Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:51 AM   #76
618537
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDStrong View Post
The government would never interfere with the British justice system, and I am sure the judge would love that not-so-subtle threat.
Fantasy land? The government will do what it wants and when it wants if it believes it's in the "best interests".

Alienating a corporation as large as Apple would not be favourable to the country at all.
618537 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:51 AM   #77
Elbon
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by FNi View Post
There is the letter of the law, then there's the spirit of the law.
My thoughts exactly. Apple was attempting to comply with the former but not the latter. Though I will admit that I did think it was funny. :-)
Elbon is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:51 AM   #78
melendezest
macrumors 6502a
 
melendezest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Whoops! This is too funny. I love Apple's snarky "apology", but the UK courts didn't find it amusing. I guess we'll be seeing 2 notices on Apple's site: one for the UK's ridiculous (in my opinion) demand, and another for the German and US court ruling...Hmm, can'twait to see Apple's approach here.

Haha, now I really wish Steve Jobs was here for this. I wonder if he would've gone "thermonuclear" on the UK courts and said: "Screw that. We'll pull the iPad from Britain entirely." I doubt it, but that would've rocked! (even if it makes NO business sense)
__________________
Love Apple, but no 17" MBP = Strike 1. iOS 7 = Strike 2...
melendezest is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:51 AM   #79
rmwebs
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapitalQ View Post
It's buried in the footer next to the country selector. http://www.apple.com/uk
Just a thought - thats not technically the homepage from the UK. There's nothing that redirects you there. The judge could, if he wanted to, force them to put it directly on apple.com
rmwebs is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:52 AM   #80
JBaker122586
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapitalQ View Post
I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought Apple was making a mockery of the judge's ruling in the current "apology".
The original ruling was a mockery.
Apple never posted on their website that Samsung copied the iPad.
Apple never took out advertisements in the UK saying that Samsung had copied the iPad.

Therefore, a legal ruling them forcing them to post on their website and pay to take out advertisements saying Samsung didn't copy the iPad is ludicrous. Dismiss the case, or at worse, assess Apple some monetary damages to pay to Samsung for their court costs.

The fact that such a ruling is legal in the UK is frankly pretty surprising to me. The judicial system seems to have absolute power.
__________________
20" Aluminum iMac 2.4 GHz, 3 GB RAM, 320 GB HD
iPad 3rd gen, 32 GB
iPhone 4S, 32 GB
JBaker122586 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:52 AM   #81
Oletros
macrumors 601
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sseaton1971 View Post
Can you please provide a direct link to the ruling where the court told Apple exactly what to post? I looked through the ruling that was linked from the Apple UK page, and I only saw the conclusion where the court says there was no infringement. I am just curious about the wording.

Finally I should say something about the notice itself. We heard no discussion about that. Plainly Judge Birss's Schedule has been overtaken by events. Subject to anything that may be submitted by either side I would propose the following:
On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet Computers, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple's registered design No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High court is available on the following link [link given].
That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on ….. A copy of the Court of Appeal's judgment is available on the following link […]. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.


Paragraph 87 http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html
Oletros is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:52 AM   #82
PVisitors
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Not quite sure what is wrong with quoting the judge's judgment in verbatim. Prepare to see only the final (US and German courts) paragraph disappear.

It's the High Court's problem for giving such a baffling reason why Samsung don't infringe. It's only being demanded to be removed by the CA because quite simply, Judge Robin is embarrassed by Judge Birrss rationale in the High Court.
PVisitors is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:53 AM   #83
BadBabi
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by subsonix View Post
Well, Apple's legal department. Are you implying that they are incompetent?
I wouldn't say they are incompetent, just unbelievably childish. The incompetent title goes to the web designers.. 2 weeks seriously?
BadBabi is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:53 AM   #84
rmwebs
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by eversonj90 View Post
Fantasy land? The government will do what it wants and when it wants if it believes it's in the "best interests".

Alienating a corporation as large as Apple would not be favourable to the country at all.
Why would the government interfere? If Apple pulled out of the UK it would have next to no impact on the government as they avoid tax anyway, so the government wouldn't loose a penny.

