Support NeoGAF

[kehs]

Her testimony demonstrated her expertise towards icons. The mistaking hardware part was to demonstrate someone without expertise (average consumer).

Considering she's not an average consumer, that's a pretty horrible display.

 

[AndyD]

Ha that document. Imagine what Apple's document looked like when they started building the iPhone. On the left what a Blackberry, Treo? Maybe it was just a mostly empty box and I don't know they came up with some shit, maybe, some stuff, I dunno?

Well apparently that Sony model phone prototype. But I see what you mean.

As someone else said these documents are pretty common in industry. My dad is an industrial engineer and apparently they do this relatively often for their products as well. More from a technical perspective, but post mortem analyses and competition comparisons nonetheless.

 

[gcubed]

Her testimony demonstrated her expertise towards icons. The mistaking hardware part was to demonstrate someone without expertise (average consumer).

agreed on the icon part, but the mistaking hardware part is hard to take at all seriously when you are getting 70 to 80,000 dollars for your testimony for your design skills

 

[numble]

Considering she's not an average consumer, that's a pretty horrible display.

An expert on icons isn't expected to be an expert on hardware.
Anyway, they did it on purpose. Samsung lawyers confusing phones, experts confusing phones, plays into their trade dress arguments, one of which is confusion.

 

[AndyD]

An expert on icons isn't expected to be an expert on hardware.
Anyway, they did it on purpose. Samsung lawyers confusing phones, experts confusing phones, plays into their trade dress arguments, one of which is confusion.

The confusion is with the screen off. And I think Samsung's case is pretty strong that their phone is different enough when off. I think where Apple has a stronger case is when you turn it on.

It will be interesting to see how this goes. I want to hear more on the FRAND parts.

 

[Kinitari]

No, one of their arguments is confusion. It doesn't help Apple for her to say they are very different. She is a supposed expert on icons, not anything else, so she only spoke with regard to the icons. Look up who Susan Kare is.

If her strength is icons, why is she weighing in on the physical design of phones? And how do you have trouble distinguishing all Samsung phones from an iPhone?

She is one the most significant people in the history of the modern computer industry. She is called the Betsy Ross of PCs. She is an expert. More than any one in this thread by a longshot.

I mean she was on the original iconic Mac team that pretty much kick started the whole modern PC era.

I know who Kare is. She helped design some of Apple's earlier stuff. But how she can confuse all Samsung phones physically for an iPhone is beyond me, and this is after her earlier kerfuffle, not knowing Samsung uses android. I guess it's not necessary knowledge, but it makes her seem not very expertly.

 

[kehs]

An expert on icons isn't expected to be an expert on hardware.
Anyway, they did it on purpose. Samsung lawyers confusing phones, experts confusing phones, plays into their trade dress arguments.

She is one the most significant people in the history of the modern computer industry. She is called the Betsy Ross of PCs. She is an expert. More than any one in this thread by a longshot.

I mean she was on the original iconic Mac team that pretty much kick started the whole modern PC era.

I'm sure all average consumers have a similar history with technology.

 

[numble]

If her strength is icons, why is she weighing in on the physical design of phones? And how do you have trouble distinguishing all Samsung phones from an iPhone?




I know who Kare is. She helped design some of Apple's earlier stuff. But how she can confuse all Samsung phones physically for an iPhone is beyond me, and this is after her earlier kerfuffle, not knowing Samsung uses android. I guess it's not necessary knowledge, but it makes her seem not very expertly.

They snuck it in. She was "nonchalantly" talking about how she was grabbing for an iPhone and accidentally grabbed a Samsung one.

 

[Kinitari]

They snuck it in. She was "nonchalantly" talking about how she was grabbing for an iPhone and accidentally grabbed a Samsung one.

Ah I get it. Clever...ish I don't know if that doesn't make people think your expert witness is either not very expert or just totally bias.

 

[mugurumakensei]

They snuck it in. She was "nonchalantly" talking about how she was grabbing for an iPhone and accidentally grabbed a Samsung one.

The problem though is someone who has a keen eye to observe icon differences should be able to spot the rather notable difference in terms of button layout on iPhone vs Samsung's devices.

 

[Kinitari]

The problem though is someone who has a keen eye to observe icon differences should be able to spot the rather notable difference in terms of button layout on iPhone vs Samsung's devices.

I think the bigger problem is that if the angle Apple lawyers are going for is "physically all these phones look like iPhones" then it will make their claim sound ridiculous. If they're a bit more reasonable, I think they could sway more people.

Just focus on the similarities between some icons, that's probably their strongest argument.

I mean a layman could confuse a blackberry for an iPhone, that shouldn't mean a thing.

 

[kehs]

The problem though is someone who has a keen eye to observe icon differences should be able to spot the rather notable difference in terms of button layout on iPhone vs Samsung's devices.

Icon experts live in a vacuum.

 

[numble]

The problem though is someone who has a keen eye to observe icon differences should be able to spot the rather notable difference in terms of button layout on iPhone vs Samsung's devices.

And a lawyer should know the difference between his client's phones, especially when he's arguing that they are distinctive.

 

[Kinitari]

And a lawyer should know the difference between his client's phones, especially when he's arguing that they are distinctive.

Would have been more of a kerfuffle if he grabbed an iPhone instead . I wonder which phones hE confused

 

[kehs]

I can't believe it takes three months to get transcripts.

They should totally just livestream trials on youtube.

 

[mcfrank]

Well apparently that Sony model phone prototype. But I see what you mean.

As someone else said these documents are pretty common in industry. My dad is an industrial engineer and apparently they do this relatively often for their products as well. More from a technical perspective, but post mortem analyses and competition comparisons nonetheless.

That "Sony Prototype" was actually designed by Apple as a mockup as what a good Sony phone would look like. It was not in any way an actual Sony prototype.

http://allthingsd.com/20120727/apple-tries-to-torpedo-samsungs-sony-style-iphone-charge/

http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/30/3201162/apple-refutes-claim-they-cribbed-notes-from-sony-reveal-prototype

 

[AndyD]

That "Sony Prototype" was actually designed by Apple as a mockup as what a good Sony phone would look like. It was not in any way an actual Sony prototype.

http://allthingsd.com/20120727/apple-tries-to-torpedo-samsungs-sony-style-iphone-charge/

http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/30/3201162/apple-refutes-claim-they-cribbed-notes-from-sony-reveal-prototype

That's not what those articles say. They simply say that Apple had a different prototype before the Sony one and ultimately they did not use any Sony influences in their final product. I don't see where it says Apple created the "Sony" prototype/mocup and that such a thing did not exist.

 

[kehs]

Follow

Amy Miller
‏@Siliconlaw
Now Verhoeven is complaining about bloggers and reporters. #icourt.

Thanks alot Aslup, he should be tried for contempt by Koh.

 

[mcfrank]

That's not what those articles say. They simply say that Apple had a different prototype before the Sony one and ultimately they did not use any Sony influences in their final product. I don't see where it says Apple created the "Sony" prototype/mocup and that such a thing did not exist.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/07/apple-v-samsung-jury-selection/

"The judge in the Apple v. Samsung case won’t allow this Apple prototype to be viewed during official court proceedings. The prototype was created by Apple to demonstrate a Sony-like design, and the artist of the prototype even went so far as to place Sony branding on the chassis. Image source: Internal Apple documents"

 

[AndyD]

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/07/apple-v-samsung-jury-selection/

"The judge in the Apple v. Samsung case won’t allow this Apple prototype to be viewed during official court proceedings. The prototype was created by Apple to demonstrate a Sony-like design, and the artist of the prototype even went so far as to place Sony branding on the chassis. Image source: Internal Apple documents"

I see. It also says "Nishibori was tasked with creating an early iPhone prototype based on a Sony smartphone design description." And the other article details some of the Sony statements. I guess the allegation is that Apple did not see the Sony design but read a description of it, then created a mockup.

But its all academic, as the evidence is not coming in so we will never know.

 

[Cheebo]

I see. It also says "Nishibori was tasked with creating an early iPhone prototype based on a Sony smartphone design description." And the other article details some of the Sony statements. I guess the allegation is that Apple did not see the Sony design but read a description of it, then created a mockup.

But its all academic, as the evidence is not coming in so we will never know.

there was no Sony smartphone. Apple designed a smartphone that they felt what a smartphone would look like if Sony made one. Sony had no all screen sort of of touch screen phones before the iPhone. It was using Sony style but it was designed by Apple. I think you misread this. There was no sony smartphone to even base it off of. The article about Sony Ive read wasn't even about phones.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

I guess the allegation is that Apple did not see the Sony design but read a description of it, then created a mockup.

