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

[drudus]

By the way, this was all typed on my Mac. Try this idea for size. It really is possible to like Apple products but still think Apple were wrong.

This is quite sad that you needed to say that on this site but I think the pro-Apple fans don't seem to understand how you can buy a Mac & still think Apple are behaving inappropriately in this case. The Apple Insider forums also went crazy with this topic too. I guess we have somehow managed to come to terms with the the dichotomy.

I've loved & brought Apple products for many years but the some of the fanboyism posted here is truly astounding.

What ever happened to Think Different? It seems to have transmogrified into 'Thinking? Don't bother there's an Apple for that'.

Good job KnightWRX, you seem to have managed to stay sane & rational in the torrent of 'made up facts', I'm impressed :^)

 

[Imacer99]

Greedy apple...

Good Apple deserve it, Apple moving to fast in the tech world they to back off. Not so fast, GREEDY company.

----------

Apple to GREEDY, they deserve it, moving to fast in the tech world. And I been a Apple user since they first started.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

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.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU

"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas"
Steve Jobs.

 

[ds2000]

Apple wont even notice

I agree but with the swiss clock price, this cost, the loss of face with maps, tumbling stock, Samsung increasing processor prices and market share, Apple need to sit up and sort themselves out a little bit - ALL companies no matter how rich need to look after their market and monies else the wealth will get eroded.

 

[BuckusToothnail]

Apple made the CLASSIC mistake of trying to cover up something it didn't need to and having it BLOW UP IN THEIR FACE and giving it FAR MORE publicity and exposure than if they just did the right thing in the beginning.

And they did this not just once, but THREE TIMES and counting.

First by drafting the extremely poor "apology" that rather made them look like the annoying smart-alec kid in 6th grade that had snappy answers for the teacher for everything and always got sent to the dunce corner.

Then they made the mistake of taking the piss with the judge and arguing there was "nothing wrong" with the first "apology" and that they would need 14 days to make any changes to the website.

Now they've made the mistake of trying to "hide" the re-written "apology" on their website by artificially forcing it to appear off the user's screen no matter the layout, screen resolution and zoom size of the browser.

In each case Apple was reprimanded not only by the judges, but by the international media and by public opinion. They gave their humiliating defeat to Samsung in the already high-profile case at least THREE TIMES the amount of publicity that they needed to, and needlessly extended the story's life cycle.

Worse, they mocked and destroyed what little reputation they still had, and came across as an extremely arrogant, self-righteous, out-of-touch and disrespectful BULLY that not only showed CONTEMPT toward the law and legal system of the UK, but toward the public in general for thinking they would be "fooled" by the dishonesty of their "apology" and the dishonesty in manipulating the positioning of the "apology" on their website.

Sadly it seems that without a strong leader, visionary and public icon like Steve Jobs to lead the company, Apple is falling apart much faster than anyone anticipated.

With their share price having plummeted 170 points in just seven weeks and wiping off US$140 BILLION off their market cap, despite launching the iPhone 5, iPad Mini and iPad 4 in that timeframe, it is now obviously apparent the "Golden Era" of Apple built by Steve Jobs has come to a screeching end.

 

[7709876]

It all depends on what side you're on. If you're a Samsung fan, you think Apple is acting childish. However, if the suit was in Apple's favor, and Samsung did the same thing, you would think Samsung 'had balls' to standup to a blatantly wrong court ruling, and you would love every minute of this.

Look at both sides here.

I don't consider myself as being on any side. I really struggle to get my ahead around anyone who considers themselves a fan of a company.

A sports team, yes. A large company, no.

I just consider myself a rational consumer.

----------

Or if you're simply neutral, you think Apple acted in contempt of the court and got served by the Judge. Thrice. You'd also think that if Apple had won and Samsung pulled the same stunts, they'd also have acted in contempt of the court and would have deserved the same threatment. But in the US, where Samsung lost in the first instance, they didn't act like Apple did. They didn't issue confusing statements to the press, they said "we don't agree and we'll appeal" and that's what they are doing.

You know, the world and posters here aren't black or white. There are all sorts of shades of grey out there. In this instance, Apple lost the ruling, couldn't shut their mouths about "copying", got handed punishement, appealed, lost again, and instead of complying with the court orders, played some school yard antics.

In the end, they could've avoided all of this, first by shutting their mouths post ruling and simply stating they didn't agree and would appeal, and then by shutting their mouths and doing as they were told by the Appeal's court, barring a further appeal to a superior instance.

No one is above the law, not Samsung, not Apple.

This just sums up my views perfectly. I hope the majority of people are like this.

Posted on my 27" top of the line iMac

 

[KnightWRX]

Sadly it seems that without a strong leader, visionary and public icon like Steve Jobs to lead the company, Apple is falling apart much faster than anyone anticipated.

I don't really think Steve would've acted differently in this instance though. In fact, things could have gone much farther under Steve's leadership, knowing his usual arrogance and bullheadedness.

 

[MonkeySee....]

You wouldn't think this was an Apple site would you.