Since you're so confident about this, would you care to share a few examples of the government interfering in a high profile case with a US corp?
rmwebs is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:55 AM   #85
moxxey
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nungster View Post
Bollocks! They did what the court ordered.
It's amazing how Apple fans still act like Apple is the same (underdog) circa 1997 and needs all the help and backing we can offer. Fans get heated when the "underdog" doesn't appear to get a fair hearing, as if all the big boys are seeking to bring down the company.

Seriously, it's amazing to see the same kind of approach I used to see in 1997, when it was Apple v Microsoft (et all). Fans forget that Apple is the biggest company worldwide, has billions of cash and can afford the best lawyers in the business. And fail to see that Apple has now become the bully
moxxey is offline   12 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:55 AM   #86
Hitch08
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by j_maddison View Post
The only thing the judge should be surprised at is how he came to his verdict in the first place. Does that mean that counterfeit merchandise is fine, because it's not as cool s the real thing!

Samsung copied them, it was blatant. E mails flew about internally giving explicit instructions to copy Apples design, Google warned them to stop it, and yet they didn't because it wasn't as cool as the real thing? Goodness how ridiculous.

As a UK Citizen, doesn't surprise me though, our legal system is inconsistent and shambolic.

I'd go as far to say that Judge Robin Jacob is possibly embarrassed by the fact Apple showed the world how ridiculous the judgement was, by simply quoting the judgement. It's his pride that's taking a knock, and that's why he's outraged.
I think you are dead on accurate. I find it bizzare that the Court ordered them to post something in the first place.
Hitch08 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:56 AM   #87
livingston
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Well after skimming through the ruling, I've gotta say Apple was pretty dumb about this.

They should have just said what the judge told them to. It really wouldn't have made them look bad, or made them lose customers because frankly no one cares about the outcome of this case other then ppl on forums.

But now, Apple looks stupid, and a story like this might make them look bad since it has all the makings of a mainstream type of story.

All that being said, I still think Apple is way more mature and classy than Samsung.
livingston is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:56 AM   #88
rmwebs
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by moxxey View Post
And fail to see that Apple has now become the bully
Thats putting it lightly too!
rmwebs is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:57 AM   #89
erzhik
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
To anyone defending Apple:
Stop it, stop it right now please. Apple was clearly making fun of the ruling and Samsung with their original statement. Apple is not a 10 year old child, they are a billion dollar company and should act like one instead of acting like a ******** brat. Apple got what was coming to them. This wasn't some child's play, this was a court ruling and they should've followed that (no, their initial apology is not following that order, how about you read up that statement and court's order). If I was the judge in that case, I would've fined them for that as well. Apple has more than 1 lawyer, I am damn sure if all those lawyers put their collective minds together, they can write a normal, legal apology without taking up 2 weeks. Christ, college students write thesis papers in less than that.
erzhik is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:57 AM   #90
126351
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBaker122586 View Post
The judicial system seems to have absolute power.
Much better than letting whoever has the deepest pockets do whatever they want.
126351 is offline   8 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:57 AM   #91
RDStrong
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by PVisitors View Post
Not quite sure what is wrong with quoting the judge's judgment in verbatim. Prepare to see only the final (US and German courts) paragraph disappear.

It's the High Court's problem for giving such a baffling reason why Samsung don't infringe. It's only being demanded to be removed by the CA because quite simply, Judge Robin is embarrassed by Judge Birrss rationale in the High Court.
Probably because they were ordered to print and post only the following:

