Jordan Crook studied English literature at the University of New York before entering the tech space. Prior to joining TechCrunch Crook dabbled in mobile marketing and mobile apps, as well as doing reviews for MobileBurn and MobileMarketer. Kruk, fascinated with the production of alternative sources of energy and greentech. It is currently a writer for CrunchGear. ? Read More
Apple introduced again that the blogosphere is calling "inaccurate evidence" in this case against Samsung. Photo on page 77 complaints Apple in the District Court of the Hague in the Netherlands shows the Samsung Galaxy S next to the iPhone 3 G and guess what! Apple once again screwed with.
But don't freak out. This may not be as big a deal as everyone makes it to be.
Here's the thing: the battle moved to the Netherlands, the only country in the EU as not yet affected by the fight. Apple recently filed a complaint (which is only available for screening in the Hague Court, but saw Weberwerld. nl) the company requests that the EU ban on almost all galaxies devices including s Galaxy, Galaxy S II Galaxy Galaxy tab tab 7 and 10.1. Apple also asked that all remaining inventory pulled from retail shelves.
This time it is not only the speech, and that makes all the difference. When Apple first introduced that Crazy picture 10.1 Galaxy tab in Germany, the suit was fully involved in the design, so there is really no obvious reason to mess with the images. This is not to say that he was some crazy-handed move by Apple, but it makes it a little harder to justify the modified aspect ratio. However, the BBC reports that the German judge then inspected the hand device and does not base its decision only on the images provided by Apple.
In the case of the Netherlands Apple complaint is much more achievements and refers to the violation of patent rights, not only on the same design community of the EU (the iPad), but other European patents dealing with mobile photography management, interpretation of the touch events and Apple swipe to unlock. In other words, we have moved the software that makes things more complex by 100%.
In the image (the image is Weberwerld's rendering above), the Samsung Galaxy S is scaled the same proportions as the iPhone 3 G in reality, the Galaxy s longer and wider than the iPhone 3 G, Samsung Galaxy S measures 122.4 mm x 64.2 mm, while the iPhone 3 G sports dimensions 115.5 mm x 62.1 mm. But the figure supplied by Apple, was changed in the Galaxy s approximately 6 per cent, making it similar in size to the iPhone. Unlike the situation with the GalTab ratio has not been significantly modified.
Since we cannot actually get our hands on court documents, it is difficult to say the side-by-side comparison, but weberwerld. nl reports that Apple is s Galaxy "-identical elements, such as a slightly larger size (at p. 77). Most likely, if Apple actually saying on the same page as the Galaxy s is more likely to have a good reason for scaling images.
Of course, the Galaxy s design is controlled by its similarity to the iPhone 3 G, but there are other aspects of the device in question as well. It's quite possible that the image of the Galaxy s size so that the judge may investigate something not related to the design. Then again this is only a side-by-side comparison photos s galaxies with iPhone 3 G, which makes me wonder why was not presented a comparative analysis of more realistic, too.
To add to the confusion, Samsung lawyers argue that Apple manipulated evidence, since that time the Samsung actually got to be part of the trial. "[Apple was] the manipulation of Visual evidence that makes the Samsung devices appear more similar to Apple," said Berghuis Ba Simmons and Simmons law firm. Because we're going to hard to be sure of the translation, but it looks like Mr. Berghuis evidence were not sufficiently important to convince the judge. Google translate, weberwerld .nl in reporting the following: "but this claim was from Samsung at the meeting is not supported by the evidence."
I can't imagine will claim Mr. Berghuis Apple manipulation of evidence without submission of the false testimony in court. So Apple filing images probably is changed for good reason. In addition, if Apple is trying to intentionally deceive the judicial systems of the false testimony, the company will likely be abandoned this plan as soon as the original photo GalTab was discovered.
No comments:
Post a Comment