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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 8, 2012, 02:52 PM   #76
Ryan John
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
All these comments stating they see that Apple did nothing wrong in hiding the text as if it is just a bit of fun etc, rather than correcting a damaging statement about a competitors product.

Pretty sure we wouldn't see the same responses if Samsung are forced to pay the $1 billion and decide to hide it in small quantities all around America.
Ryan John is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 02:56 PM   #77
damitssam
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
$537 and dropping. LOOL!
damitssam is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 03:04 PM   #78
MikeyMike01
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by M-O View Post
to be fair, it was a pretty stupid ruling. fine them and move on. it's a company, not a child.
What do you expect from the UK?
MikeyMike01 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 03:13 PM   #79
Ubuntu
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK/US
This just makes Apple look pathetic. Seriously, it's like a kid throwing a tantrum.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan John View Post
All these comments stating they see that Apple did nothing wrong in hiding the text as if it is just a bit of fun etc, rather than correcting a damaging statement about a competitors product.

Pretty sure we wouldn't see the same responses if Samsung are forced to pay the $1 billion and decide to hide it in small quantities all around America.
Of course we wouldn't see the same responses, this is a forum about Apple products.
__________________
Windows & Mac user, iOS & Android developer.
Ubuntu is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 03:42 PM   #80
Tech198
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Australia, Perth
Browsing UK site on iPad 3, you must still scroll when Ipad is used horizontal, but you can easily see the cort order notoce, when viewed vertically.
__________________
13" MBPR, i5, 256Gig SDD, 8 Gig Ram, Apple TV, iPhone 5S 16Gig, iPad 16Gig, Mac Mini 2.3Ghz i7, 1TB HD
"There are no stupid questions, just stupid people."
Tech198 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 04:21 PM   #81
MacDav
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by BvizioN View Post
You are joking, right? You must be. Otherwise you need an urgent eye test.
He thinks he's joking, but he lives in a Windows world, so that kind of explains it.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by damitssam View Post
$537 and dropping. LOOL!
Yeah. Thanks a lot Obama. The whole market is tanking since the election.



Just to set the record straight I am joking. It's not Obama...It's Romney's fault.

For not getting elected. No... I'm just kidding...or am I?
MacDav is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 04:39 PM   #82
MacDav
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyMike01 View Post
What do you expect from the UK?
Okay, write on the chalk board one hundred times...I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement.
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
No...I'm not going to do it 100 times.
MacDav is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 05:04 PM   #83
kalsta
macrumors 65816
 
kalsta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy10709 View Post
Just undoing Scott Forstall trickery
Poor Scott. Steve gets the credit for everything that went right at Apple, while Scott gets blamed for everything that went wrong.
kalsta is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 05:35 PM   #84
faroZ06
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Haha
Now will it be white text on white?
faroZ06 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 06:43 PM   #85
hamkor04
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by rei101 View Post
Steve Jobs was a decent man, he wouldn't be playing with things like that. Apple is becoming a joke.
Also, Im noticing more and more Apple users (they are proper users) becoming more Apple haters, because of what they are doing now, I am trying to understand. I thing they have their point.
__________________
“All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.”
hamkor04 is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 09:00 PM   #86
divinox
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy10709 View Post
There was nothing wrong with what apple did. They just put a quote that the judge said over the court order... I fail to see anything wrong with that. Freedom of speech, for the win.
Anyone with half a brain understands that Apple was in the wrong here. Legally, i would assume the behavior is verging on contempt.
divinox is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 01:33 AM   #87
8a22a
macrumors 6502a
 
8a22a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by emdotdee View Post
"They would've got away with it if it weren't for all those pesky gadget blogs"
Exactly. Why spoil it? I would have never have known.
__________________
iPhone 5 32GB iPad mini 16GB TV 3
8a22a is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 01:50 AM   #88
dreadnort
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nem Wan View Post
Apple should withdraw recognition of the sovereignty and legitimacy of the United Kingdom and declare their former territory to be a failed state. British refugees should report to the nearest Apple Store for assistance.
thats funny, and what school did you go to!

With that kind of thinking it must be the reason Samsung have a Royal Warrant and Apple does'nt.
Next we shall here its not a big deal well speak to the McIlhenny Co. they think its a very big deal.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyMike01 View Post
What do you expect from the UK?
arh ha another person who hates the UK well done now go stand in the corner and don't come back until you have learnt your lesson.

