Apple Ordered to Alter Website Statement Acknowledging Samsung Galaxy Tab Did Not Infringe on iPad Design

[Prallethrin]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

Link was posted about 2 dozen times already in the thread. This is the July 18th ruling, with Apple's quote, etc.. :

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup...method=boolean

Thanks. I only skimmed this thread. This fills in a lot of details.

/sigh

Apple should just state the outcome of the case and that they disagree with it - that is clearly permitted by the ruling if I'm not mistaken - and be done with it.

The newspaper ads might be a tad much though, rich as Apple may be they still have to pay signicfiant amount of money for it.

In general, I can't say I agree with points 49-54. It's perfectly legal for Apple to publicly statement that they believe Samsung infringes on their right, whether it affects Samsung's reputation completely depends on how the public takes the statement - out of Apple's control. Samsung should be responsible for defending their own reputation in public. Having Apple pay for the dissemination of the verdict is obscure - it could also be interpreted by the public as wrongdoing on Apple's part; I'm surprised Apple's lawyers didn't bring this up.

Personally I find the judgement controversial.

To be honest, when you think about it, the whole thing is much ado about nothing - the whole thing is about dissemination of a verdict. Guess we have the tech press to thank for the sensationalizing of it again.

[linux2mac]

It doesn't matter. The Galaxy is a hunk of junk compared to the original iPad. Now Apple destroyed the competition with the latest iPad and iPad Mini release.

[muckydoggy1]

Originally Posted by SiPat

I live in the UK, and we have a saying here:

"The law is an ass", and that applies to this judge in spades.

If you were really British, you'd have spelt it 'arse' so I'm beginning to speculate over your nationality.

----------

Originally Posted by Prallethrin

In general, I can't say I agree with points 49-54. It's perfectly legal for Apple to publicly statement that they believe Samsung infringes on their right

No it's not legal, it's called Libel and has been illegal since the beginning of the British legal system; a legal system that's made up pretty much every civilised country's legal system since it's inception.[COLOR="#808080"]

[reefoid]

Originally Posted by muckydoggy1

If you were really British, you'd have spelt it 'arse' so I'm beginning to speculate over your nationality.

The phrase refers to the animal, not the body part, so ass is correct.

[spyguy10709]

Originally Posted by muckydoggy1

If you were really British, you'd have spelt it 'arse' so I'm beginning to speculate over your nationality.

----------



No it's not legal, it's called Libel and has been illegal since the beginning of the British legal system; a legal system that's made up pretty much every civilised country's legal system since it's inception.[COLOR="#808080"]

How is it LIBEL? It's a true statement. It's simply a quote from a judge. From the OS X dictionary - " a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation. "

[kdarling]

There seems to be some confusion on the part of some posters.

The Appeals Court is not worried about Apple quoting the original judge's remarks.

They were concerned that Apple was continuing to try to mislead people, by adding this comment on their website:

"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."

- Apple

In actuality, the German case was NOT about the iPad, but the generic registered Community Design. Moreover, the US jury found that the Samsung tablets did NOT infringe on the same Apple design patent. So the statement was pretty incorrect. Apple even admitted it on their website:

“On 25 October 2012, Apple Inc. published a statement on its UK website in relation to Samsung's Galaxy tablet computers. That statement was inaccurate and did not comply with the order of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. The correct statement is at Samsung/Apple UK judgement."

- Apple

Trying to mislead people was the same reason why the judge decided that Apple had to post the ads in the first place:

"(Having created the confusion,) Apple itself must make the position clear: that it acknowledges that the court has decided that that these Samsung products do not infringe its registered design.

"The acknowledgement must come from the horse's mouth."

- High Court

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by linux2mac

It doesn't matter. The Galaxy is a hunk of junk compared to the original iPad. Now Apple destroyed the competition with the latest iPad and iPad Mini release.

If it doesn't matter - then why are you so full of hate?

[TAFuk]

What bollocks! Apple should never say sorry, what's the point... Are they actually sorry, do they mean it even if they publish it?? No! That uk judge is just an idiot!

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by TAFuk

What bollocks! Apple should never say sorry, what's the point... Are they actually sorry, do they mean it even if they publish it?? No! That uk judge is just an idiot!

