Samsung Galaxy Gear ad copies original iPhone ad from 2007 [SameSung]

Monday, October 7, 2013
By OP Editor

Finally, Samsung made a great ad that the people like. I wonder why.

Samsung copies 2007 iPhone TV ad

Matthew Panzarino (@panzer), senior editor of Techcrunch noticed that Samsung is trying to pass off a copy of the original iPhone TV ad as its own.

2007 – first Apple iPhone TV ad:

The iPhone ad:

  • Shows a traditional looking device
  • Shows montage of movie & TV characters talking to the device
  • Shows the new device

Now, over six years later, Samsung follows.

2013 October – SameSung Galaxy Gear ad:

Surely the ripping off the first TV ad of the iconic Apple iPhone by Samsung is totally a coincidence.

This is not the first time Samsung copied an Apple TV ad. At least they didn’t hire the same actress this time.

And the funny thing is that while the Apple iPhone revolutionized the phone industry, the Samsung Galaxy Gear watch is universally panned. Even the Samsung-sponsored The Verge called the ad “Samsung’s best commercial is for its worst product.”

That’s because similar to the HP Slate that tried to preempt the rumored Apple iPad tablet, the Samsung watch is based on rumors of the Apple iWatch. Without an actual iWatch to copy, Samsung can’t make a useful product.


Related Posts

  1. Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 copies iPad mini thin border design [SameSung]
  2. Difference between Apple iPhone “Hello” and Samsung Gear ad
  3. Samsung Copies 2008 iPhone 3G Design [SameSung]
  4. Samsung Copies Genius Bar [SameSung]
  5. Samsung Copies Apple iPod touch [SameSung]

Tags: Apple, Counterfeit, iPhone, Samsung, Video

21 Responses to “Samsung Galaxy Gear ad copies original iPhone ad from 2007 [SameSung]”

  1. freeazy

    “I’m old enough not to believe in coincidences anymore.”

  2. CopyRat

    I see what you did there!

  3. Samdung

    Apple iwatch strategy: 1. “Leak” rumor 2. R&D while “competition” stumbles to be first + creates a market 3. Launch superior product 4. $$$

    • BaronAaron

      I’ve actually been thinking the exact same thing. For the last few years Apple has had the potential luxury of simply releasing rumors about products they’re considering, letting their competitors rush something to market to beat Apple to the punch, then see what works and what sucks for real people and build their device to address those needs.

  4. John

    If I’m not mistaken, Apple’s iPhone ad was not their idea… nor that of their agency… and was “inspired” (shot by shot) by the work of a filmmaker who put together a montage of movie people saying “Hello”.

    I’m no fan of Samsung (except their TVs) or their behavior, but really… in this particular case it’s just a cleaver takeoff. This type of “inspired” stuff has been going on since the beginning of advertising… and unlike Apple’s “Hello” spot, it does kind of have a “plot”.

    • immovableobject

      That’s just a pathetic defense. While I agree that no idea is completely original, you can’t deny that Apple was first to use this movie montage concept in an ad to sell a high-tech phone device.

      I don’t, for a second, believe that Samsung wasn’t fully aware of Apple’s iPhone commercial. They clearly decided to copy it wholesale, as is their way. There is nothing “clever” about it. Samsung clearly lacks the creativity or guts to try something different from what Apple has already proved successful.

    • John

      1st) What ever happened to “off topic / RUDE comments” being removed? Rhetorical question… of course.

      2nd) I’m replying to my own comment in order to reply to a reply. All comments really require a “Reply” button… otherwise there is, in fact, no “discussion” happening.

      3rd) To immovableobject, I gues I must have struck a raw nerve. Not sure what would justify such a response.

      The comments were not pathetic, as they were simply not a defense of Samsung. As an Apple user since 1986, I have no reason to “defend” Samsung. The commentary was simply an observation, a statement of facts about Apple’s first iPhone ad, and the differences between it and the Samsung spot.

      If anything, it was euphemistically generous to call the original iPhone spot “inspired” when, in fact, it raised a bit of a stink at the time, and… to rub salt in a wound, premiering at (of all things) the Academy Awards broadcast. “Inspired” was not the word that many (particularly among the Mac artistic/filmic communities) used to describe Apple’s “inspiration”.

