Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:20 AM   #126
thefourthpope
macrumors 6502a
 
thefourthpope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: DelMarVa
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetDon View Post
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"
You need to review some of your terminology. Maye a refresher course in government.

It's the right of citizens in a democracy (not corporations) to disagree with elected officials (not government officials) provided that a) they support their disagreements with relevant civil or criminal statutes, generally in the form of civil liberties, and b) continue to follow the law--including those officials' decisions--unless the law goes against the civil liberties etc of part a. This case doesn't fit any of those criteria.
thefourthpope is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:22 AM   #127
Gnomeflyer
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
This is hilarious, and the notion of "buying ad space to place the same statement" is just silly and makes me ask why? Do people there have stock in those publications?
Gnomeflyer is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:22 AM   #128
racer1441
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
So, it's against the court decision to quote the court
racer1441 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:23 AM   #129
8a22a
macrumors 6502a
 
8a22a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by mac.ross View Post
The amount of fanboyish crap in here is astounding.

The facts are that Apple was ordered to put a message on their website specifying the outcome of the ruling and to state that Samsung did NOT copy their designs as they implied.

The message they posted, although amusing, was childish and not what they were ordered to do, thus the court is ordering them to change it.

Simple.
You should see the discussion on Engadget, it's proper slanging match between Apple and Samsung fans.

Samsung fans appear to be the more childish ones. Using terms like Crapple and iSheep.
__________________
iPhone 5 32GB iPad mini 16GB TV 3
8a22a is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:23 AM   #130
tatonka
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by frayne182 View Post
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.
Yeah I know .. I didn't say Apple is better or Samsung is better .. I said I don't like comparing advertisements that undermine the opponents. Samsung does that, Apple does it .. I don't like either.
tatonka is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:24 AM   #131
RDStrong
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer1441 View Post
So, it's against the court decision to quote the court
Yes. They also didn't post the statement where they were told to post it (they simply put a hyperlink at the bottom of the main page which linked to a modified version of the statement).
RDStrong is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:24 AM   #132
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premią de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer1441 View Post
So, it's against the court decision to quote the court
Yes, it is
Oletros is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:24 AM   #133
G4DP
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 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.
Apple a big company in the UK? That is funny, that's why the have everything based in the REPUBLIC OF IRELAND?

Nothing to do with the UK.
__________________
Apple wouldn't know a cartographer if they stabbed them with a pair of compass' in the backside!
G4DP is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:26 AM   #134
618537
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Judge facilitated ALL the text, Apple didn't comply and wrote more that they were allowed.
So call in the killing squad. A US company put extra content on a website hosted within the US on US servers. UK jurisdiction over that = none.

The entire (current) situation still remains stupid and a waste of money. They got their apology albeit seen as half-arsed, they still got it.

I revert to my Apple should just tell the UKCA to shove it.[COLOR="#808080"]
618537 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:27 AM   #135
bwillwall
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
"I'm at a loss that a company such as Apple would do this," Judge Robin Jacob said today.

Apparently he doesn't know much about Apple

bwillwall is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:28 AM   #136
618537
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by G4DP View Post
Apple a big company in the UK? That is funny, that's why the have everything based in the REPUBLIC OF IRELAND?

Nothing to do with the UK.
Let's just ignore the estimated £6bn made through UK sales?
The people they employ here?
The arrangements with UK mobile networks?
The services they supply?
The businesses they kit out?
The consumers that use their technology?

Oh ... their entire involvement in the UK economy?
618537 is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:29 AM   #137
k1121j
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: North East USA
Go apple

they are only stating the facts bet the judge feels like and ass now. LOL
k1121j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:29 AM   #138
G4DP
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
How much tax did they pay on that £6bn in sales then?

Oh wait, it was £10m. Simon Cowell pays more tax than Apple.
__________________
Apple wouldn't know a cartographer if they stabbed them with a pair of compass' in the backside!
G4DP is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:29 AM   #139
wschutz
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by maflynn View Post
Two weeks - really. I don't think anyone buys that excuse
Apple thinks they can get away with this, and the only thing that will happen is that it will be forced to have the advertisement longer besides the public embarrassment of its tactics.

Shame on Apple.
wschutz is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:30 AM   #140
frayne182
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by tatonka View Post
Yeah I know .. I didn't say Apple is better or Samsung is better .. I said I don't like comparing advertisements that undermine the opponents. Samsung does that, Apple does it .. I don't like either.
I can agree with that.