Quote:
"On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronics (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet computers, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple's registered design 000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High Court is available via the following link [insert hyperlink]."
RDStrong is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:58 AM   #92
reasonosx
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Glasgow
I was surprised when the ruling and appeal ruling went against Apple. But then again I was surprised when the company beat the Beatles on the issue of the Apple trademark for music-related activity.
The British (in this case the English and Welsh) courts decide on issues of British law. Apple would have been better advised not to try to be smarmily smart. The average high-ranking British judge is "cool" as in they do "get" irony and they're not easily impressed by gauche one-upmanship.
The UK is an important market for Apple and an important source of talent for its iTunes store and, of course, its industrial design (and thankfully now also its human interface) activities.
But it appears there's a very great deal that it doesn't know about the UK ... as even a cursory glance at its Maps app will confirm.
reasonosx is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:58 AM   #93
618537
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by FNi View Post
Wow, you're very misinformed about your own country.
Yes, totally misinformed. /sarcasm

Quote:
Originally Posted by FNi View Post
The government won't let it get out of hand for fear of alienating Apple? Even if this were remotely true, Apple is one of the UK's biggest tax avoiders, so why would they care? You think the government hasn't got bigger things to worry that they can go to war against the British legal system over an American company? Yeah, that will win them support...
Because making a corporation pay tax becomes so much easier when you go and alienate them. It'll only give them more incentive to opt out wherever and whenever they can, the relationship would become strained.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FNi View Post
And for the record, the UK justice system is one of the most consistent and balanced systems in the world. A few fringe articles within our agenda heavy press doesn't change that fact.
It's still inconsistent and unbalanced, even the judges that hand down the judgements say it. Take a Google, look at today's news, think back to the riot judgements. etc etc
618537 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:58 AM   #94
livingston
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by erzhik View Post
To anyone defending Apple:
Stop it, stop it right now please. Apple was clearly making fun of the ruling and Samsung with their original statement. Apple is not a 10 year old child, they are a billion dollar company and should act like one instead of acting like a ******** brat. Apple got what was coming to them. Apple has more than 1 lawyer, I am damn sure if all those lawyers put their collective minds together, they can write a normal, legal apology without taking up 2 weeks. Christ, college students write thesis papers in less than that.
I have to admit they stooped top Samsung level. That's pretty sad.
livingston is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 08:59 AM   #95
TheMacPotato
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Apple have been ordered to make the homepage link at least 11pt text too. I notice the current one (10px) has a class name of ".sosumi" ....hmm
TheMacPotato is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 09:01 AM   #96
subsonix
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadBabi View Post
I wouldn't say they are incompetent, just unbelievably childish. The incompetent title goes to the web designers.. 2 weeks seriously?
The ruling itself is unbelievably childish. I don't think the update itself takes two weeks, but preparing the new text, finding time to do it and make the update, with some added margin in a large organization doesn't sound unreasonable.
subsonix is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 09:01 AM   #97
Mike in Kansas
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Metro Kansas City
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puonti View Post
Apple's note was funny, childish and absolutely not what the judge had in mind.
And it was awesome. Glad to see the huge gigantic Apple still has the sarcasm of Jobs...
__________________
13" 2012 MBA/i7/8GB/256GB
24" 2008 iMac/2.8GHz/6GB/240GB SSD & 2TB FW800 HDD "Fused"
2GB TC; ATV 3; 32GB iPad 4; iPhone 5
Nikon D300 / Nikkor 35mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.8, 70-300mm VR / Sigma 10-20mm
Mike in Kansas is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 09:04 AM   #98
Oletros
macrumors 601
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by subsonix View Post
The ruling itself is unbelievably childish. I don't think the update itself takes two weeks, but preparing the new text, finding time to do it and make the update, with some added margin in a large organization doesn't sound unreasonable.
You're kidding, don't you?
Oletros is offline   8 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 09:05 AM   #99
unplugme71
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: May 2011
The more news I hear about this, the more I don't like Samsung. Even if Samsung didn't do anything and it was the judge, I still look at Samsung to blame. I'm sure others do too.

If anything, Samsung should just say forget about it as it makes them look worse now.
unplugme71 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 09:05 AM   #100
tatonka
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
No matter who is right or wrong legally here .. comparative advertisement always leaves a very bad taste in my mouth .. never was a fan of the i am a mac commercials and I don't like this childish BS either.

That said .. Samsung is not a stranger to this type of marketing either, which is no better, even if they come from the underdog position.

T.
tatonka is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:23 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC