Apple sues Samsung for skanking iPhone design!

In the case of the phones Im sure thats largely true, but since Samsung are apparently somewhat notorious for ripping stuff off I'm not going to resist heckling their designer. That you disagree is not surprising, and thats fine, I don't exactly think you are dead wrong, all this stuff is grey rather than black & white. For me it was the combination of the galaxy tab design, packaging and accessories such as the charger that made me unafraid to wade into this area in a somewhat sloppy manner. I don't think Samsung should be heavily punished for getting inspiration elsewhere, but nor do I think it should go unmentioned.

Im not sure what it will take for Samsung to have an iconic product. To some degree the S2 probably is, and its not all Samsungs fault that they don't get the same media frenzy as Apple. But to do something truly iconic they need to add a little innovation of their own, and this isn't easy either since such devices are presently in the evolutionary rather than revolutionary phase.

What does different design language mean anyway? And don't you think his comment about stuff needing to be timely is kinda interesting given the context?

Read an interesting piece the other day (can't find the link at the mo) which showed that Apple repeatedly made approaches to Samsung prior to the law suites to sort this whole mess out. Had Samsung not been so arrogant perhaps this shit wouldn't have got this far?

The term "design language" sounds a bit wanky but there's some sense in it.

Taking phone design from the last keyboard models before touchscreen phones really took off, there really wasn't very much way to go from a rectangle with round corners a screen and a keyboard to a rectangle with round corners a much bigger screen and a minimal keyboard of 1-4 buttons.

So, how do you innovate in such a tightly specified space? Well then, design of the buttons themselves becomes important, the way the case looks, the edges of the case are important, the number of buttons. How the grilles for microphone and speaker look. How the camera bits look.

In each one of those cases Samsung phones have a different look from the iPhone which as a whole combines into their phone design. To me, that is the design language. It completely makes sense as an argument against the lawsuit.

Anyone that knows anything about design knows that the term and concept of design language actually had relevance...

I can't believe you're still fixated on the 'literally mistaking' aspect of the whole saga... I don't think anyone agreed that would happen, it's just the bit of US law Apple felt they had a case under. Pretty sure it didn't apply to all their cases... The thing is, the original cases were against the S, which does look very similar to the 3g (or whatever it was), the SII cases I imagine piggybacked off that to an extent. And the design is very similar, any designer should be able to see that.

Apple's LCD tech can only take it so far, and Samsung is already well established in the OLED market and has obvious advantages with other hardware, there phones tend to have more features too (as you know), I reckon they could (and in many ways have) outstrip Apple on innovation, but at the moment their actual design is basically derivative and a bit dull.

Of course the design is similar - once you make virtually the entire front of a rectangular round cornered phone into the screen then they're all going to look similar. The details are quite clearly different though.

I posted various different phones earlier in the thread, there's a lot you can do with a limited form-factor.

They even have the same silver ring around the edge. I do realise they're not exactly the same, but fuck - can you really not see how similar those two designs are?

It's wilful blindness at best, particularly given Samsung's longstanding habit of copying designs from other manufacturers. Christ, their sister company (run by a relative of this corrupt, sprawling chaebol) even put together a blatant smart cover rip off and there are plenty of examples of Samsung adverts and trade displays lifting off Apple logos and iPhone screens wholesale. It doesn't speak of a brand with a distinct self image and a genuine desire to promote its differences.

Yes, it's hard to avoid some similarity but Samsung weren't even trying to distinguish their product, more adhere to the familiar design of the market leader as closely as possible. Most respectable companies wouldn't resort to that trick so repeatedly, on multiple product lines to boot.

We've covered that one.

No-one on this thread is arguing that people are going to mistake a Samsung for an iPhone. No-one.

Well I know what you mean but especially when I see some of the pictures on this thread, I struggle to think of it as a different design language. Its more of a regional dialect.

The main thrust of this argument will just go around in circles but I know that if I were the Samsung designer and I wanted to be highly regarded, Id be trying to differentiate my stuff far more than they have done in recent years. Its not so easy right now, but next time tech leaps on I'd want to be there first, not playing second fiddle to Apple.

Apple brought the law suit against an overall design, in the US legal system the trade dress laws were the ones their lawyers thought covered that most easily, and their laws are worded around that basis of mistaken identity. This is not true of all the law suits or all country's design laws iirc.

Seriously, read what you just typed - 'it's thinner and has a bigger screen'. That's your idea of differentiating a design? Lets look at some really simple objects... Since I've spent ages nattering with Quoad and the like about pens, lets look at them. A pen has one function (usually) and has to fit in your hand, not be too heavy and hold some kind of ink. pens range from this (iconic mass-manufacture):


to this (hand crafted Japanes lacquer):



There are thousands of different types in between from minimal:


To chunky:



Any number of technical pens, calligraphic pens etc. Many of them, despite fulfilling the same basic purpose and having the same basic form-factor, look completely different from one another. A restricted form-factor does not mean you can't have any number of different designs. Most design is restricted in some way; a good designer rejoices in restrictions, they frame your design, if design is unrestricted it's bloody hard. A great design is often a synthesis of of many designs that came before, a great design is not something that is mainly differentiated from another great design by being slimmer and having a larger screen.

Again, Samsung are miles ahead of Apple in many, many ways, but their overall design is basically just a bit derivative.

It's more than the ripping off of the phone style it's also the branding, check out Samsungs boxes, look at the way they have their devices in their promo shots you can clearly see the brand association at work. I don't think its wise to underestimate how that works for the consumer either, all this guff about people not being able to tell the difference is a big red herring, brand association is a powerful thing. And Samsung know it.

Design law (at least in Europe) recognises the concepts you're all discussing - it uses the term 'design freedom'. Basically, if there's very little wriggle room (i.e. the designer is relatively constrained in terms of form factor) then you can get a registered design even if the differences between your design and existing designs are quite small. However, the rights given by your registration are also constrained.

Everyone is comparing the phones, but that's not the test. The test is to compare the allegedly infringing phone with the registered design.

It''s notoriously difficult to answer the question "does this design infringe this registration?". It's a problem both with the law and with perception. I once went to a leading QC for advice on a particular design infringment matter and he told me he didn't understand what the law meant. So I don't think we're going to get anywhere on U75.

There's a lot of talk about the patent system being flawed but it's got nothing on the law of designs.

The good thing that's come out of this is demystifying Apple's design with all the photos of prototypes. Love it when a corporations marketing is so effectively stripped away.

Lol now this is a little suspect:

Link.

Where did Apple copy a Sony device?