on pr schemes seems weird to me.

[pohl]

An image of the LG Prada for reference:

http://dailymobile.se/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/lg-prada2-0...

[Peaker]

Are external phone designs protected by patents or copyrights?

[mishmash]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_patent

[bilban]

Similarity/convention is actually a good thing for the consumer - as long as it is by sound design.

[shareme]

Apple went through this before with MS..looks are not patentable..