      And I never said that Samsung wasn’t aware of what they were doing… or that they were being creative… or had guts.

    • Mike

      That is correct. The Apple ad was based on _Telephone_ by Christian Marclay, from 1995.

      _Telephone_ isn’t just some little thing by a nobody filmmaker — it is commonly taught in contemporary art history classes.

      Supposedly Apple contacted him about using the concept prior to launching the ad. He declined. They went ahead anyway.

    • So Apple tried to pay him and Marclay refused. Marclay’s own lawyer said that Apple doesn’t owe him anything.

      How does that excuse Samsung’s shameless copying of everything Apple?

  5. Spiderific

    The vergetable

  6. bhuto

    If you have to tell people it’s the next great thing – it propably isn’t.

    • Thanks flimbus,

      It seems to me that Apple voluntarily tried to do the right thing and pay Marclay, and he refused. (His own lawyer told him that Apple doesn’t owe him anything).

      So did Samsung approach Apple or Marclay to license the concept? I think not.

  7. Nicolas

    On the plus side, Samsung shows great taste in music for this ad, with “Someone great” from LCD Soundsystem. Doesn’t engage emotionally as well as the Apple music, though.

    • Mike

      Oh it’s a great and powerful song, though not exactly uplifting and inspiring. They could have found something more fitting and not one about someone dying.

  8. Samsung is headed by a convicted felon who bought off the Korean Govt. with millions in order to get out of jail. What do you expect from a criminal outfit like Samsung. Of course more crime it is the way they operate.

    It looks as if they have extended their crime wave to the US. The jury trial that found Samsung willfully infringed on several Apple patents only to have the verdict delayed over a year and the award to Apple reduced by a Korean- American Judge, Judy Koh. Something really smells fishy their maybe the Ninth District ought to conduct an investigation into the judge herself. Our suit happy DOJ is just trying another extortion gambit with that books trial. They were successful with the Publishers so they thought they could also get a piece of Apple’s cash pile. ITC’s behavior looks like they are also might be in on the pay off party.

    Samsung is ripping off America’s most innovative company(Apple) with the help of the Korean Government. They are literally copyoholics with no respect for intellectual property. Why in the world are we spending all this money and endangering about 35,000 US military people to defend this crime organization. America is struggling with a burdensome National Debt let’s bring those troops home from Korea and let Korea defend themselves. We could put the money to better use reducing our debt at a very minimum.

    They are now appealing for President Obama to appeal the import ban of their products coming into the US starting at midnight on Oct. 8th. Let’s hope Obama does the right thing and protects an American manufacturer and lets the ban stand.

    Samsung is a proven criminal organisation Chaired by a *convicted* criminal in collusion with a corrupted government. Read about it here

    Little wonder they’ll stop at nothing to gain an advantage (that’s what criminals do).


  9. Mike

    Don’t you get it?

    When you watch this ad you initially think “oh Apple” and you wonder how you missed the big announcement of the Apple watch.

    The POINT of this advertisement is to bring thoughts of Apple to your mind so they can counterpunch that with the Samsung branding on the last frame. The watcher is meant to be surprised and see Samsung as “the new apple”.

    This is clever.

    • AC-Sirius

      interesting point. unfortunately, it’s not reasonable to call Samsung the “new Apple” since … well, Samsung is anything but. but sure, if you’re arguing that the point was to counterfeit an Apple ad as a way of demonstrating in a tv spot that Samsung is counterfeiting Apple left and right, that is pretty clever.

  10. Samsung also pretends to be a Japanese company in its advertising around the world. Some examples are here :

  11. Brandan

    It’s not Samsung, it’s Samsuck. It’s a company or should I say CULTURE that’s not concerned with being original or a pioneer in a particular field. It sits and wait for a hit then it copy copy copy, add a little extra bell and whistle then claim itself as the competitor to the original. They have no shame, you see it over and over again how they blatantly copy and have the audacity to make a claim for credit. It’s so embarrassing, but Samsuck doesn’t even care as long as they’re making money from the oblivious zombies who buys their products.


Site Search

iPad Air 2 Case

Popular Tags