The document compares the innovation of Apple and Samsung, detailing significant product introductions and highlighting legal disputes over design similarities. Apple asserts that Samsung copied various design elements and functionalities, leading to a lawsuit where Samsung was ordered to pay Apple $1.05 billion. The author concludes that Apple is more innovative than Samsung.

1. Amila Dayarathne

2. Apple
is more innovative than
SAMSUNG

3. Let’s see the truth…

4. In 2001

5. Apple introduced
the
i-pod

6. SAMSUNG
Introduced
SGH-T100

7. In 2007

8. Apple introduced the
i-phone

9. SAMSUNG
Introduced
SGH-J700

10. Before introducing
I-phone,
SAMSUNG phones
were like this…

12. After the revolution of
I-phone,
SAMSUNG phones
are like this…

16. In 2010

17. Apple introduced
the
i-pad

18. SAMSUNG
Introduced
Galaxy Tab

19. Before introducing
I-pad,
SAMSUNG tab
is like this…

20. SAMSUNG Q1

23. Because of these reasons
Apple field a suit in a US court
against SAMSUNG,
Claiming that they copied
Apple’s design for its Galaxy Phones.

24. Let’s see
what
SAMSUNG copies
from Apple…

26. A rectangular product shape with all
four corners uniformly rounded

27. The front surface of the product
dominated by a screen surface with
black borders

28. Substantial black borders above
and below the screen having
roughly equal width
and
narrower black borders on
either side of the screen having
roughly equal width

29. A metallic surround framing the
perimeter of the top surface

30. A display of a grid of colorful square
icons with uniformly rounded corners.

31. A bottom row of icons set off from the
other icons and that do not change as
the pages of the user interface are
viewed.

32. Apple claimed that SAMSUNG also
imitated Apple’s product packaging
trade dress

33. Apple claimed that in addition to
copying Apple’s product trade dress,
SAMSUNG has also copied numerous
application icons in which apple had
valid trademark rights as shown
below.

34. Apple claimed that SAMSUNG’s
infringement of the Apple utility
patents provided SAMSUNG
with unique functionality for its
product that was the result of
Apple’s innovation, and not
SAMSUNG’s.

36. Apple claimed that SAMSUNG’s USB cables
are a clear knock-off of Apple’s designs.

37. Apple claimed that power adapters used for
SAMSUNG’s smartphones, which are almost an
exact replica of Apple’s USB power adapters

38. And….

39. Finally
The jury ordered
Samsung to pay Apple
$1.05 billion

40. According to my opinion…

41. Apple
is more innovative than
SAMSUNG

43. Amila Dayarathne
e-mail:- amilapc3@gmail.com
Facebook:- www.facebook.com/amilapc3