What Sony smartphone design? What are you talking about?

It was Apple thinking "what would a Sony smartphone look like if it had our iPhone features like no keyboard, big screen, etc" and then imagining it. Sony had no phone to copy.

 

[AndyD]

there was no Sony smartphone. Apple designed a smartphone that they felt what a smartphone would look like if Sony made one. Sony had no all screen sort of of touch screen phones before the iPhone. It was using Sony style but it was designed by Apple. I think you misread this. There was no sony smartphone to even base it off of. The article about Sony Ive read wasn't even about phones.

I know there was no physical phone based on the articles. The implication by Samsung was that Apple took the device ideas and style cues from Sony as in "they were not original to Apple". I don't think Samsung was saying Sony made this phone, Apple copied it, in the way Apple is accusing Samsung of copying the Iphone post release. I think Samsung was trying to say the ideas that Apple incorporated came from Sony (the article mentions early Sony ideas of minimal buttons, mostly screen front, rounded corners...). Sort of a roundabout patent prior art argument. Obviously not a great argument, or at least not solid enough to see the light of day.

 

[Talon]

I see. It also says "Nishibori was tasked with creating an early iPhone prototype based on a Sony smartphone design description." And the other article details some of the Sony statements. I guess the allegation is that Apple did not see the Sony design but read a description of it, then created a mockup.

But its all academic, as the evidence is not coming in so we will never know.

I don't see why there's any confusion. The "Jony" phone was built with a Sony perspective. It was a "what-if" device. There was no Sony smartphone.

It's a specious argument from Samsung. Trade dress is what we're talking about here, and Samsung is saying "LOOK, LOOK, THEY MIGHT HAVE TAKEN INSPIRATION FROM OUTSIDE THEIR COMPANY!"

 

[Mastgrr]

Ha that document. Imagine what Apple's document looked like when they started building the iPhone. On the left what a Blackberry, Treo? Maybe it was just a mostly empty box and I don't know they came up with some shit, maybe, some stuff, I dunno?

Steve Jobs explains in the iPhone announcement keynote what their competitors looked like and what they wanted to do differently:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uW-E496FXg#t=5m07s

Quite an interesting contrast, really. Steve Says says "Oh, here's what we can do better" not "We need to copy this".

 

[Talon]

Steve Jobs explains in the iPhone announcement keynote what their competitors looked like and what they wanted to do differently:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uW-E496FXg#t=5m07s

Quite an interesting contrast, really. Steve Says says "Oh, here's what we can do better" not "We need to copy this".

If anything, they went in a completely opposite direction. They had a slide in their presentation where they compared the iPhone's music player interface to the competitions, and they looked drastically dissimilar.

 

[maharg]

Steve Jobs explains in the iPhone announcement keynote what their competitors looked like and what they wanted to do differently:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uW-E496FXg#t=5m07s

Quite an interesting contrast, really. Steve Says says "Oh, here's what we can do better" not "We need to copy this".

You realize this is because the competitive products at the time were pretty roundly shit, right? Not that Apple would have entered the market if they hadn't had the opportunity to set things right.

Sometimes competitive analysis comes to the conclusion "be less like the competition" and sometimes it comes to the conclusion "be more like the competition". That's normal. Pretending like it should always involve differentiating in every way possible is just stupid and would be laughed out of an undergrad business class.

 

[gcubed]

Which is the proper way to do that competitive study that Samsung did, not "this is how its being done by the most successful competitor... implement that"

I have no sympathy for manufacturer skins

 

[kehs]

Which is the proper way to do that competitive study that Samsung did, not "this is how its being done by the most successful competitor... implement that"

I have no sympathy for manufacturer skins

I sense a little hostility.

 

[derder]

As someone who made the iphone 3g to samsung galaxy s1 jump in 09:

Let Samsung burn.

I've never seen such a cut-and-dry case in my life. My phone with Touchwiz felt distinctly borrowed. I remember picking up a friends Droid X and thinking that his featured the actual android OS, not Touchwiz.

 

[Technosteve]

If Apple wins, can they use that money to buy Palm and bring back the Pre. Or give it to Nokia and let them release the N9 in the states.


