Have you seen the Chromebook???
How does that look anything like this?
Ok.. they're both silver with black keys!! Somebody fire up the lawyers!
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 Ordered to Pay All of Samsung's Court Costs in UK Tablet Design Dispute
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Have you seen the Chromebook???
How does that look anything like this?
Ok.. they're both silver with black keys!! Somebody fire up the lawyers!
So are they when they say Apple ripped off Sony. Get over it, you didn't know Apple took so much from Sony, and that's fine. Must be a hard wake up call when you find it the victim is actually the thief.
----------
It's silver with black keys, in the general shape of a laptop. Apple invented that look out of thin air, because they'd obviously never seen all the other silver with black keyboard laptops out there in the last 2 decades.
I personally think Samsung should have ripped off this totally solid and not plasticy design that especially doesn't look like a kid's toy :
Oh dear god no!I personally think Samsung should have ripped off this totally solid and not plasticy design that especially doesn't look like a kid's toy :
![2305646304_544845382c.jpg]()
Those were truly the dark days of design at Apple.
Tacky, tacky, tacky.
What?, so other companies can just copy that immediately without doing any research themselves, or spending billions to do so..
What you said above could be said about Samsung. Why can't they stop copying ang get on with inventing new things.
only the lawyers win. As long as lawyers can convince big companies to go to war there will be pointless company losses like this.
In other news..
People have to pay bills.
Thought this was pretty obvious that if you didn't win you have to pay the other companies costs.
People have to pay bills.
Thought this was pretty obvious that if you didn't win you have to pay the other companies costs.
The rubber band patent cost Apple roughly $34.95 plus 8 bottles of quaaludes for Jonathan Ives.
That was an expensive bit of cak handed one-upmanship from Apple. I hope whoever advised Apple that they could get away with such a poorly judged and ill-tempered 'apology' is given their marching orders.
In this case, since Apple didn't file the lawsuit against Samsung but Samsung is actually the filer, why would Apple pay Samsung's fees "obviously" ? No, Apple had to mess up to get this ruling against them.
Conspiracy
I can even imagine all this big corporate companies like Samsung, Microsoft, HP, HTC, etc... in a dark alley conspiring against Apple a couple of years ago. "Let´s get in court with those Apple guys, we´ll milk them for what they have and in the meantime no more innovation from Cupertino so we can catch up."
I can even imagine all this big corporate companies like Samsung, Microsoft, HP, HTC, etc... in a dark alley conspiring against Apple a couple of years ago. "Let´s get in court with those Apple guys, we´ll milk them for what they have and in the meantime no more innovation from Cupertino so we can catch up."
Pretty sure it was Apple that was filing design despites over the Galaxy Tablet can't see why Samsung would file against themselves.
I really think we need to look at the conduct of the judge in this matter.
Whatever the legal BS is going down, it's clear that Samsung copied Apple. Android/Google warned them that they were. Putting a silver stripe around the outside of the case doesn't change this fact.
The judge's initial ruling is against the spirit of the law, whatever the technicalities. This is entirely about running up legal bills for his mates, and to punish foreign companies who dare to demonstrate how technologically impotent Mother England is.
The judge requiring Apple to advertise that Samsung didn't copy them is belligerent, since Apple never advertised that Samsung copied them.
Apple quoting the judge was way less damaging than the judge's ridiculous ruling, and I fully support Apple's action here. Hold up a mirror to the stupidity? How dare you? Don't you understand, the judge is the captain of their own pirate ship?
Just how big is the UK market for Apple? If their intellectual property isn't protected there, I don't see any reason for Apple to sell their products in that market. Concentrate on China, Apple. Whatever their reputation, in practice, it's better than the UK's.
If the UK legal system wants its citizens to have 4th rate copies, like the lawless developing country the UK really is (they just haven't told their citizens, even if the rest of the world sees it), so be it. Let UK citizens buy from store.apple.com and enjoy (what previously seemed like laughable) US legal protections, but turn out to be more sensible.
Let the UK legal system make a laughing stock out of the country. If they're going to be this childish, they deserve everything they get - or don't get, as the case may be.
Whatever the legal BS is going down, it's clear that Samsung copied Apple. Android/Google warned them that they were. Putting a silver stripe around the outside of the case doesn't change this fact.
The judge's initial ruling is against the spirit of the law, whatever the technicalities. This is entirely about running up legal bills for his mates, and to punish foreign companies who dare to demonstrate how technologically impotent Mother England is.
The judge requiring Apple to advertise that Samsung didn't copy them is belligerent, since Apple never advertised that Samsung copied them.
Apple quoting the judge was way less damaging than the judge's ridiculous ruling, and I fully support Apple's action here. Hold up a mirror to the stupidity? How dare you? Don't you understand, the judge is the captain of their own pirate ship?
Just how big is the UK market for Apple? If their intellectual property isn't protected there, I don't see any reason for Apple to sell their products in that market. Concentrate on China, Apple. Whatever their reputation, in practice, it's better than the UK's.
If the UK legal system wants its citizens to have 4th rate copies, like the lawless developing country the UK really is (they just haven't told their citizens, even if the rest of the world sees it), so be it. Let UK citizens buy from store.apple.com and enjoy (what previously seemed like laughable) US legal protections, but turn out to be more sensible.
Let the UK legal system make a laughing stock out of the country. If they're going to be this childish, they deserve everything they get - or don't get, as the case may be.
No, in the UK Samsung filed the case as they wanted clarification on whether the Tab infringed on Apple's registered design.
In the UK, Samsung filed pro-actively seeing how Apple was filing everywhere else in the EU. That way, they got to choose the venue instead of being stuck in another "Dusseldorf" (pro-plaintiff court).
It was a strategic decision. So really, Apple wouldn't have had to pay Samsung's legal fees if they hadn't clowned around with a court order.
Apple should pay the fees in pennies.
Not this.... The jude will turn red
I vote for iTunes credit......
Why inform yourself when it is funnier to write all the wrong crap you have written
The judge ? 4 judges ruled on this in the UK, all decided in the same way. BTW, the US Jury also decided the same thing : The Galaxy Tab does not infringe on Apple's registered designs. Are you going to look at their conduct too ?
No court has ruled Samsung as infringing on Apple's registered design. None. Nada. Are you going to look at all their them too ?
Or are you mistaking your opinion for fact, prior to even having read the legal basis on which the Judge based this decision ? Read the ruling, them comment on how it's "Wrong".
Oh and how mature is that argument, boo-hoo! we lost the case and now we're talking our ball home and won't play with you nasty Brits again - really? have you heard yourself.
Apple were naughty and got spanked, that's all there is to it. No need to throw the tea overboard again.
Good job the case wasn't about copying then. Come on, keep up.
Can you give some legal arguments to support your claim the judge was ruling against the spirit of the law? Or are we meant to just take your word for it?
Except for the public statement they made after the first ruling where they said Samsung were "slavishly copying" the iPhone and iPad.
Will Apple pull out of all countries where decisions go against them? That could become a pretty big list, including the US.
Yeah, what a crap legal system we have. Only 1,000 years old and most of the world's legal systems are based on it, including the US. The only laughing going on is by us Brits laughing at people writing off our legal system over what is, in reality, a nothing case in the grand scheme of things.