They are childish ads for sure.
__________________
Custom Gaming PC ; Google Nexus 7 ; iPhone4 ; iPhone5
frayne182 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:31 AM   #141
tatonka
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by eversonj90 View Post
I revert to my Apple should just tell the UKCA to shove it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eversonj90 View Post
Let's just ignore the estimated £6bn made through UK sales?
Not sure I understand how these two positions go together well (not trolling btw). How would Apple tell a UK court to "shove it" when they expect such a big sale turn out in the same country.

T.
tatonka is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:33 AM   #142
melendezest
macrumors 6502a
 
melendezest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
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. 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.
Yes. They were making fun of it. Rightfully so. It was ridiculous in the first place. They disagree with the UK court's ruling. They should use whatever means available to them to defend their position.

Just because a judge says you're guilty/innocent does not mean that you really are; it applies only within the confines of the legal system. There have been plenty of people that have been wrongfully convicted, and exonerated later. Conversely, I'm convinced there have also been people that have been exonerated that should have been found guilty. To assume that any justice system is infallible is just unrealistic. If you knew you were innocent, would you just shut up and do the time?

So in this Apple vs Samsung ridiculousness, all of us consumers are going to take sides based on what we believe to be the truth. If you believe Samsung is in the right, hey, OK. If you think Apple got the UK court shaft, well, whoop-tee-doo.

Personally, I don't care one way or another. However, I agree with Apple here and I do believe Samsung is a blatant copycat, based on what I've seen; but it means nothing to me as long as good products keep coming out.

However, I would love for Apple, despite being a "respectable multi-billion dollar, super-huge, classy-whatever corporation" to give a blue jeans and black turtleneck, Malcom X by any means necessary, punk-rock, Revolutionary War-style middle-finger to the UK courts on this one. Simply for the entertainment value of it all, same as the reason why I come to these forums.
__________________
Love GOD more than anything, and your neighbor as you love you. Do this, and life will be good!
melendezest is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:35 AM   #143
apolloa
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Sigh at all the blind fans on here.

The Guardian has a much better report and this excerpt explains what was wrong with the origional statement, which, funnily enough is the BS Apple added to it:

Darren Smyth of EIP Partners said: "The objection was that Apple had added to the statement that the court of appeal had ordered, so did not comply with the original order, and furthermore that the additions were not accurate.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...sung-statement

Yes Apple is above the law blah blah blah, it's so rich it can ignore all laws blah blah.....

No, it will be held in contempt if it does it again and it has been ordered to make the change in 48hrs, if Apple does indeed take the pee again and is held in contempt then I believe that can mean a massive fine and prison for it's directors and executives. So perhaps they should grow up and cut the sheer arrogance against everyone and the courts eh?
It was due to what Apple did during the trial that brought this punishment in the first place, again because of their arrogance.
This arrogance IS going to destroy the company.
__________________
RIP Jasper, 2000 - 2014
You made our lives special
apolloa is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:35 AM   #144
618537
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Now it is clear that you don't know a sh.. about what you're talking or how your own country law works.

Continue with your blindness
Erm, do elaborate on your post. I'd love to know which law gives the UK power over a US website hosted on US soil. It's Apple's site and they can do what the hell they like - they don't need to comply if they don't want to, sure there'll be consequences but laughable in the grand scheme of things.

Before you answer consider that the Apple UK website is actually hosted at apple.com/uk/ and not apple.co.uk (apple.co.uk is simply a redirect and does fall under UK (nominet) control but it's contentless - at most could only be seized (having no effect on the Apple UK site at all)).
618537 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:36 AM   #145
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Apple was 100% wrong and they knew it. They took a chance - and lost.

What people are forgetting is that the requirement to put the notification up in the first place was only tangentially due to the court case. Apple was required to post the specific notification because AFTER the court case - which the Galaxy Tab was found NOT to infringe - Apple made several statements that undermined the UK courts.

They were ordered to publish a specific statement. Dictated by the courts. They failed to do that. I can't believe anyone would actually agree or think Apple could post whatever they wanted as long as they at least included what the court wanted. That wasn't the point of the court. The court wanted Apple to follow directions. They didn't. Period. There's no argument.

And now that they've been ordered again (which we all know doesn't take 2 weeks - they are just stalling) people still want to say it's unfair? Well boo hoo. Apple as a corporation knew what they were doing. So does anyone with half a brain. It's one thing to be amused by what they posted - another to think it was within the spirit of the ruling.

And I wonder what will happen now that Apple says 2 weeks. Because I would bet the court will say - you have 24-48 hours.

