Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Loses Appeal on UK Ruling Requiring Ads Acknowledging Samsung Did Not Infringe iPad Design
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ah. I just saw your username.
Why would you join an Apple-fan website, I wonder?
To make friends, of course.
Actually, the ruling doesn't prevent Apple from posting parts of the original ruling; it just requires a *specific* posting. Apple could, if they chose, post whatever else they want.
I doubt they would do that but nothing in the verdict prevents them from using the original verdict to their advantage. The court was unhappy that Apple continued to insist Samsung copied them; which the court determined was inappropriate and sanctioned Apple as a result. My guess is Apple will simply be glad to let this blow over since Samsung isn't a serious threat and they can simply take their chip and display business elsewhere in response to Samsung's actions.
Everything in my post was factually correct - if a bit snarky. I hope that clarifies it for you and your apology is accepted in advance.
I'm pretty sure the ruling is specific to posting that and only that. But no matter. It's clear that what you posted (at the time you posted) indicated you failed to read all the posts before yours. Your "factual" faux ad is a riff on someone dozens of people posted before you. So you can choose your own conclusion here 1) you didn't read the other posts 2) you were ignorant to the ruling 3) you read the other posts and lack originality 4) you're just posting flamebait
If you think Samsung isn't a viable threat - you know very little about business.
And much like your apparent ignorance of the ruling and business - to live in some fantasy world where I would think I need to apologize to you is just absurd.
I now have to apologize to myself for wasting a minute and 30 seconds reading and responding to your post.
If you think Samsung isn't a viable threat - you know very little about business.
And much like your apparent ignorance of the ruling and business - to live in some fantasy world where I would think I need to apologize to you is just absurd.
I now have to apologize to myself for wasting a minute and 30 seconds reading and responding to your post.
At this point, I don't think Samsung is a viable threat for several reasons:
1) The Tab sales are a tiny fraction of the iPads so people clearly aren't flocking to them over the iPad (or other tablets for that matter)
2) They lack the surrounding infrastructure to provide a viable alternative to iTunes in which they can provide a consistent user experience and access to content. While Android has a lot of support the fragmentation of the marketplace limits companies ability to counter iTunes.
3) Samsung lacks the focus of other companies in the market - as the Tab fails it is no big deal for them; it's a small drop in the company's revenue. They will simply move on to the next think; which appears to be bigger phones.
That's not to say Apple doesn't have threats, and I think Amazon is a serious threat. They are building a hardware / software / content combination, at good price points, that can offer a compelling alternative to Apple. They also have some unique offerings; such as Prime which offers shipping plus access to content at a fixed annual price. Finally, they also are a well known brand that is regularly visited by their target market. If they can fend off WalMart they will be a formidable competitor to Apple.
to me, the next question is who does Amazon buy / strike a deal with to get last mile access to households that they can bundle with existing services.
[SNARK]Accepted[/SNARK]
Oh - I'd probably agree with you at current Samsung's tablet market isn't much of a thread - but I wouldn't write them off so quickly in the near future. We'll see.
The problem of going in and out of various news threads is that I was responding to Samsung in general being a threat to Apple. I do believe their phones are a huge threat to Apple.
I agree phones (not just Samsung) are a big threat. The issue, as i see it, is they are very much viewed as a short term device; to be replaced by the latest and greatest every few years at worst. Subsidization of purchase price via contracts reinforces the view they are cheap and disposable. As long as "must have" apps such as social media, banking, etc are available on a variety of devices Apple will find it harder to lock people into the iPhone as other phones offer equal or more compelling features.
The real winner will be the company(s) that crack the high bandwidth data delivery challenge - how do I make it affordable for customers to stream high bandwidth content without it costing them an arm and leg? Data caps are the first salvo in the battle over who gets the money from content; Amazon, with their ATT 3g Kindle setup, showed the way of the future. The question is how to do that with video / etc.
Nope, just vindicated! I'm really happy this ruling came down. I was mad when the American one happened.
What would happen if Texas Instruments had patented/defended the Microprocessor? Xerox the GUI? We'd set back human progress by a freaking decade, and those were far more legitimate patents than freaking rounded edges on rectangular devices and other bogus crap with plenty of prior art.
I know it's an uphill battle arguing 1) against Apple fanboys 2) against intellectual property laws. However, even if you're in favor of this idea which runs counter to technology and evolution of civilization, you have to admit it's gone too far. And now Apple's joined the Patent Troll club along with SCO (AKA Microsoft) and all the rest.
----------
I'm aware the original ruling in the UK was unrelated to the US legally speaking. However, in principle I'm happy the UK courts agreed Apple had no legal standing on this issue. I didn't mean to imply the UK court ruling had anything chronologically to do with the US ruling, only that the question was the same, and the UK answered correctly while the US ignored prior art in some jurors' self-righteous attempt to make a statement.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...ly-ignoring-prior-art-other-key-factors.shtml
Last edited:
Ha Ha!!
