Apple should sue the judge now for 'forcing Apple to damage their reputation' or some such nonsense.
If judges don't want their rulings quoted then perhaps they should leave out those parts. The ad was specified down to the font size; if the judge had wanted specific text and nothing else on the page, then he should have said so.
What I find more concerning is that a High Court patents judge thinks that "Samsung's product isn't as cool or as well designed as Apple, ergo there is no infringement" is a perfectly rational judgment. What sort of precedent does this set, from his judgment one could easily conclude therefore that any iPad [or other product] knock offs could then be construed as not infringing as they're not as 'cool'.
This the part that irks me. It seem lost on the judge that the public could misinterpret this as admission of "wrongdoing" on part of Apple. I'm surprised Apple's lawyers didn't bring this up.
Well, it too late now unless they appeal again. But given that Apple didn't appeal immediately probably means they aren't interested in doing so.
And they did so, have you read the ruling?
Nice cherry picking.
That wasn't the only reason for there being no infringement.
Perhaps you'd like to read the full judgement. The "They are not cool" line is in section 190 out of 191. There was a lot more reasoning taken over the decision than "Samsung's product isn't as cool or as well designed as Apple, ergo there is no infringement".
Nice cherry picking.
That wasn't the only reason for there being no infringement.
Perhaps you'd like to read the full judgement. The "They are not cool" line is in section 190 out of 191. There was a lot more reasoning taken over the decision than "Samsung's product isn't as cool or as well designed as Apple, ergo there is no infringement".
Anyone that looks at that newspaper page won't even read it because its just a load of text & looks like the standard bunch of terms and conditions that you find at the bottom of an ad that no one reads.
If I was Apple, I would close the UK web and retail stores. The amount of jobs lost would piss off a lot of people and the government.
Forum Rules said:Threads and posts on controversial political, religious, and social issues are to be limited to the Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum, and made only by those eligible for that forum.
Well, it too late now unless they appeal again. But given that Apple didn't appeal immediately probably means they aren't interested in doing so.
It's obvious that you haven't. Because there is nothing written.
The ruling is here: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/samsung-apple.pdf
There is nothing in this ruling that says Apple has to run any advertisements.
Nice cherry picking.
That wasn't the only reason for there being no infringement.
Perhaps you'd like to read the full judgement. The "They are not cool" line is in section 190 out of 191. There was a lot more reasoning taken over the decision than "Samsung's product isn't as cool or as well designed as Apple, ergo there is no infringement".
There is nothing in this ruling that says Apple has to run any advertisements.
Apple is clearly upset with the verdict and is dragging their feet. Of course they could do it in just a few minutes, but because they don't HAVE TO, they won't do it. This is their little LEGAL way of annoying the judge.
Apple tried to argue that it would take 14 days to post an updated notice on its website, but the request was shot down. In fact, Judge Jacob made it clear that Apple's actions are beginning to make him testy.
"I would like to see the head of Apple make an affidavit setting out the technical difficulties which means Apple cant put this on" its site, Jacob said. "I just cant believe the instructions youve been given. This is Apple. They cannot put something on their website?"
This court-ordered ad is just chickens**t by Apple haters who would like to drag down something good that is happening in the world. Reminds me of the old PC-Mac arguments.
The court ordered ad is by the same judge that said the iPad was cooler. So he's an Apple fan when says their products are cool, but he's an Apple hater when he tells Apple not to take his verdict lightly ?
No, I think he's a balanced and objective person.
The idea of needing to post on your own site that a product didn't infringe just because you lost the case is pretty strong new precedent which is pretty much unheard of in modern patent law.
Since when was cool a differentiator between products.
Anyone that looks at that newspaper page won't even read it because its just a load of text & looks like the standard bunch of terms and conditions that you find at the bottom of an ad that no one reads.
Have to agree, I don't understand what Apple actually did wrong here. They accused Samsung of copying their products by taking the matter to court.
It's obvious that you haven't. Because there is nothing written.
The ruling is here: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/samsung-apple.pdf
I just read the full judgement. Either UK law is utterly different from US copyright law AND international copyright treaties, or the judge has no understanding of copyright law.
How long will it take the first fanboy to come up with some absurd pretend technical reason why Apple can't change the text in an hour? Poor apple, they think they can bend the reality of anyone who has ever published any text on the web, or edited a post. Or used a word processor. This is insane.