Home / News / Mobile Phone News / Apple exec claims Samsung ‘went and copied the iPhone’

Apple exec claims Samsung ‘went and copied the iPhone’

Luke Johnson



Samsung ‘went and copied the iPhone,” Apple’s Senior Vice President of Worldwide Product Marketing, Phil Schiller has told a Californian court.

With the longstanding legal battle between the two companies hitting fever pitch, Apple’s Schiller has suggested that the first Samsung Galaxy S handset was a direct copy of the iPhone and caused consumers to question Apple’s ‘innovation and design skills’.

As a retrial between Apple and Samsung continues over the Korean manufacturer’s claimed infringement on its Cupertino-based rival’s patent and trademark holdings, Schiller has laid the boot into Samsung, suggesting its copying made it harder to sell iPhone and iPad devices.

"They went and copied the iPhone" Schiller told Judge Lucy Koh during his testimony in California. He added that he had been left “quite shocked” after the original Samsung Galaxy S was unveiled.

Detailing the damages he believes Samsung’s claimed infringements had on Apple, Schiller stated: “It weakens the view that the world has for Apple. He added that the copying made consumers “question our innovation and design skills in a way that people never used to.”

Further looking to highlight his point, upon being shown a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in court Schiller is reported to have said: “I don’t know which Samsung devices are allowed to copy our devices and which ones aren’t. It looks like an iPad.”

Despite courts last August ordering Samsung to pay $1.05 billion (£650m) in damages to Apple, a figure later lowered, Apple has taken its rival back to court, seeking a higher fee. While Samsung believes it should pay just $52 million in damages, Apple is seeking a settlement closer to $380 million.

Defending its own corner, Samsung’s legal representatives have hit out at the iMac and iPod touch maker, stating “Apple doesn’t own a patent on a product being beautiful or sexy. Apple doesn’t own the right to preclude the design of this hardware.”

Read More: iPhone 5S review

Via: WallStreetJournal

Tim Sutton

November 17, 2013, 1:43 pm

I'll just leave this here.

Grahame C

November 17, 2013, 3:43 pm

Get a life Apple. Very little is truly original today. Indeed a lot of your original Macintosh was copied from Xerox Park back in the day. This is how the world works. You are highly profitable, enjoy your success and keep innovating, you can afford to. This is how you will keep customers impressed.

Jeff G

November 17, 2013, 7:52 pm

Learn your tech history. Apple paid Xerox for the technology it 'took'.


November 17, 2013, 9:42 pm

Apple against Samsung makes me think of King Canute trying to hold back the tide. Apple are never going to compete with their two handsets against a whole armada of Android ones. This just feels like Apple pointlessly following Job's last vow to destroy Android, when they would be better going back to what they're good at - which is innovating.

As Tim's pointed out, smartphones were already converging on the iPhone design. It's just that Apple's handset was the first where CPU, battery and display technology came together to make it possible.


November 18, 2013, 5:33 am

No, if they had copied iphone they would not be on the lead. They improved the iphone. Android is the best phone by miles


November 18, 2013, 8:56 am

Hehe.... so Apple stole from Samsung?


November 18, 2013, 9:36 am

Android is not a "phone"; it is a mobile operating system, and a highly fragmented one at that. There are Android handsets that are superior in some regards to even the latest iPhones, and if you want a larger than 4" screen, NFC or a more open experience then you obviously have to rule out Apple's offerings. If, however, you want the best build quality, largest and best curated selection of software, seamless integration with other Apple products, or a host of other things that are either exclusive to, or done better by, Apple, then the iPhone remains a standout choice. I'm trying to remain neutral in this post, and Android is certainly a compelling choice (the "right" choice) for many people), but I resent unfounded statements like yours that irrationally dismiss Apple's products, because the implication is that anyone who purchases an iPhone is an "iSheep" with no tech knowledge, who made his or her decision based on style and blind brand loyalty alone. There are undoubtedly those people who fit that description, but I - along with many, many others - took an informed look at the market and made my choice based on which handset best addressed my requirements. The time is approaching to replace my iPhone 4S, and I am going through the same evaluative process. Guess what - Apple is leading again. "By miles".


November 18, 2013, 9:37 am

And, of course, you are defeating your own argument. If they have "improved the iPhone", then by implication they copied it, looked at what they liked and didn't like, and made iterative improvements to it. The iPhone 5S is indisputably an improvement on the iPhone 5, and it on the 4S before it. Are you saying that that means the iPhone 5S is not derivative of the earlier Apple handsets?


November 18, 2013, 10:12 am

Sour grapes Apple...

Tim Sutton

November 18, 2013, 11:27 am

I think its fairer to say that design convergence from all manufacturers was inevitable, because there really aren't many ways to have a rectangular screen with as little frame around it as possible.

Having said that. Apple do like to borrow and refine ideas from others, and their horrifically hypocritical legal actions do stick in my throat somewhat.

Apart from anything else, I don't think it should be possible to sue someone claiming you own the rectangle. Especially when other people used it first.


November 18, 2013, 12:54 pm

No, learn your tech history. Apple only paid Xerox for the technology that it stole after a very long, protracted legal dispute.


November 18, 2013, 1:11 pm

The horrifying thing is that a rectangle with rounded corners and a bounce effect on a gallery is much more valuable in court than the real marvels of microtechnology that our devices are built upon.
Companies like Motorola, Samsung and Nokia that spend millions on research and development in electronics and communications often have their inventions used without payment - because of FRAND. In the recent lawsuit where Apple devices were banned in the States (but then overturned by Obama), Apple had offered a sum verging on zero for the telecoms tech covered by FRAND, and simply refused to enter negotiations - a favourite, tried-and-tested tactic of theirs. When their offer was inevitably rejected they went ahead and used the technology anyway, claiming FRAND. However, they were finally caught out by the courts this time, but Obama bailed them out.

comments powered by Disqus