Apple Posts Revised Samsung Apology on UK Website, Hides It Below the Fold

[Orange Furball]

Works fine on my Samsung Galaxy Note using Google Chrome... I can see the statement in large letters without having to scroll down

[mrobit]

Originally Posted by lifeinhd

No, you didn't read the full article.

1700px and it'll display without scrolling.

Crap. I read through it quickly. You're right. I'll go back to my corner of shame.

[MacGit]

Originally Posted by MacGit

I agree completely. There appeared to be no Moderation on here at all - either that, or more likely, the Moderation was in sympathy with the anti-Brit sentiment. A sad day really because wherever this issue is being discussed and debated, the main casualty has been Anglo-US relationships caused by a minority of idiots who want to turn arguments about iPads and iPhones into an anti-British hate campaign. Crazy and unjust.

I eat my words - well, some of them. It appears the calm after the storm is due to the fact that the Troll has been placed in "Time out". I assume that's a kind of Naughty Step? Well done Mods for finally taking appropriate action. Pity it wasn't done sooner before the fire had already raged through every floor of the building, but welcome nevertheless. Thank you.

[jvmxtra]

Originally Posted by samcraig

Seriously - do you know that this requirement has nothing to do with the original court case but because after the ruling that Samsung's tablet did NOT infringe, Apple still was stating it did?

Clarifying this over and over to people who refuse to understand the issue can be exhausting.

----------

Do you know how weird that sounds? Did you read what apple was force to put up? To majority of users(who do NOT want to read all that court crap) gives the idea that samsung did not copy apple. Apple still stated that it did because Samsung DID copy.. So what's so hard for you to understand what I am saying? and how other perceive this events as ?? Original ruling was wrong.. that's the point. That's why they are blind.

[kdarling]

Something that I haven't seen mentioned yet:

One of the reasons the Appeals Court decided that Apple needed to publicize the trial outcome was ... ready for this? ... because Apple itself had demanded that Samsung be made to publicize the outcome if Samsung lost.

The court commented:

"In Holland where Apple are suing Samsung in respect of patent infringement, Apple is seeking a publicity order which requires Samsung if it loses to give publicity to that on its website.

So Apple consider that website publicity by the loser is proportionate.

It may also be noted that Apple claimed a publicity order in general terms in its counterclaim in these proceedings, again showing it thought a publicity order appropriate."

So, ironically, Apple themselves came up with what the loser must do.

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by jvmxtra

Do you know how weird that sounds? Did you read what apple was force to put up? To majority of users(who do NOT want to read all that court crap) gives the idea that samsung did not copy apple. Apple still stated that it did because Samsung DID copy.. So what's so hard for you to understand what I am saying? and how other perceive this events as ?? Original ruling was wrong.. that's the point. That's why they are blind.

You're confusing copying (as most identify it) with infringing. They aren't the same thing.

See KDarlings post above mine (this post). If you want to fault someone for the punishment - blame Apple. They originated the idea.

[jvmxtra]

Originally Posted by samcraig

You're confusing copying (as most identify it) with infringing. They aren't the same thing.

See KDarlings post above mine (this post). If you want to fault someone for the punishment - blame Apple. They originated the idea.

I don't care about the punishment.

It should have never come to that. Since Sammy copies all the apple stuff.
If they were able to dance around the legality, then all the blame should go to team of apple lawyers.

[cdubb80]

I find it funny how similar and fanatical apple fans and republicans (and maybe some democrats) can be.

"if you are not with us you are against us" is their mantra.

They make a big stink if someone says they are wrong.

I own a lot of apple products (iPad, iPhone, MacBook pro, apple tv) and think they are great, but don't worship at Steve Job's grave.

Apple did something sly, but was a dick move.

[Oletros]

Originally Posted by jvmxtra

I don't care about the punishment.

It should have never come to that. Since Sammy copies all the apple stuff.
If they were able to dance around the legality, then all the blame should go to team of apple lawyers.

Well, courts in every place where Apple has accused Galaxy Tab of design infringement have said that Samsung didn't copied.

Perhaps they didn't copied

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by jvmxtra

I don't care about the punishment.

It should have never come to that. Since Sammy copies all the apple stuff.
If they were able to dance around the legality, then all the blame should go to team of apple lawyers.

I guess this is something you'll have to get over. Because Samsung was found not to infringe. So it really doesn't matter (legally) what your opinion (or mine) is.

[neuropsychguy]

Originally Posted by ctrl94

Why do you think they put it there? It's to limit the number of people that actually see it.

Of course. My only point is that that is not childish. We could maybe call it passive aggressive but it's not a childish act. Apple is holding strictly to the letter of the law (ruling). Apple is under no obligation to go above and beyond the ruling. If the judge wanted Apple to do something else, he should have spelled it out clearly (post the disclaimer at the top of the screen for everyone to see). What this shows is that Apple has good lawyers and knows how to run a business, neither of which are childish.

[jvmxtra]

Originally Posted by Oletros

Well, courts in every place where Apple has accused Galaxy Tab of design infringement have said that Samsung didn't copied.

Perhaps they didn't copied

Yeah... I guess.. I mean.. I dont know.. just doesn't feel right but will have to accept. Everytime I look at samsung product or even their store.. or commercial, everything feels like it came from apple. oh well.

----------

Originally Posted by samcraig

I guess this is something you'll have to get over. Because Samsung was found not to infringe. So it really doesn't matter (legally) what your opinion (or mine) is.

Yes sir.. I understand..

[Ubuntu]

Originally Posted by Bigapplefan

No they are not sore losers. The Far East are a pack of dirty low down cheats and have been doing it for decades particularly China and Korea. It is time somebody stood up to them and their dirty tactics. Maybe if our PC country had a bit more backbone we would still have a greater proportion of the wolds R & D than our current miserly lot. Judges in this country have been acting like feudal lords for too long. See what a reliance on shops and banks has done for us.

Wow, you seriously believe that? Shame on you.

[samcraig]

Almost saw this coming...

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

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

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by jvmxtra

Yeah... I guess.. I mean.. I dont know.. just doesn't feel right but will have to accept. Everytime I look at samsung product or even their store.. or commercial, everything feels like it came from apple. oh well.

Apple's currently the go-to company for tech fashion, but the actualy technology behind all their products? They popularized it, maybe even cleaned it up a little bit, but they didn't invent it. Much as they like to claim otherwise.