WOW! Apple Provides Misleading Evidence to Court. Again

August 19, 2011
7
137
89 37 11

This is unbelievable, and it’s really starting to get ridiculous. Apparently Apple was so satisfied with the result of the first injunction in Germany, where they manipulated the image of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 to make it the same size and give it a more 4:3 ratio, so they can “prove” that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is “virtually identical” to the iPad, that they decided to do it once again at the Court in Netherlands, this time for the Galaxy S smartphone.

Webwereld reconstructed Apple evidence

Webwereld reconstructed Apple evidence*

Apple provided the Court with this evidence while trying to show “an example of the similarity relevant to copyrights.” So basically, they were trying to prove that the Galaxy S is “identical” to the iPhone 3GS, and therefore they showed a Galaxy S that is the exact same dimensions as an iPhone 3GS to back their claim, even though a Galaxy S phone has a 4″ display, while the iPhone 3GS has a 3.5″ one. If you had both of them in front of you, you’d see the difference is quite significant. And this is not the only picture that Apple has provided to the courts, comparing their own products to Samsung’s, but those weren’t available for inspection. So one has to ask himself – how many more such cases of misleading evidence can be found in there?

The first case may have been considered a mistake on the lawyer’s part, although still highly unlikely, because the Galaxy Tab 10.1 wasn’t just made as tall as the iPad, which you could say it came from making the pictures the same size (but why would you do that?), but it was also stretched out to the sides. That’s a mistake that’s a lot harder to make unintentionally, and if you did do such a thing, you’d probably notice immediately that there’s something “wrong” with that picture, and doesn’t accurately represent the product. You’d think a lawyer trying to show evidence to the Court would notice such things.

But this is the second time this has happened, and it was found by the Dutch website Webwereld, almost randomly, again. So I’m willing to bet these 2 cases of manipulated evidence, are not the only ones. I hope the Dutch Court is taking this seriously, and looks into all of them. Apple can’t be allowed to do this again, and if found guilty of this, they should be called out for it, before they try to use the same “evidence” in other countries as well.

Comments