They weren't ordered (at least originally) to write an apology. They were ordered to issue a statement stating that Samsung didn't infringe.

Do you know anything about the judgement and/or have you read this thread. or did you just skip to the end and post "drivel" ?

[JForestZ34]

Originally Posted by TAFuk

What bollocks! Apple should never say sorry, what's the point... Are they actually sorry, do they mean it even if they publish it?? No! That uk judge is just an idiot!

And I'm sure you'd feel that way if Samsung had to write or type something like this up. Your feeling this way because apple was wrong and you don't like to swallow it


James

[chris7777]

So let me get this straight, Judge Robin Jacob, did not have any problem whatsoever with Samsung's blatant copying of Apples products, packaging, and advertising. But, he had a huge problem when Apple copied his ruling verbatim?

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by chris7777

So let me get this straight, Judge Robin Jacob, did not have any problem whatsoever with Samsung's blatant copying of Apples products, packaging, and advertising. But, he had a huge problem when Apple copied his ruling verbatim?

Apple didn't copy his ruling verbatim. Try and keep up.

[unplugme71]

Originally Posted by AppleFan1984

Perhaps you missed this detail in the story, but the order didn't come from Samsung, it came from the court.

I'm aware. I just want this Apple/Samsung suit **** to end and go on to making quality products.

[chris7777]

Originally Posted by samcraig

Apple didn't copy his ruling verbatim. Try and keep up.

Not in entirety, talk about a nit picking. I assume you must be a Samsung fanboy. I don't necessarily agree with everything in the lawsuit, but when I see Samsung players side by side with ipod touches and the only major differentiation on the boxes is apple and Samsung. Only a few people would sit and argue that one is not trying to cash in on the others popularity.

[NoMoreSony]

Wow! It was extremely bad idea for Apple to joke about UK court order. And now, they have to pay more -

http://gizmodo.com/5959509/apples-go...ze-well-enough

"And Apple's apology to Samsung as order by the UK court just got even messier. After posting an apology they had to rewrite, and then pushing the rewritten one down the page with Javascript, a UK court has ordered Apple to pay Samsung's legal fees in full to even things out.

The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has ordered Apple to pay Samsung's legal fees on an "indemnity basis," saying that Apple's initial apology was "false and misleading" by virtue of referring to other cases outside of the UK (which Apple had won) to spin the whole thing in a sort of positive way. Typically losers already have to pay for the court costs of the winner in the UK, but this ruling takes that to the fullest extent of the law by basically extending it to cover every nickel and dime. It's intended to serve as a little punishment to Apple for being rather snide about the whole thing. This should bring the whole saga to a close. Hopefully. "

It's a right time to find a guilty persons within Apple and let them follow for Forstall and Browett. Childs with their childish jokes have to go home.

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by chris7777

Not in entirety, talk about a nit picking. I assume you must be a Samsung fanboy. I don't necessarily agree with everything in the lawsuit, but when I see Samsung players side by side with ipod touches and the only major differentiation on the boxes is apple and Samsung. Only a few people would sit and argue that one is not trying to cash in on the others popularity.

Assume away. It would only indicate you inability to acknowledge that there are people that can be technological agnostic. Fanboy is a terrible hyperbolic statement. And overused to the point cliche. Especially for an opinion that differs from your own. Surely you can argue your point without make the opponent some extreme on some "scale."

Further - My home is almost entirely Apple (2 imacs, 2 apple tv's, an iPad, a few iPods, a MacBook Pro, 2 iPhones). I have a samsung LED-LCD tv and also a Skyrocket phone. We also have 2 kindles.

Clearly I'm an Apple, Samsung and Amazon fanboy. I must be since I own their tech right?

[samcraig]

And this just in -

Apple is now being forced to pay Samsung's legal bill...

http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/11/u...ing-orders-fu/

[funkybudda]

Originally Posted by samcraig

And this just in -

Apple is now being forced to pay Samsung's legal bill...

http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/11/u...ing-orders-fu/

lol, WTF-PWNED.

[wikus]

LMFAO! This was the best news story I've read in a long time. Too bad it didnt make headlines elsewhere. Absolutely hilarious to see Apple try and troll the system only to get slapped and forced to abide by the law.

Oh man, I've been waiting a long time for Karma to bite Apple right back in the a$$. Long overdue for their all their shady practices.