It's not like they have to create a new page - it's already done. They just need to delete the text that didn't comply.

Apple is once again mocking the court. And I doubt they will stand for it.
samcraig is offline   13 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:37 AM   #146
AppleFan1984
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nungster View Post
Bollocks! They did what the court ordered.
Apparently the court disagrees, explicitly referring to Apple's original notice as "non-compliant".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nungster View Post
Ever deal with an eight year old? A teenager? A computer? Sometimes when you say to do something, you get exactly what you asked it to do.
Do you believe Apple is no wiser than an eight year old? Please, give them some credit.
AppleFan1984 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:37 AM   #147
mac.ross
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by eversonj90 View Post
Erm, do elaborate on your post. I'd love to know which law gives the UK power over a US website hosted on US soil. It's Apple's site and they can do what the hell they like - they don't need to comply if they don't want to, sure there'll be consequences but laughable in the grand scheme of things.

Before you answer consider that the Apple UK website is actually hosted at apple.com/uk/ and not apple.co.uk (apple.co.uk is simply a redirect and does fall under UK (nominet) control but it's contentless - at most could only be seized (having no effect on the Apple UK site at all)).
It is used by Apple for trading in the UK as well as it being a British top level domain.

Just like the apparently has jurisdiction on websites which in no way are related to the US other than it is used by US citizens.
mac.ross is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:38 AM   #148
AppleFan1984
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by unplugme71 View Post
The more news I hear about this, the more I don't like Samsung.
Perhaps you missed this detail in the story, but the order didn't come from Samsung, it came from the court.
AppleFan1984 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:39 AM   #149
618537
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by tatonka View Post
Not sure I understand how these two positions go together well (not trolling btw). How would Apple tell a UK court to "shove it" when they expect such a big sale turn out in the same country.

T.
Apple posted the apology - made a point of making factual statements and quotes (albeit to the credit of another poster they posted more than they should have - unconfirmed).

The second quote was in reference to the person that said Apple wasn't a big company in the UK. £6bn kind of disagrees.

Hope that clears it up a bit.
618537 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2012, 10:40 AM   #150
RDStrong
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by melendezest View Post
Yes. They were making fun of it. Rightfully so. It was ridiculous in the first place. They disagree with the UK court's ruling. They should use whatever means available to them to defend their position.

Just because a judge says you're guilty/innocent does not mean that you really are; it applies only within the confines of the legal system. There have been plenty of people that have been wrongfully convicted, and exonerated later. Conversely, I'm convinced there have also been people that have been exonerated that should have been found guilty. To assume that any justice system is infallible is just unrealistic. If you knew you were innocent, would you just shut up and do the time?
They weren't asked to admit they were guilty, just post a paragraph of information (and link) that said the High Court ruled that certain Samsung products didn't infringe on particular patents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melendezest View Post
So in this Apple vs Samsung ridiculousness, all of us consumers are going to take sides based on what we believe to be the truth. If you believe Samsung is in the right, hey, OK. If you think Apple got the UK court shaft, well, whoop-tee-doo.

Personally, I don't care one way or another. However, I agree with Apple here and I do believe Samsung is a blatant copycat, based on what I've seen; but it means nothing to me as long as good products keep coming out.

However, I would love for Apple, despite being a "respectable multi-billion dollar, super-huge, classy-whatever corporation" to give a blue jeans and black turtleneck, Malcom X by any means necessary, punk-rock, Revolutionary War-style middle-finger to the UK courts on this one. Simply for the entertainment value of it all, same as the reason why I come to these forums.
Then the High Court would come down on Apple like a ton of bricks. It would not end well for them.
RDStrong is offline   4 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

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple Posts Notice to UK Site Acknowledging that Samsung Galaxy Tab Did Not Infringe on iPad Design Because "They are not as cool" MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 267 Jan 24, 2013 09:57 PM
Apple Removes UK Website Statement Regarding Galaxy Tab Design, Publishes Newspaper Acknowledgement MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 167 Nov 17, 2012 04:30 PM
Apple Loses Appeal on UK Ruling Requiring Ads Acknowledging Samsung Did Not Infringe iPad Design MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 428 Oct 28, 2012 07:37 PM
samsung galaxy tab 7.0 2 plus is better than ipad mini ok AR999 iPad 6 Oct 24, 2012 12:47 PM
Apple Wins EU Sales Ban on Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7, Loses Appeal on Galaxy Tab 10.1N MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 21 Jul 26, 2012 07:47 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:15 AM.

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

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