Most Comprehensive "New Media" Coverage of Apple iPad

iPad on Ulitzer

Subscribe to iPad on Ulitzer: eMailAlertsEmail Alerts newslettersWeekly Newsletters
Get iPad on Ulitzer: homepageHomepage mobileMobile rssRSS facebookFacebook twitterTwitter linkedinLinkedIn

ipad Authors: Kevin Benedict, Newswire, Shelly Palmer, RealWire News Distribution

Related Topics: iPhone Developer, Consumer Electronics, iPad on Ulitzer, Apple Life Magazine, IT News & Views


Did Apple Mislead Judge into Granting That Injunction?

“The picture of the alleged Galaxy Tab provided by Apple is cropped and its aspect ratio is distorted”

One of the screenshots Apple used to persuade the Regional Court in Düsseldorf last week that Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 is a dead ringer for its iPad 2 and should therefore be barred in all of Europe except Holland because it infringes Apple design rights is inaccurate according to, a Dutch IDG publication, which went scurrying off to tell Samsung all about it.

The point of the look-and-feel comparison on page 28 of Apple's complaint (see below) is ostensibly to show that Samsung copied the iPad's rounded corners, flat surface, metallic frame and icons. However, side-by-side the two devices look to be the same size when in reality they're not.

Writing in English in PC World, Andreas Udo de Haes, the author of the Dutch story, says, "The picture of the alleged Galaxy Tab provided by Apple is cropped and its aspect ratio is distorted. According to Samsung, the Tab measures 256.7 x 175.3 millimeters which translates to an aspect ratio of 1.46. The Tab pictured in the complaint however has an aspect ratio of 1.36. The bottom is about 8 percent wider than the actual one.

"As a result, the aspect ratio of the purported Tab is actually closer to the aspect ratio of the iPad 2, which is 1.30. In short: the shape of the alleged Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Apple's complaint matches the iPad 2 more closely than it matches the actual Tab."

The discovery raises the question of whether this inaccuracy undermines Apple's case since preliminary injunctions are only handed out on the basis of strictly factual evidence.

Samsung - which hasn't complained about the discrepancy - at least not yet - has challenged the ex parte injunction and a hearing is currently scheduled for next Thursday, August 25.

More Stories By Maureen O'Gara

Maureen O'Gara the most read technology reporter for the past 20 years, is the Cloud Computing and Virtualization News Desk editor of SYS-CON Media. She is the publisher of famous "Billygrams" and the editor-in-chief of "Client/Server News" for more than a decade. One of the most respected technology reporters in the business, Maureen can be reached by email at maureen(at) or paperboy(at), and by phone at 516 759-7025. Twitter: @MaureenOGara

Comments (0)

Share your thoughts on this story.

Add your comment
You must be signed in to add a comment. Sign-in | Register

In accordance with our Comment Policy, we encourage comments that are on topic, relevant and to-the-point. We will remove comments that include profanity, personal attacks, racial slurs, threats of violence, or other inappropriate material that violates our Terms and Conditions, and will block users who make repeated violations. We ask all readers to expect diversity of opinion and to treat one another with dignity and respect.