Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,779
41,982
USA
Smart move by Apple. It was ridiculous they had to post anything on their site in the first place, but this just makes it great! Thanks to the UK judge giving Apple this opportunity!

Would be funny if Samsung had to post on their site how they lost 1+ Billion dollars to Apple for copying them.

Do you understand why Apple had to do this?

For one - it has nothing to do with their case in the US.

Second - this had nothing do to with the original lawsuit in the UK. This was ordered because AFTER the verdict was given, Apple in essence negated the ruling when commenting publicly.

So tell me - why would Samsung be ordered to post anything on their website?
 

Tigger92

macrumors member
Sep 22, 2009
77
0
North Carolina
$100 wiped off the share price in 1 week.

Who is laughing Apple?

Not your shareholers

Do you seriously think this notice is the actual reason? Considering how short a time it has been out, it can't possibly be. Not to mention, most who buy and sell stocks would never base a decision on this notice....they tend to guess the market and base it on earnings.

I would also bet that that the majority of stock holders out there aren't even aware of this.
 

0000757

macrumors 68040
Dec 16, 2011
3,894
850
Reminds me of a laptop. Here is one quite similar from 2000

Image

Yes, it is silver as well. In 12 years they have got smaller - but the overall layout is the same.

Some of the blind fanboy devotion to Apple is just creepy.

lets take a look shall we:

MacBook Air:
34850077_OVR_440x330.png


Some Samsung Ultrabook:
CES_Ultrabooks_05.jpg


But wait, it must be similar to all other laptop designs right?

dell-inspiron-r,P-P-252349-13.jpg


11x04231607eyna33d.jpg


HP+Pavilion+dm4-3022tx+Beats+Edition+NoteBook+front+look+display+keyboard.jpg
 

wovel

macrumors 68000
Mar 15, 2010
1,839
161
America(s)!
Pure petulance from Apple. It's not that hard to follow simple instructions, is it? There's not room for creative license with a court ordered punishment. Well maybe I can change it around a bit here and there make me look good. Nope, not up for discussion.


And to the Apple trolls all the silly +1 comments, especially concerning the Samsung patent infringement "win". Maybe you didn't notice that the USTPO began proceedings to invalidate Apple's patents used the $1 billion payout case. I'm sure there's a whole lot more of that to follow. The case is slowly unravelling. It was a ridiculous decision in the first place.

https://www.macrumors.com/2012/10/2...to-samsung-lawsuit-preliminarily-invalidated/

The "win" is being tarnished more and more, as more and more evidence and due diligence is being done on the case. I can see Samsung perhaps not paying out anything at all if the case is overturned and at worst a measly fraction of total punitive damages.

Didn't they move to invalidate one patent that was a small part of the judgement? In any case, your use of the plural was misleading.
 

craftytony

macrumors regular
Oct 3, 2012
226
0
Sycamore, IL
Do you understand why Apple had to do this?

For one - it has nothing to do with their case in the US.

Second - this had nothing do to with the original lawsuit in the UK. This was ordered because AFTER the verdict was given, Apple in essence negated the ruling when commenting publicly.

So tell me - why would Samsung be ordered to post anything on their website?

I will tell you why....Because it would be funny and make me giggle.....

Now calm down, relax, munch on a chocolate chip cookie or something...life is too short, and it's not even noon yet buddy....lol
 

tbrinkma

macrumors 68000
Apr 24, 2006
1,651
93

He claims the judge didn't use the reasoning that the Tab isn't as cool as the iPad as part of the ruling.

Unfortunately, he's directly contradicted by the ruling itself. Heck, the section of the ruling in question is quoted, word for word, in Apple's acknowledgement which is the topic of discussion here. It's even quoted, in the article at the start of this thread!

For clarity, it is paragraph 190 from the ruling (first link in the acknowledgement). I'll include it below (emphasis added to help draw Olestros's eye to the key portion of this particular quote):

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. The overall impression produced is different.


----------

Another time, I have read the fracking paragraph, what it is false is the claim that they didn't infringe because it is not cool.

Got it?