I told you so. Apple WAS able to put it into their own words. I think this court forced notation only hurts Samsung that much more. Way to go Apple!
I told you so. Apple WAS able to put it into their own words. I think this court forced notation only hurts Samsung that much more. Way to go Apple!
I told you so. Apple WAS able to put it into their own words. I think this court forced notation only hurts Samsung that much more. Way to go Apple!
It will be interesting to see what the courts/Samsung has to say about the ad given that it goes against the courts order to help clear up customer confusion.
Apple just stated the facts, my friend. Just the facts.
Not accurately. The Galaxy 10 wasn't found to infringe. Have a nice day.
Pooh Widdle Samsung!
What aren't you getting? Please, explain in specific detail as to what you are missing on this whole matter.
The UK court said Samsung did not illegally infringe on Apples patents and design on the iPad, saying their design just "is not as cool" as Apple's ( although a court in Germany disagreed ). This UK court then forced upon Apple to disclose this information for all to read on their UK website. Apple posted it, stated the facts by pointing out that the Judge basically said Samsung's tablet is just "not as cool" as the iPad. Ha ha
Samsung hung themselves on this one. Whoever's idea this was on Samsungs side to have Apple run these ads, should be fired. What a dumb move.
What aren't you getting? Please, explain in specific detail as to what you are missing on this whole matter.
The UK court said Samsung did not illegally infringe on Apples patents and design on the iPad, saying their design just "is not as cool" as Apple's ( although a court in Germany disagreed ). This UK court then forced upon Apple to disclose this information for all to read on their UK website. Apple posted it, stated the facts by pointing out that the Judge basically said Samsung's tablet is just "not as cool" as the iPad. Ha ha
Samsung hung themselves on this one. Whoever's idea this was on Samsungs side to have Apple run these ads, should be fired. What a dumb move.
missed the point entirely. Enjoy your bias.
What aren't you getting? Please, explain in specific detail as to what you are missing on this whole matter.
The UK court said Samsung did not illegally infringe on Apples patents and design on the iPad, saying their design just "is not as cool" as Apple's ( although a court in Germany disagreed ). This UK court then forced upon Apple to disclose this information for all to read on their UK website. Apple posted it, stated the facts by pointing out that the Judge basically said Samsung's tablet is just "not as cool" as the iPad. Ha ha
Samsung hung themselves on this one. Whoever's idea this was on Samsungs side to have Apple run these ads, should be fired. What a dumb move.
Actually, the court ruled on the Tabs vs the design drawing and used various mesurements of thickness, shape of border (the design drawing has a flat top with 90 degree edge, the tabs have a rounded edge, etc..).
And the German court did not disagree as no trial has been done in Germany, no ruling have been made. Like in the US, there is a preliminary injunction against certain models of the Tab (not all of them either), but like the US, the trial could still rule the Tabs non-infringing (the US courts did declare the Tabs non-infringing of design patent 889).
You realize your efforts to educate him are fruitless? But I'm glad you're (re)posting these truths for others who are visiting the thread
Samsung hung themselves on this one. Whoever's idea this was on Samsungs side to have Apple run these ads, should be fired. What a dumb move.
It wasn't Samsung's idea. It was the judge's.
I would suggest putting more thought into your posts before you embarrass yourself further.
Last edited:
Sam "Not As Cool" Sung.
And how tough would it have been for a Samsung lawyer to say, "Your honor, these ads won't be necessary. We don't want to be known as "not as cool."
And how tough would it have been for a Samsung lawyer to say, "Your honor, these ads won't be necessary. We don't want to be known as "not as cool."
And how tough would it have been for a Samsung lawyer to say, "Your honor, these ads won't be necessary. We don't want to be known as "not as cool."
Your smileys are annoying. Just FYI because it does nothing to illustrate any level of maturity.
The press Samsung got with the Judge's ruling was gold. All the papers announcing that Apple was going to have to apologize was priceless. And Samsung would have been fools for asking the court to dismiss the punishment.
Are you talking about US market? Did you see the other topic about smartphones market-share? Did you note that Nokia is still ranked #2 in the worldwide market - and Samsung is the first?
That is, Apple goes well in US, but looking to the worldwide market, it's not in a comfortable position. ZTE is growing faster than Apple, for example. You can't underestimate China.
First of all, I was referring to tablets, not smartphones. They are two different markets.
I agree Apple has some significant competition in smartphones; Nokia however isn't one. They are #2 in overall phones, not smartphones, and their position is weakening. I would not be surprised if they are an afterthought in a few years.
I agree you can't underestimate Chinese companies; especially in their home market which is very big.
In the end, profit margin is as important or more important than market share. Apple seems to be doing real well there.