Apple Removes Code Hiding Samsung Court Order on UK Website

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Nov 8, 2012.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

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


    As noted by CNET, Apple has tweaked its international sites to remove code that automatically pushed footer text including a court-order acknowledgment that Samsung had not infringed the protected iPad design in the UK below the scroll unless the user's browser window was extremely tall.

    [​IMG]
    While Apple has used such vertically responsive design before to automatically adjust page layouts based on browser window size, its use on the company's international front pages (but not the main apple.com page) was seen as an effort to hide the notice on its UK page.

    The international pages are now using the same layout as the main apple.com site, alternating between the iPad mini and the fourth-generation iPad as featured products and keeping a static layout. Previously, images within the iPad mini feature linking to the keynote and product videos automatically moved to underneath the feature section as the browser window was made taller, pushing the footer text where the Samsung acknowledgement was out of view unless the page was scrolled.

    Article Link: Apple Removes Code Hiding Samsung Court Order on UK Website
     
  2. macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
  3. macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #3
    They're obviously doing all this to piss them off.
     
  4. macrumors 6502a

    spyguy10709

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Location:
    One Infinite Loop, Cupertino CA
  5. All Taken, Nov 8, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2012

    macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    I understand the need to be protective of your design but if a Judge delivers a verdict you should be adult about it and just place the damn notice clearly instead of acting like a smart arse teenager.

    Practice what you preach and grow up Apple.

    The Judge isn't treating Apple like a child by giving this order which so many Macrumors readers naturally leap to assume, it is simply that the Judge felt Samsung didn't infringe on Apple's iPad design and that as a result of the court case Apple tarnished Samsung's reputation given the media attention.

    When brand reputation is a MASSIVE part of your business model then it needs to be protected. If it were the other way around then I'm sure the Judge would have demanded the same of Samsung given the reliance of both companies on brand reputation.

    I won't comment on the merit of the decision as I, simply put, am not a Judge.
     
  6. macrumors 6502a

    DrJohnnyN

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Location:
    California and Texas
  7. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2012
    Location:
    Winter Springs, FL
    #7
    Geez, just do it right and get it over with. The sooner they comply, the faster this will all go in the past and be forgotten.
     
  8. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    Location:
    Central California
  9. macrumors 68040

    KdParker

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
  10. macrumors 6502a

    spyguy10709

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Location:
    One Infinite Loop, Cupertino CA
    #10
    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.
     
  11. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    #11
    Did you guys even read the article?
     
  12. needfx, Nov 8, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2012

    macrumors 68030

    needfx

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    macrumors apparently
  13. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2012
    Location:
    Winter Springs, FL
    #13
    D'oh! Just a little fustrated that it's taken them this long to get it right.
     
  14. macrumors 68040

    KdParker

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    #14
    Aren't they following the verdict?
    The judge is a lawyer also and should have clearly stated how the court order should be executed.
     
  15. macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
    #15
    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
     
  16. macrumors 68020

    Mr. Gates

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Location:
    --Redmond --------- ----------------Washington---
    #16
    Now they need to release a statement that the iPad Mini is a copy of the Nexus 7.

    When I saw it I was so confused ! I said to my wife " Is that a Nexus 7 ?"

    I cant tell them apart.
     
  17. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    Sure did, Apple have tried to neutralise the verdict in a previous notice by using jest full word play, then they tried hiding the notice by altering page layout.

    All signs of Apple refusing to abide by what the ruling required. It was a simple demand of the court that should have been executed without this farce.

    Did you even read the article(s)? ;)

    ----------

    No
     
  18. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2011
    #18
    Guys, seriously? Even on an Apple forum you don't realize that that behavior has been there for a while and it's on every website besides the US?

    The Mexican Apple.com still has the old flexible layout for the iPhone 5, what are they hiding?
    http://apple.com/mx
     
  19. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #19
    I'm genuinely surprised that Apple didn't use a white font for the online apology...
     
  20. macrumors 6502a

    NinjaHERO

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Location:
    U S of A
    #20
    The comedy of this situation isn't going away anytime soon is it?
     
  21. M-O
    macrumors 6502a

    M-O

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #21
    to be fair, it was a pretty stupid ruling. fine them and move on. it's a company, not a child.
     
  22. macrumors 68030

    Mattie Num Nums

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #22
    I was thinking the same thing! Or made it some epileptic type color scheme.
     
  23. macrumors 603

    Oletros

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Location:
    Premià de Mar
    #23
    And the judges clearly stated how the court order should be executed
     
  24. macrumors 68030

    BvizioN

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #24
    You are joking, right? You must be. Otherwise you need an urgent eye test.
     
  25. macrumors 65816

    Gemütlichkeit

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2010

Share This Page