The only thing false here is your claim.

It's in the freaking ruling. That part of the ruling is quoted, word for word, in Apple's acknowledgement of the ruling. Your denial doesn't change the facts.

Got it?



----------



And, for the record, I'd like to announce that I was both right *and* wrong about Apple's final response to this particular can of worms.

Right: I saw, and called, the 'wiggle room' in the order which allowed the further wording of Apple's acknowledgement.
Wrong: I didn't actually think Apple would take advantage of that 'wiggle room'.
 
Last edited:

Macist

macrumors 6502a
Mar 13, 2009
784
462
I'm no fan of Apple's army of legal eagles but this is amusing.

Apple have managed to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.
 

stevaroo01

macrumors newbie
Oct 26, 2012
21
5
Pensacola, FL USA
I find the whole thing amusing... Pretty ridiculous (IMO) that this was mandated by a court! But if they have to do it I don't see any harm in Apple pointing out the judge's opinion which in turn is great advertisement for Apple. "Yeah, we didn't win the court case and have to post this dumb ad. But the reason is because our products are cooler and Samsung really doesn't have anything to be proud of anyway because other courts have agreed with us that they stole our designs." I'm sure this isn't what the judge had in mind, but he didn't give much of a guideline. And if you're going to give them a punishment like they're in kindergarten, then you can probably expect a response that is similarly "childish".
 
Last edited:

Oletros

macrumors 603
Jul 27, 2009
6,002
60
Premià de Mar
He claims the judge didn't use the reasoning that the Tab isn't as cool as the iPad as part of the ruling.

No, I have not said that. If you can't understand that simple fact now it is clear why do you don't understand that the judge didn't ruled that the tablet is not infringed BECAUSE it is not cool.

Being cool or not doesn't affect at all the infringement, the ruling says that they don't infringe because they are different
 

JAT

macrumors 603
Dec 31, 2001
6,473
124
Mpls, MN
The only thing false here is your claim.

It's in the freaking ruling. That part of the ruling is quoted, word for word, in Apple's acknowledgement of the ruling. Your denial doesn't change the facts.

Got it?
Well, it really depends on what your definition of "is" is.
 

Tech198

Cancelled
Mar 21, 2011
15,915
2,151
So....Apple is trying to start WWIII between UK and Germany?

Apple WOULD have to go after Germany.

Classc case of "cat & mouse" syndrome...

I think theres a cure for that.
 
Last edited:

LordVic

Cancelled
Sep 7, 2011
5,938
12,458
Edit; just read the next section.

Doesn't really go against it. The judge says he wants to avoid consumers believing the Tab is an illegal product. No where do Apple allude to the Tab being illegal.

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.

They sure as hell implied it in this statement.

Everything else seemed good by the description. But adding a subnote here. a bit "BUT!", its a very big slap at the judge. its basically saying, while you have the power to make this decision, because others haven't agreed with you internationally, we don't have to respect you


i hope Apple gets a nice firm slap on the wrist for that last paragraph.
 

joseph2166

macrumors 6502
Jan 11, 2006
258
5
Honestly Apple sounds like a little kid saying "oh yeah, well my dad is cooler than your dad so there" Really, all they needed to do was put the footnote there, no one will read it, no one will care.

You do realise it was the judge who mentioned how cool Apple's dad was? Poor samsung. It was the headline from the trial, with the fact of their victory relegated to second place.
 

MuppetGate

macrumors 6502a
Jan 20, 2012
649
1,084
Classic Apple

The next iPhone will probably be made of teflon ... :rolleyes:

Unfortunately, they haven't actually gone against the judgement.

The judge did not say Apple had to apologise; he said they must say that Samsung did not infringe and that the accompanying text did not have to advertise Samsung. He said that they also must provide a link to the judgement.

They've pretty much done that. If you want to blame anyone, blame the judge for being such a massive iFan, and blame Samsung for their poor legal strategy: as soon as the judge said that Apple did not infringe because Cupertino's products were cool designs and Samsung's were thin and insubstantial then Samsung should have called a halt to the proceedings on the grounds of bias.

