Apple Ordered to Alter Website Statement Acknowledging Samsung Galaxy Tab Did Not Infringe on iPad Design

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Nov 1, 2012.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    Last week, Apple posted a statement on its UK website acknowledging that Samsung had not infringed upon the protected design of the iPad, in line with a court order following the trial. But Apple took the opportunity to playfully quote statements from the judge's ruling saying that the Samsung Galaxy Tab was "not as cool" as the iPad and note that it had won cases against Samsung in other jurisdictions.

    [​IMG]
    Bloomberg now reports, however, that Apple's version of the statement is not in line with the intent of the order, which was to present a simple reference to the court decision ruling against Apple. The court has requested that Apple alter its website statement within two days, but Apple claims that alterations could take up to two weeks.
    The original court ruling required that Apple keep the acknowledgement linked on its website for one month and to purchase advertisements in a number of newspapers and magazines to publicly make the same admission. Those advertisements have, however, yet to appear.

    Article Link: Apple Ordered to Alter Website Statement Acknowledging Samsung Galaxy Tab Did Not Infringe on iPad Design
     
  2. macrumors 68030

    ChrisTX

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Location:
    Texas
  3. Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #3
    Two weeks - really. I don't think anyone buys that excuse
     
  4. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    #4
    Lol oh man...even I gave Apple the benefit of the doubt that they got this approved before doing it. Now they kind of look stupid. Still, the original was great, hopefully this one will be just as good.
     
  5. macrumors regular

    gregwyattjr

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #5
    Apple should change it to "The Samsung Galaxy Tab did not infringe on the iPad's design since it's simply not as cool."
     
  6. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Location:
    Asheville, NC
    #6
    yes!
     
  7. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2011
    #7
    Contempt of court, followed by more contempt of court.

    Jolly.
     
  8. macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
  9. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    #9
    It's not contempt of court.
     
  10. macrumors regular

    Nungster

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    #10
    Bollocks! They did what the court ordered. And now the court is refining what their intention is, Apple will comply and again do what the court ordered.

    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.
     
  11. macrumors 68000

    ThunderSkunk

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2007
    Location:
    Durango, Co
    #11
    Looking at their posted statement, they actually quote verbatim the Judge's ruling. I don't see how that's an egregious breach of anything. Somebody's being spiteful, and I'm not sure it's Apple this time.
     
  12. macrumors 6502a

    j_maddison

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2003
    Location:
    Nelson, Wales
    #12
    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.
     
  13. macrumors 68030

    ChrisTX

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Location:
    Texas
    #13
    Also, I can't imagine Apple will advertise in a various assortment of publications in the UK to state that Samsung did not infringe on their patents. They have the money, I'm sure they'd rather just pay the appropriate fines, and move on. :cool:
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    -Garry-

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #14
    Apple complied with the order and put up the notice. Whatever else they decide to put on their website is surely up to them.
     
  15. macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
    #15
    No, they didn't
     
  16. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #16
    I wonder if that judge will force Amazon to write "The iPad Mini has two speakers and is actually a great device" on their homepage. How childish.
     
  17. FNi, Nov 1, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 1, 2012

    FNi
    macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2011
    #17
    No. There is the letter of the law, then there's the spirit of the law. Judges don't take too kindly to people acting dumb when given an order they don't like.
    The UK is a sovereign country. If Apple wish to sell their products here, they should follow UK law. They don't get to deliberately confuse a court order by adding mentions of similar court proceedings around the world, as they do not apply here.
     
  18. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    #18
    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".
     
  19. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    #19
    It's pretty much guaranteed that they have made the statement with the help of their legal department to make sure they stay on the right side of wrong. With that in mind, it is a surprise imo.
     
  20. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    #20
    They were also ordered to put up advertisements in print media but they failed to do it. So, no... they haven't complied with the court order.

    Their behaviour is pretty childish and the current turn of events is entirely a result of their disrespect and contempt for the original ruling.

    Also, they can update the Apple website immediately after a conference but it takes 14 days to change simple text?
     
  21. Moderator

    OllyW

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Location:
    The Black Country, England
    #21
    Alternatively they could grow up and simply upload the message they were ordered to post and it will all be done and dusted.
     
  22. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #22
    This is just crazy these companies are always saying outlandish things and altering the truth don't the judges have more important things to do this is crazy.
     
  23. macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
    #23
    The same legal department that brought the first ruling?
     
  24. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2011
    #24
    Apple's note was funny, childish and absolutely not what the judge had in mind.
     
  25. macrumors 6502a

    turtlez

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2012
    #25
    But it is fine for Samsung to mock Apple in every advertisement they do?
     

Share This Page