Now go away or i shall taunt you a second time

Last edited by dreadnort; Nov 9, 2012 at 01:57 AM.
dreadnort is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 09:58 AM   #89
lrjr
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyMike01 View Post
What do you expect from the UK?
You should read the whole judgement which adequately explains things. Hopefully it should dispel your ignorance on this subject.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1430.html
lrjr is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 10:08 PM   #90
thefourthpope
macrumors 6502a
 
thefourthpope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: DelMarVa
Cheeky buggers. (everyone involved)
__________________
Cool toys not listed
thefourthpope is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 12:13 AM   #91
pooprscooper
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Who cares if you have to scroll down to read the entire page. Some people will whine about anything...
__________________

Last edited by pooprscooper; Nov 10, 2012 at 12:51 AM.
pooprscooper is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 07:18 AM   #92
unigolyn
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
If they'd just quietly complied with the ruling in the first place, this would be a non-issue.

I don't agree with the court order, but Apple's behavior is completely childish.
__________________

iPhone 4S
unigolyn is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 09:53 AM   #93
Lennholm
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mak47 View Post
Steve Jobs would have told them where to put their order.

The man refused to use a license plate, sped everywhere he went and parked in handicapped spaces. (yes, even when he wasn't sick)

He would have read that order, hit delete, and moved on with his work.
Sure, he would try to find and exploit loopholes, exactly like Apple did here but also just as it ended up for Apple, Steve Jobs would've had to eventually suck it up and comply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mak47 View Post
There is absolutely no reason that any company should be required to do this. Any company, or individual for that matter has the right to file suit. The court saw fit to hear the case, so it's clearly not some frivolous lawsuit and it wasn't an abuse of the courts--if it were, they could have thrown it out.

When you file suit, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. In this case Apple lost. OK, fine, let the lawsuit end so both parties can go about their business.

A judge ordering a company to post a message like this is simply punishing them for exercising their rights. Losing the case (and all the financial issues that accompany that) should be enough.

This judge is sending a message, and it says: Don't sue people, don't try to protect your property. If you lose, not only will you lose the case, but you'll be publicly shamed for even trying.

Apple should have simply refused to comply with the order entirely. What is this judge going to do, demand extradition of Tim Cook from the US so he can do jail time for not saying he's sorry?
Why don't you look into the case before you comment? The judge didn't punish Apple for "exercising their rights", he punished them for publicly making accusations of "blatant copying" that the court ruled unfounded and untrue.

The message the judge is sending is this and only this: Don't make accusations that are unfounded and untrue because you won't get away with it.

If Apple refuses to comply with a court order they can AND WILL lose their right to do business in that territory.
Lennholm is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 12:51 PM   #94
kdarling
macrumors G4
 
kdarling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Device engineer 30+ yrs, touchscreens 23+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrjr View Post
You should read the whole judgement which adequately explains things. Hopefully it should dispel your ignorance on this subject.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1430.html
That linked order should be required reading for anyone to comment in this thread.

It fully explains the three judges' reasons for making Apple change their website posting.

Then people can debate the actual reasoning, instead of talking about made-up ideas skimmed from blogs and forums, or worse, making immature comments about the UK etc.
kdarling is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 07:09 PM   #95
spyguy10709
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: One Infinite Loop, Cupertino CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by divinox View Post
Anyone with half a brain understands that Apple was in the wrong here. Legally, i would assume the behavior is verging on contempt.
How so - please explain it to me - I actually don't understand. Apple put a quote on their website, and then the legal thing. Is Apple's whole website now property of the court? What the hell - they can't censor FOS like that.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
What was wrong was the part where it said "other courts have found Samsung to infringe". That part was a blatant lie as far as the IP here is concerned. No courts have found such a thing, not even the US California court.
No, other courts have seen Samsuck infringing - is Samsung paying apple nearly 2 billion dollars from the kindness of their hearts?

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by apolloa View Post
when I read some (the majority) of comments on these story's on Mac Rumors, I genuinely feel annoyed that the Judge didn't flex his powers and use his right to ban the sale of Apple products in the UK, and then fine them.

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be reading pathetic comments stating the judge and his ruling was childish by people who have NO clue about the case and the reason behind this ruling, if he did.
Why the **** would he ban the sale of Apple products? That makes absolutely 0 sense...