Also It kicks the Lama in the ASS.

 

[rkn]

Which is the proper way to do that competitive study that Samsung did, not "this is how its being done by the most successful competitor... implement that"

I have no sympathy for manufacturer skins

That's the essential part. I myself have done what I guess you can call a competitive analysis of products and services for places I've worked for. And it was the same thing, screenshots of 1.Various competitors, not just one. 2.Things they did right, but also things they did wrong. And our recommendations sometimes aligned with them, simply because that was the right way and sometimes we proposed new and better (or worse) solutions, that we thought were better. As a designer myself, the sort of company where the department heads don't allow the creatives to actually create are the worst and basically wholesale mandate the "do it like they did it" is the worst. I've said it before, it must suck to be a designer at Samsung.

 

[Dhx]

Which is the proper way to do that competitive study that Samsung did, not "this is how its being done by the most successful competitor... implement that"

I have no sympathy for manufacturer skins

This is a ludicrous claim and again misses the point of the report. You speak as if this is the only report Samsung drafted and it exists in a vacuum. The concept of comparative analysis especially in a post mortem report seems to completely escape you and the other posters that keep dismissing the context, instead choosing their own.

Again I ask, where is the evidence they took this report and implemented the recommendations in a literal sense?

 

[Technosteve]

This is a ludicrous claim and again misses the point of the report. You speak as if this is the only report Samsung drafted and it exists in a vacuum. The concept of comparative analysis especially in a post mortem report seems to completely escape you and the other posters that keep dismissing the context, instead choosing their own.

Again I ask, where is the evidence they took this report and implemented the recommendations in a literal sense?

I guess, by looking at galaxy 2 ui?

 

[Cheebo]

As someone who made the iphone 3g to samsung galaxy s1 jump in 09:

Let Samsung burn.

I've never seen such a cut-and-dry case in my life. My phone with Touchwiz felt distinctly borrowed. I remember picking up a friends Droid X and thinking that his featured the actual android OS, not Touchwiz.

Agreed. Every android device I played around with pre-Nexus 7 was Samsung. And every time I thought "Why would anyone want to use this shitty iOS lite on their phone?". Playing around with a unfiltered version of Android is a completely different experience and feels unique to itself.

Which makes me wonder. Why does Samsung put so much time and effort into making TouchWiz? I mean Android does a damn good job on its own. Why spend so much effort and money to pile shit on it? What in the world do they gain from that? TouchWiz isn't making anyone pick their hardware.

 

[Dhx]

I guess, by looking at galaxy 2 ui?

(I'll qualify the following by stating I just spent about 10 minutes looking at the 2 UIs in question, hardly an exhaustive comparison.)

The S2 UI appears to be more dissimilar to the iPhone UI than the S1. If this is the case, the report's context becomes clearer, and that context is not one of a master document to be used to shape future Samsung UI design. If it were, Apple would have targeted the offending phones in the suit. Instead, Apple seems to be counting on the jurors to take the report out of context, as so many posters have clearly done over the last few pages.

I hope the jurors are more skeptical.

 

[Talon]

Agreed. Every android device I played around with pre-Nexus 7 was Samsung. And every time I thought "Why would anyone want to use this shitty iOS lite on their phone?". Playing around with a unfiltered version of Android is a completely different experience and feels unique to itself.

Which makes me wonder. Why does Samsung put so much time and effort into making TouchWiz? I mean Android does a damn good job on its own. Why spend so much effort and money to pile shit on it? What in the world do they gain from that? TouchWiz isn't making anyone pick their hardware.

Well, that's sort of the point of this trial, right?

Apple clearly feels that the initial Galaxy S' success rode on the fact that they aped Apple. Remember, this was before the iPhone was on Verizon. The Fascinate, Droid, and Droid Incredible were your main options, and that first one looked awfully similar to an iPhone*.

*In the words of Apple.

 

[Kinitari]

Agreed. Every android device I played around with pre-Nexus 7 was Samsung. And every time I thought "Why would anyone want to use this shitty iOS lite on their phone?". Playing around with a unfiltered version of Android is a completely different experience and feels unique to itself.

Which makes me wonder. Why does Samsung put so much time and effort into making TouchWiz? I mean Android does a damn good job on its own. Why spend so much effort and money to pile shit on it? What in the world do they gain from that? TouchWiz isn't making anyone pick their hardware.