I'm 100% with Apple. I want them to protect themselves as much as possible against these rip off merchants. They need to otherwise what's the point thinking up new ideas if in the end in means nothing if another company can just rip you off.

----------

But in the US, where Samsung lost in the first instance, they didn't act like Apple did. They didn't issue confusing statements to the press, they said "we don't agree and we'll appeal" and that's what they are doing.

So if the judge told Samsung to put a statement up on their website, "We have copied Apple in their design and UI etc etc" you think they would do it? You're living in a dream world.

----------

Sony R&D > Apple

You can't see it in the picture, but the keyboard is also copied.
Sony travelled in a time machine. Saw what Apple "was" doing in 2008 and slavishly copied it.

Image

If you think that's a copy then there is no hope for you in life.

 

[macs4nw]

I love these threads. The haters and trolls can't resist gloating and blowing their cover.

Duly noted. LOL

.....But I do what I love and get paid for it... wouldn't choose a career for money first.

You're a lucky man indeed! Lord knows, there are enough people in the world, who hate their jobs.

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.

I'm absolutely not surprised by the courts behaviour here - the one thing you can't do is make a mockery of the justice system in the UK (even when it's totally justified). They have no interest in justice but will uphold the minutiae of law and precedent as if their lives depended on it, and anyone pulling back the curtain to reveal hypocrisy in the system will be severely punished - how dare they suggest the system makes mistakes. When you look at the original ruling (by the judge who stated the Samsung tablet wasn't as cool as the iPad) there was clearly room for Apple to disagree with the ruling (he didn't want to curb their freedom of speech). Whoever wrote the original Apple statement however clearly didn't understand how seriously the UK courts take any 'contempt' (no matter how much the original ruling deserved it). I would say that whoever made this decision (whether hired lawyer or Apple management) will probably pay with their jobs for this miscalculation and the embarrassment that this now widely reported ruling has been given.

The real issue here is that the Judge made on record comments that basically sound like he agrees personally that Samsung copied, but the legal tests that would allow him to declare a violation of the law were not met. Then when he made this order he wasn't precise in the rules and opened himself up to having those comments exposed, thus causing embarrassment. So he screams that Apple knew what was intended etc. which is a bit ironic since it seems he recognized that Samsung 'intended' to copy Apple's product design but the test of specificity failed and in patents specifics trump 'intent'.

Agreed x3.

Please show me where he threw a "tantrum" ?Apple didn't "playfully" do anything. It was strategic. And it backfired. They hedged a bet and lost. They knew the first post wouldn't comply. They lied about how long it would take to correct it. Then they had fun with the javascript code. The judge ordered a specific message to be posted. Apple didn't post that message exclusively. They added commentary and negating the purpose of the message in the first place. You can love Apple and think what they did was funny. But I can't see how anyone would think what they did was in the spirit of what the court required. Unless you're just blind. But do show us any evidence of a tantrum. I'm pretty sure he made a ruling and when it wasn't kept to the letter of the law, he responded in kind.....

APPLE is definitely paying more, for being somewhat contemptuous of the judge's ruling. Tantrum is a strong word, but the judge was definitely not amused by APPLE's response, and as any articling law student will confirm, they can be very cantankerous. They do not like to have their authority undermined and know they can mete out punishment, as they see fit. APPLE unfortunately rubbed this judge the wrong way, and must now pay 'indemnity court costs'.
I think they were humiliated enough, by having been forced to post those ridiculous ads.

 

[KnightWRX]

APPLE is definitely paying more, for being somewhat contemptuous of the judge's ruling. Tantrum is a strong word, but the judge was definitely not amused by APPLE's response, and as any articling law student will confirm, they can be very cantankerous. They do not like to have their authority undermined and know they can mete out punishment, as they see fit. APPLE unfortunately rubbed this judge the wrong way, and must now pay 'indemnity court costs'.
I think they were humiliated enough, by having been forced to post those ridiculous ads.

So, basically, all they had to do was keep their mouths shut. Why do people say the court's behavior is to blame here ? It's Apple's behavior that got them in hot water with the court. Apple had 100% control over the whole situation and basically escalated things themselves.

After the initial ruling, there were no "apologies" or "ad" requirements. None. Apple could have simply appealed the ruling and ago, there would have been no "apologies" or "ad" requirements. After they lost the appeal, it would have been the end of that.

But Apple had to open it's damn mouth. Then they got punishement. When they appealed and lost, they failed to comply. Twice.

And yet the court's to blame ? I don't get some of you folks. What do you get out of defending the indefensible exactly ?

 

[OllyW]

You wouldn't think this was an Apple site would you.

It's possible to like Apple and it's products and still be able to accept they can occasionally get things wrong, in fact I would say it's the norm. They handled this badly and had to face the consequences.

Time to leave it behind and move on.

 

[MonkeySee....]

It's possible to like Apple and it's products and still be able to accept they can occasionally get things wrong, in fact I would say it's the norm. They handled this badly and had to face the consequences.

Time to leave it behind and move on.

I def agree with this bit

 

[Renzatic]

And yet the court's to blame ? I don't get some of you folks. What do you get out of defending the indefensible exactly ?

iTunes gift cards?

