WOW! Apple Provides Misleading Evidence to Court. Again

by: LucianAugust 19, 2011

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.

  • AppleFUD

    Out of the two “doctored” items this one could possibly be a mistake, though it lines up just a little too well with the same height as the iPhone however, the Tab was clearly photoshoped and there’s no way of getting around that those images are indeed misleading and false testimony.

  • ThorFolklore

    Disgusting, Steve. Is this how you train your staff and the people who will take over Apple from you?

  • Anonymous

    If you can look at the icon display on Windows you’ll see a clear convention for displaying icons in this format that predate the I phone.

    That is the only item that can be considering a generic format for a phone/PDA

    Valid patents are unique ways of doing things that are by no means obvious and I would ask the court how else this information could be displayed?

  • Anonymous

    Lol once Apples case gets thrown out the courts should fine them for doctored evidence and Samsung should counter sue for damage to brand and lost sales.

  • Anonymous

    Lol once Apples case gets thrown out the courts should fine them for doctored evidence and Samsung should counter sue for damage to brand and lost sales.

  • From Wiki: “Jobs’s first child, Lisa Brennan-Jobs, was born in 1978, the daughter of his longtime partner Chris Ann Brennan, a Bay Area painter.[96] For two years, she raised their daughter on welfare while Jobs denied paternity by claiming he was sterile; he later acknowledged Lisa as his daughter.” Jobs, already a zillionaire, claimed in court that he was sterile to avoid supporting his only child. This is Apple culture. If Jobs was willing to deny his only child in court, what’s a little mistatement in court about Samsung?