What are these ios features? Similar icons and....?

 

[maharg]

(I'll qualify the following by stating I just spent about 10 minutes looking at the 2 UIs in question, hardly an exhaustive comparison.)

The S2 UI appears to be more dissimilar to the iPhone UI than the S1. If this is the case, the report's context becomes clearer, and that context is not one of a master document to be used to shape future Samsung UI design. If it were, Apple would have targeted the offending phones in the suit. Instead, Apple seems to be counting on the jurors to take the report out of context, as so many posters have clearly done over the last few pages.

I hope the jurors are more skeptical.

Your faith in jurors is admirable.

 

[diffusionx]

I really don't think there is any doubt that Samsung tried to copy Apple with abandon, in an effort to make their phones more Apple-like. I don't even think it's a tough question. It's not just about one feature either - it's the whole of the system, from the hardware to the software to the packaging and cabling. This is why arguments like "round corners lol" are disingenuous.

This is not saying that Android is a copy of iPhone, or that Apple is the god of cellular phones and everyone else sucks. It's just that Samsung ripped off Apple explicitly and deliberately. It's just about Samsung.

And let's take this another level. Do you actually believe anyone bought a Galaxy S because they thought it was an Apple product because it was a sunflower on the pictures icon? One person on the entire planet?

I think that people bought the Galaxy S because they wanted an iPhone but it was out of the realm of possibility for some reason (Verizon, etc.). As such I think Samsung did have a motivation to make their phone more iPhone-like, and did it for that reason.

 

[maharg]

It's not really Samsung's fault that Apple had an exclusivity agreement with AT&T. In the scenario you describe, it was a feature of the GS that it was available on multiple carriers.

So you didn't really answer the question. Were the people who bought a Galaxy S unaware that they were not buying an Apple product, and did them buying it in any way damage Apple's reputation or ability to sell the iPhone?

What seems lost on you and other people who take this "they copied, period." tack is that copying elements of another product is not in itself illegal for a very good reason. Trade dress and trademarks are designed to protect brands from *fraud*.

 

[Kinitari]

I really don't think there is any doubt that Samsung tried to copy Apple with abandon, in an effort to make their phones more Apple-like. I don't even think it's a tough question. It's not just about one feature either - it's the whole of the system, from the hardware to the software to the packaging and cabling. This is why arguments like "round corners lol" are disingenuous.

This is not saying that Android is a copy of iPhone, or that Apple is the god of cellular phones and everyone else sucks. It's just that Samsung ripped off Apple explicitly and deliberately. It's just about Samsung.



I think that people bought the Galaxy S because they wanted an iPhone but it was out of the realm of possibility for some reason (Verizon, etc.). As such I think Samsung did have a motivation to make their phone more iPhone-like, and did it for that reason.

The cable for the galaxy line of phones is like iphones? Quick, name all the hardware and software similarities

 

[EightBitNate]

What are these ios features? Similar icons and....?

Black slab with silver rounded sides
Icon "squares" even though all other Android skins were different shapes
The icons that look exactly the same as iOS (phone, photos, contacts, etc...)
Similar package design
Cables and wall plugs that imitate Apple's
Advertising shows app drawer instead of home screen
S-Voice
The whole "rip off Apple guidebook"

Pretty damning information. I'm sure you'll have an excuse for all of these points, but whatever.


I know your defense for this since you've thrown it at me so many times (Asus), but do we really know if Apple has plans to sue Asus? I think that's possible.

 

[diffusionx]

I don't care that much, and I'm not an expert on patent law. So it's not my place to say whether or not what Samsung did was a violation of law. I'm also not going to spend hours digging around Wiki and law sites to become more informed.

I think they saw the iPhone and thought that copying it was a good way to build market share, especially in places where the iPhone wasn't. Did they cross the line legally? That's for the court to decide.

 

[Kinitari]

Black slab with silver rounded sides
Icon "squares" even though all other Android skins were different shapes
The icons that look exactly the same as iOS (phone, photos, contacts, etc...)
Similar package design
Cables and wall plugs that imitate Apple's
Advertising shows app drawer instead of home screen
S-Voice
The whole "rip off Apple guidebook"

Pretty damning information. I'm sure you'll have an excuse for all of these points, but whatever.