Seriously - Samsung was the infringing one (outside of the UK - of course, where samsung made very large political campaign contribution.) not Apple.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
They broke the court order, the court explicitly told them what to put on the note.

And it has nothing to do with free speech, they can say what they want wherever they want EXCEPT in the court order
And they didn't - it was in a separate place from the court order - it was ABOVE it. Not on the same line, not even in the same colour font.
spyguy10709 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2012, 12:07 AM   #96
RiverCitySlim
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacDav View Post
Okay, write on the chalk board one hundred times...I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement.
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
I will not sue Samsung for patent infringement
No...I'm not going to do it 100 times.
We will not blatantly and wilfully attempt to mislead the public into believing that Samsung infringed the Community design '607 or its US design patent equivalent, D'889.
We will not blatantly and wilfully attempt to mislead the public into believing that Samsung infringed the Community design '607 or its US design patent equivalent, D'889.
We will not blatantly and wilfully attempt to mislead the public into believing that Samsung infringed the Community design '607 or its US design patent equivalent, D'889.
We will not blatantly and wilfully attempt to mislead the public into believing that Samsung infringed the Community design '607 or its US design patent equivalent, D'889.
We will not blatantly and wilfully attempt to mislead the public into believing that Samsung infringed the Community design '607 or its US design patent equivalent, D'889.
We will not blatantly and wilfully attempt to mislead the public into believing that Samsung infringed the Community design '607 or its US design patent equivalent, D'889.
We will not blatantly and wilfully attempt to mislead the public into believing that Samsung infringed the Community design '607 or its US design patent equivalent, D'889.
RiverCitySlim is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2012, 05:55 AM   #97
Wordman
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyMike01 View Post
What do you expect from the UK?
Wow, a xenophobe. Thought they'd all died out.
Wordman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2012, 06:45 AM   #98
Dave.UK
macrumors 6502a
 
Dave.UK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Kent, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy10709 View Post
How so - please explain it to me - I actually don't understand. Apple put a quote on their website, and then the legal thing. Is Apple's whole website now property of the court? What the hell - they can't censor FOS like that.

----------



No, other courts have seen Samsuck infringing - is Samsung paying apple nearly 2 billion dollars from the kindness of their hearts?

----------


Why the **** would he ban the sale of Apple products? That makes absolutely 0 sense...

Seriously - Samsung was the infringing one (outside of the UK - of course, where samsung made very large political campaign contribution.) not Apple.

----------


And they didn't - it was in a separate place from the court order - it was ABOVE it. Not on the same line, not even in the same colour font.
I was going to reply to your points, until I saw you used the term "samsuck". Unfortunately I like discussion with adults.
Dave.UK is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2012, 10:13 AM   #99
AidenShaw
macrumors G5
 
AidenShaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Peninsula
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_elt View Post
You guys might not think its related but I dont think stuff like this and stories about AAPL dropping 20% is unrelated. Public perception of Apple is changing. And not for the good. (I Still think there is money to be made and bad press to change but Apple has to change first)
For example:

Quote:
Here's How Apple's Reputation Dived After the Samsung Verdict
Thumb resize.
(click to enlarge)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/haydnsha...ung-verdict/2/
__________________
Edward Snowden - American Hero.
Daniel Ellsberg: "Edward Snowden: Saving Us from the United Stasi of America"
Marriage equality is unstoppable
AidenShaw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2012, 10:01 PM   #100
spyguy10709
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: One Infinite Loop, Cupertino CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave.UK View Post
I was going to reply to your points, until I saw you used the term "samsuck". Unfortunately I like discussion with adults.
I promise you - it was autocorrect. I'm not sure how that got in there... but it did.
spyguy10709 is offline   0 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
Japanese Court Rules Apple Does Not Infringe on Samsung Patents MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 41 Mar 27, 2014 09:56 AM
Apple Removes Download Options From Quicktime Trailers Website MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 218 Dec 10, 2013 06:01 PM
Tokyo Court Says Samsung Infringed Apple 'Bounce Back' Patent MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 36 Jun 24, 2013 08:28 PM
Apple Removes UK Website Statement Regarding Galaxy Tab Design, Publishes Newspaper Acknowledgement MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 167 Nov 17, 2012 03:30 PM
Apple ordered to pay damages to Samsung by Dutch court Androidpwns iPad 5 Jun 21, 2012 10:25 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:27 AM.

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

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