Apple Ordered to Pay All of Samsung's Court Costs in UK Tablet Design Dispute

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by Rogifan

Could we ever go a day where Samsung isn't mentioned on the front page of this site? These threads always end up in silly tard wars.

Maybe you should tell Apple to lower the intensity of their lawsuits against Samsung. We'd have less litigation news about it.

[perealb]

Originally Posted by samcraig

So don't buy one?

Of course I wouldn't buy it. It's a piece of crap inside. But that's besides the point. I think that it's not fair Samsung copying design from Apple. If you want to compete, come up with something better.

Originally Posted by nick_elt

Are you a shareholder? If not, why does it piss you off? ??

As a matter of fact, yes, I am, but again, this is besides the point; I get pissed off every time I see unfairness.

[nebo1ss]

Originally Posted by kurosov

I still see nothing wrong with the first statement. They might not have liked it but it did state facts.

I'm guessing the judge didn't want to seem like a dumbass with the whole "not as cool" comment. It was a stupid reasoning when he said it and its stupid now.

It was factually inaccurate because they claimed to have won legal rulings on the same issue of the Ipad design in the USA and Germany. Neither was true.

[johnnyrb]

If I were Apple, I would pay in pennies.

I'm looking forward to the day that Apple will no longer be a customer of Samsung. That would be a HUGE loss for Samsung.

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

Maybe you should tell Apple to lower the intensity of their lawsuits against Samsung. We'd have less litigation news about it.

Maybe that intensity will start Samsung on a path to creating something completely new that blows the market away and stop with the copying.

[mikechan1234]

Originally Posted by igrip

the only thing apple can do now is to pull out completely from the british isles. Anything less is just a show of weakness.

hahahahahaahahahahahahahahaha

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by perealb

Of course I wouldn't buy it. It's a piece of crap inside. But that's besides the point. I think that it's not fair Samsung copying design from Apple. If you want to compete, come up with something better.

As a matter of fact, yes, I am, but again, this is besides the point; I get pissed off every time I see unfairness.

So are you giving up your Apple products with Samsung parts?

What makes Samsung's devices crap inside? Isn't Apple using Samsung parts. Are Apple products crap inside?

Do you realize how conflicted you are?

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

Maybe that intensity will start Samsung on a path to creating something completely new that blows the market away and stop with the copying.

What copying ? Except for that verdict that's being contested in the states because of the foreman not understanding prior art rules or following jury instruction, they haven't been found guilty of any copying yet.

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by Rogifan

Could we ever go a day where Samsung isn't mentioned on the front page of this site? These threads always end up in silly tard wars.

Can we go a day where someone doesn't offensively use the word "tard." Surely you can find a more appropriate word to use.

[bkushner]

Samsung is the devil.

----------

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

What copying ? Except for that verdict that's being contested in the states because of the foreman not understanding prior art rules or following jury instruction, they haven't been found guilty of any copying yet.

A Quebecer talking nonsense. Par for the course.

[longofest]

Originally Posted by Meroigo

MacRumors, you should make a lawsuits category hidden from the main page. Thanks in advance.

In general I'd agree, especially with the tit for tat news. But this bit was actually kind of nice to see. I was extremely annoyed to see Apple acting like a toddler with its compliance (or lack thereof) to the court's orders, so I am glad to see the court threw it back at them.

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

What copying ? Except for that verdict that's being contested in the states because of the foreman not understanding prior art rules or following jury instruction, they haven't been found guilty of any copying yet.

I don't think anyone can deny that Samsung is guilty of copying Apple far too closely, regardless of whether or not a court finds that it is infringing.

[devilstrider]

lol

[Jibbajabba]

You're losing it wrong ....

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by bkushner

A Quebecer talking nonsense. Par for the course.

Can you point to other decisions besides the California verdict ? If not, maybe my post was more factual than you'd like. I'll ignore the racism for now.

----------

Originally Posted by DeathChill

I don't think anyone can deny that Samsung is guilty of copying Apple far too closely, regardless of whether or not a court finds that it is infringing.

As long as we can agree that Apple also copies and draws inspiration from elsewhere too and thus are pretty much being the pot calling the kettle black in this case.

If it's not infringing, then nothing wrong was done.

[Oletros]

Originally Posted by johnnyrb

That would be a HUGE loss for Samsung.

No, it won't be huge for Samsung

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

As long as we can agree that Apple also copies and draws inspiration from elsewhere too and thus are pretty much being the pot calling the kettle black in this case.

If it's not infringing, then nothing wrong was done.

Of course Apple is inspired from others. No one is saying being inspired is wrong. What Samsung did was not being inspired.

I hope you don't truly believe that.

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by bkushner

Samsung is the devil.

----------



A Quebecer talking nonsense. Par for the course.

That's a retort to a logical discussion point? So nothing really to add?

Originally Posted by DeathChill

I don't think anyone can deny that Samsung is guilty of copying Apple far too closely, regardless of whether or not a court finds that it is infringing.

i think there are clearly people who don't think Samsung copied seeing as other than in the US - they haven't been found guilty. So using "anyone" is hyperbolic.

[Veinticinco]

Originally Posted by chris7777

Talk about the Judge throwing a hissy fit.

I might be a little more sympathetic to samsung, If they had not exactly copied apple advertisements, and packaging. But that is just way too "coincidental" to be an accident.

Apple disagreed with the decision, and playfully pointed out the Judges own words. He took offense and pitched a tantrum, by ordering to pay Samsung, as punishment for mocking his short sighted decision.

Sadly true, but that's to be expected when you thumb your nose at a belligerent old man who takes great issue with anyone challenging their authority, particularly global corporations.

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by samcraig

i think there are clearly people who don't think Samsung copied seeing as other than in the US - they haven't been found guilty. So using "anyone" is hyperbolic.

I think that it's pretty darn clear that Samsung copied Apple. What's up for debate is whether or not it's enough for the courts to consider it infringing.

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

Of course Apple is inspired from others. No one is saying being inspired is wrong. What Samsung did was not being inspired.

I hope you don't truly believe that.

Are you saying that nothing Samsung does (in the cell world) is not inspired? And that nothing Samsung does is original or their own?

Because I'd argue that.

[Justicehl]

I wonder if Judge Robin Jacob holds Samsung stocks or has special feelings toward to Samsung. He must have!

[oliversl]

I've read the original Apple statement and could not see any lies. So, what is this lie the judge is talking about?

Samsung has a strong UK politic lobby, they were one of the main Olympic sponsors. No surprise that Samsung is treated better than Apple in court, politics/business as usual.

[yakapo]

Chump change for apple - seeing as how they just paid 20 million for a clock.

Maybe now they will redirect their efforts & financial resources into innovation instead of litigation.

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by oliversl

I've read the original Apple statement and could not see any lies. So, what is this lie the judge is talking about?

Samsung has a strong UK politic lobby, they were one of the main Olympic sponsors. No surprise that Samsung is treated better than Apple in court, politics/business as usual.

Read more - and wear less of a tin foil hat.