I know your defense for this since you've thrown it at me so many times (Asus), but do we really know if Apple has plans to sue Asus? I think that's possible.

So software side (which was my question), it's the icons and, s voice?

And my defense is multifaceted. Let's remember that the galaxy line of phones do not have a similar cable.

After that if all you have is mildly similar hardware, and mildly similar packaging, it's not a trade dress issue.

 

[EightBitNate]

So software side (which was my question), it's the icons and, s voice?

And my defense is multifaceted. Let's remember that the galaxy line of phones do not have a similar cable.

I dunno, but it really seems like you're belittling what I said. The icons probably play the biggest role in the OS.

I'm not sure where you're getting "mildly" from. They're pretty fucking similar, man.

 

[Kinitari]

I dunno, but it really seems like you're belittling what I said. The icons probably play the biggest role in the OS.

I'm not sure where you're getting "mildly" from. They're pretty fucking similar, man.

I'm repeating what you said. And yeah, mildly. They're black and curved corners, but everything else is different on the galaxy s.

 

[mugurumakensei]

Black slab with silver rounded sides
Icon "squares" even though all other Android skins were different shapes
The icons that look exactly the same as iOS (phone, photos, contacts, etc...)
Similar package design
Cables and wall plugs that imitate Apple's
Advertising shows app drawer instead of home screen
S-Voice
The whole "rip off Apple guidebook"

Pretty damning information. I'm sure you'll have an excuse for all of these points, but whatever.


I know your defense for this since you've thrown it at me so many times (Asus), but do we really know if Apple has plans to sue Asus? I think that's possible.

Almost all android icons are square. This isn't atypical.

Green has been the general calling color since at least the 1990s. The camera icons are different. The only icon similar to the photos icon for the Galaxy S is the gallery icon. The contact icon is an address book with an anonymous profile which makes it easy to identify. You'll also see plenty of icon suites include one just like the iPhone (in fact even more direct replicas) being sold for use in websites.

The cables are shaped like PDMI cables.

Google's also developing Assistant(which will make S-Voice redundant). Querying multiple engines has been used by search engines for years. Adding voice on top of it doesn't make it a patent-able invention.

http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/10010/width/500/height/1000 <--- square icons

http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/10011/ <--- Almost all third party icons are square (even including gradients like apple likes to use)

http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/10006/ <--- Skype has green with white phone pre-iphone
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1222738/Screenshot_2012-06-30-16-27-58.png <--- Again similar
http://cdn0.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/4575047/DSC_6376-hero_gallery_post.jpg

 

[Dhx]

What seems lost on you and other people who take this "they copied, period." tack is that copying elements of another product is not in itself illegal for a very good reason. Trade dress and trademarks are designed to protect brands from *fraud*.

If I could have one request in this thread, it would be that posters take the time to read the above quoted portion and internally acknowledge the reality of this point.

The entire "kirfing" tack reeks of user loyalty and bias. It reminds me of when Sony borrowed largely from the Super Nintendo controller for the original Playstation. They took the best product on the market and riffed off it. Even today, all non-motion controllers utilize this form factor to a large extent. Is this because they aren't creative? No. It's because it's the clear and obvious best design given user demand and the current technology.

It wasn't illegal when Sony riffed off of Nintendo, just like it isn't illegal if Samsung riffed off the original iPhone. If you as a consumer want to punish Samsung for its "kirfing", that is your prerogative. But please do not cloak it in some grand sense of greater justice and fairness.

 

[Technosteve]

If I could have one request in this thread, it would be that posters take the time to read the above quoted portion and internally acknowledge the reality of this point.

The entire "kirfing" tact reeks of user loyalty and bias. It reminds me of when Sony borrowed largely from the Super Nintendo controller for the original Playstation. They took the best product on the market and riffed off it. Even today, all non-motion controllers utilize this form factor to a large extent. Is this because they aren't creative? No. It's because it's the clear and obvious best design given user demand and the current technology.

It wasn't illegal when Sony riffed off of Nintendo, just like it isn't illegal if Samsung riffed off the original iPhone. If you as a consumer want to punish Samsung for its "kirfing", that is your prerogative. But please do not cloak it in some grand sense of greater justice and fairness.

they didn't kirf the dpad, that was patented