However, by mentioning cases outside the UK, Apple may have crossed the line. The results of those cases have no bearing on the case in the UK. They will probably have to remove the last paragraph.
 

jlc1978

macrumors 603
Aug 14, 2009
5,483
4,268
Apple put what they did about the German court (even though not accurate) because if they 100% concede that Samsung didn't copy the iPad then that has implications further down the road with lawsuits. They (I imagine) believe that it was a better risk to post it.

Apple's legal department no doubt carefully considered the ramifications and you may be right about the reasoning.

I am surprised (somewhat) about Apple's snarky cool comment, maybe the Ghosts of Jobs past paid Cook a visit.

At any rate, it'll be fun to grab some popcorn and watch the play unfold...
 

PaulChowHK

macrumors regular
Jan 13, 2011
169
0
It better they be friends and not fighting. The lawyers loving it and we all losing because we not seeing best designs
 

LordVic

Cancelled
Sep 7, 2011
5,938
12,458
Apple has done nothing to warrant such a loss. It's just Wall Street being idiots, which is nothing new when it comes to Apple. It's a great time to buy Apple stock.

no? (TLDR following)
here's some things that have happened in the last few months that might negatively impact stock expectations and put hesitation in wall street investment. Remember, wall street is based on speculation, so the stock price represents what investors Believe is on the horizon for Apple.

off top of my head some stories about apple that have popped up in the last month.

1: possible split of Samsung and apple for production of LCD technologies. if this does go through, possibility Apple will be left 15 million units a year production capability Short. Finding new suppliers to make up such a tremendous supply will not be easy, nor cheap.

2: USPTO invalidation of "bounce back" patent. This patent was a major cornerstone of all the Apple v _____ lawsuits. this patent was a major proponent of the 1 billion settlement in court in the US, in which 21 devices were believed by the jury to infringe. Without this patent, that is a tremendous reduction of possible damages and infringing devices and will require a serious look back at what damages were awarded.

3: inevitable appeal by Samsung in the USA due to inconsistencies during the Apple v Samsung case. From Jury issues that have been released (conflict of interest and potential lying jury foreman, to a judge who "overstepped her authority" by granting a preliminary injunction). That 1 billion settlement is anything but a sure thing.

4: Enough attention at new product launch that their most recent iPad mini is "overpriced". it has gained enough negative attention that both Tim Cook and Paul Schiller have had to publicly defend their price point.

5: I haven't finished pouring over the financials from 4th Q. but initial investigation shows that Apple is showing a general decrease in profit margins across the board from before.

6: see 5 for this caveat, but initial impressions did not show any real growth to Apple sales. I do understand that Sept numbers do not include new ipad sales, nor i believe iphone5 sales. But as of September, Apple did not increase sales of any product over previous Quarter. In fact, if you check the fancy chart, sales were pretty flat on almost all product groups except PC sales, which is not the majority of their business.

7: Apple has lost its #1 place in the mobile smartphone market. they might be the single largest single phone vendor in the past, but currently Android has more marketshare, and Samsung if it hasn't passed apple yet in total smartphone sales isn't doing to shabby. Apple hasn't made up much ground and is conceding more.

8: Apple is currently being seen as cutting ties with Google out of spiteful reasons and not smart business decisions. Pulling youtube and google maps off iOS6 has not entirely sat well (though it's subjective obviously), the Maps fiasco has not sat well with investors.

9: Foxconn strike, health and safety concerns, and possible quality control issues speak for itself.

These are just SOME of the negative stories that have come in the last few months regarding apple. there are more. some good positive ones are there, but it seems that right now Investor confidence has started to wane. In the summer after a tremendous unprecendented boom in Iphone4s sales. Sales numbers dropped of dramatically and did not remain high as predicted. Since Q1, when investors believed Apple should easily be worth $1000 / share, and the stock price was tracking towards $700 a share, we have suddenly seen the share price drop to todays (as of right now) $602 / share.

What this indicates is that Despite the previous confidence, Investors believe Apple, if it continues on the current trend will not be as valuable a company overall as they predicted.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.