Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Ordered to Alter Website Statement Acknowledging Samsung Galaxy Tab Did Not Infringe on iPad Design
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's only short sighted of people to see major corporations as major tax avoiders and not being worth part of the UK economy.
The very fact that they have turnovers as high as they do is incentive enough for the government to work to address such avoidance. For that to happen it requires everyone to be on fairly good terms, at worse unbalanced but certainly not at each others throats because some judge got a little upset that they were quoted and Samsung continued to be embarrassed.
Personally as a tax payer I'd rather have Apple cough up their tax than spend money on court time chasing them over something as stupid as this.
Apple should stop playing dumb, grow up, and to what the court ordered. If they want to sell products in the UK they should follow the law.
It's good you read the judgment
The judge could have avoided setting himself up with some of those embarrassing quotes though
In a free society, there are always two options: abiding by the law (and the verdicts of its courts) or facing the consequences.
In principle, one may opt to just face the consequences. Especially if one has Apple's cash reserves.
In principle, one may opt to just face the consequences. Especially if one has Apple's cash reserves.
I don't think there is too many people with such a strong bias. I am still at a loss how somebody could blame this on Samsung ..
They only complied with a court order and stated the facts / quotes. Which they're perfectly entitled to do so.
Does it affect the quality of their products? No.
Last edited:
Yes, Apple was making fun of the ruling with the original statement. It was a stupid ruling that deserved mockery, tyrants should be given no respect.
And yes, I'll call it tyranny. What the original court demanded is that Apple affirmatively state the judgement as correct, to go beyond that and state not just no infringement but no copying. The mark of a democracy is the right to tell every government official "you're wrong" and say about every governmental action "This is wrong". This court decision required Apple to publicly and at their own expense state the decision was wrong. Particularly when there was no action to cure, no posts on the website about how terrible Samsung was to copy their designs or advertisements about how you shouldn't buy from those copycats Samsung.
And so, they did indeed publicly state the judgement, they also pointed out that there have been judgements going the other way. The tyrants are now insisting not only that Apple affirm their decision but deny other decisions.
Well, they have the power of the law. I wonder if they will object to Apple adding one line, "And yet it moves"
Was it really necessary for Samsung to take it back to court? This is where it starts becoming a problem for them... the judge already said "They are not as cool.".
I think Samsung were hoping for an amazing apology they could use for PR instead they got an apology but surrounded by facts about how uncool their product was in comparison and how other jurisdictions differed in judgements.
That's perhaps a cultural difference between the UK and US. I'd guess that most judges in the US wouldn't think of writing an opinion using those kinds of words, even in passing, and they'd be more specific in issuing an order, since it's the letter of the law, not the "spirit" (which is subject to interpretation) that is normally enforceable.
Likely Apple's attorneys knew quite well that the appellate court could smack them down, but they decided to take a gamble. If nothing more, it got the judge's words about Samsung's device not being "cool" out there for a few more days.
I don't know whether Apple would be enjoined from putting a second link elsewhere on their website saying "Additional information about IP lawsuits around the world" stating factual truths, such as that a jury in a US federal court did find Samsung to be infringing upon design patents. My guess is that the judges won't want a link on the "official" notice, but what's to stop a company from posting a factual truth on its website?
They did, it was just viewed as half-arsed.
Samsung upset that it apologises but states facts and quotes, judge unhappy over the use of "They're not as cool.".
Judge facilitated half of the text:
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/samsung-apple.pdf
Not complying would have been to do nothing at all.
Everybody and their mother sees that Apples text goes against the intention of the ruling, which is to set the record straight, not to pile on. Regardless of the original source of the statements. Apple knew what they were doing and they got slapped on their finger for it.
I know that in the USA corporations are often given the same rights as people but... Apple is a corporation and not an individual with the right to vote. If they wish to do business in the UK then they must abide by the court's decision.
take a step back:
Samsung copies Apple
Apple sues
Samsung crys and sends out mocks
Apple sends out mock
--
Who started it?
Yes Samsung copied Apple much like Chrylser copied Ford in making wheels.
Last edited by a moderator:
Judge facilitated ALL the text, Apple didn't comply and wrote more that they were allowed.
lol what?
Samsung isn't looking bad at all.
Apple compares just as much as Samsung. Hell they had the Nexus 7 up at their last conference.
So remove the red text? While Samsung weren't found guilty the judgement is still embarrassing for them as it makes them the one with the lesser product.
They set the record straight in the quote below... no need for any more or grovelling apologies.
On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limiteds Galaxy Tablet Computer, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apples registered design No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High court is available on the following link http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html.
In the ruling, the judge made several important points comparing the designs of the Apple and Samsung products:
"The extreme simplicity of the Apple design is striking. Overall it has undecorated flat surfaces with a plate of glass on the front all the way out to a very thin rim and a blank back. There is a crisp edge around the rim and a combination of curves, both at the corners and the sides. The design looks like an object the informed user would want to pick up and hold. It is an understated, smooth and simple product. It is a cool design."
"The informed user's overall impression of each of the Samsung Galaxy Tablets is the following. From the front they belong to the family which includes the Apple design; but the Samsung products are very thin, almost insubstantial members of that family with unusual details on the back. They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool."
That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 18 October 2012. A copy of the Court of Appeals judgment is available on the following link http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.
However, in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.