 

[KnightWRX]

iTunes gift cards?

Really ? I need to get in on that program then. Where do we apply for the "Defend Apple at all costs, get some free music and apps!" program ?

 

[Renzatic]

You don't apply for it. They choose you based on your posting history. The more rabid you are, the more likely you'll get inducted into the program.

Right now, I see no reason why you deserve a free iTunes gift card. Not even a dollar one.

 

[KnightWRX]

You don't apply for it. They choose you based on your posting history. The more rabid you are, the more likely you'll get inducted into the program.

Right now, I see no reason why you deserve a free iTunes gift card. Not even a dollar one.

Well damn. Guess I'm going to have to move off of "News Discussion" and back into the "OS X" section for a bit of Mission Control vs Spaces action to rebuild my eligibility then.

 

[Renzatic]

Or you can do what I do: fire up an alternate account for card harvesting.

...you might also know me as Linux2Mac. I'm rolling in the points.

edit: a moderator just came by my house and threatened to break my knees. I need to clarify that I DO NOT DO THIS, NOR DO I RECOMMEND ANYONE DO THIS! Linux2Mac is an entirely separate entity from myself.

And anyway, Apple knows when you're milking them for free iTunes gift cards, so it wouldn't work. You have to be honest about it.

 

[macs4nw]

So, basically, all they had to do was keep their mouths shut. Why do people say the court's behavior is to blame here ? It's Apple's behavior that got them in hot water with the court. Apple had 100% control over the whole situation and basically escalated things themselves. After the initial ruling, there were no "apologies" or "ad" requirements. None. Apple could have simply appealed the ruling and ago, there would have been no "apologies" or "ad" requirements. After they lost the appeal, it would have been the end of that. But Apple had to open it's damn mouth. Then they got punishement. When they appealed and lost, they failed to comply. Twice. And yet the court's to blame ? I don't get some of you folks. What do you get out of defending the indefensible exactly ?

I wasn't implying that the court was to blame, and am definitely not defending APPLE's conduct during this case, but merely making an observation.

Not apologizing for APPLE here, but if you put yourself in their position though: this is one bitter pill to swallow for them; they are convinced SAMSUNG copied their iPads, and probably feel betrayed by the courts.

 

[kdarling]

This is quite sad that you needed to say that on this site but I think the pro-Apple fans don't seem to understand how you can buy a Mac & still think Apple are behaving inappropriately in this case. The Apple Insider forums also went crazy with this topic too. I guess we have somehow managed to come to terms with the the dichotomy.

Agreed, it's idiotic that anyone has to add how much they've supported Apple over the years. Very McCarthyistic.

I've loved & brought Apple products for many years but the some of the fanboyism posted here is truly astounding.

What ever happened to Think Different? It seems to have transmogrified into 'Thinking? Don't bother there's an Apple for that'.

Bluntly put, the problem is what it always is on the internet: too many immature males with no self-identity or history of accomplishment. They grab onto product fandom as a way to be vicariously proud of themselves.

The adults here must constantly speak out against such childish behavior, otherwise this forum could easily turn into another useless circle jerk like Apple Insider.

 

[KnightWRX]

they are convinced SAMSUNG copied their iPads, and probably feel betrayed by the courts.

The case wasn't about the iPad. The Judge specifically ruled on the basis of the Design registration and stated that the iPad doesn't come to play.

 

[iBug2]

And yet the court's to blame ? I don't get some of you folks. What do you get out of defending the indefensible exactly ?

Nobody can "prove" that what Apple did was indefensible. Just because a court ordered something doesn't mean that you cannot fight that in any way you can any less than you should be fighting when a bully tries to cut your throat. I'm not saying the legal system is as broken as not to be trusted at all, but nobody on this forum actually believes in the legal system, neither Apple haters nor fanboys nor people who seem to be neutral. Throughout this entire lawsuit extravagancy for the last few years, basically everyone pointed out numerous times where the patent system or the jury system or the legal system overall has flaws and has to be changed. Nobody seems to be contempt with what's going on, from whatever side they are looking at it.

Hence it's no surprise when certain people say that Apple should have won the U.K. appeal. It doesn't mean they are stupid. It means that they think Apple should have won. And being rational first and foremost means that one has to be consistent. You cannot at the same time think that Apple had to have won, and then think that what Apple did here was indefensible. You already are in a state of mind that thinks the court was the bad guy here, so anything after that has to be consistent with that idea, otherwise you are being irrational. Nobody likes being irrational and they are right. Irrational people arguing is even less useful than rational people arguing.

It'll be exactly the same with the U.S. case. If Samsung loses the appeal as well and Apple is awarded the damages, there will still be people here that won't take that court case seriously and will include it only in parenthesis for any future reference. This will be the same even if the case is retried with a new jury. People who think Apple should have lost that case will keep thinking the same thing. They will keep bringing up any discrepancies with the case at every chance they get. It won't matter what happens and what the judge rules. That won't change people's minds about what the verdict "should" have been. Nobody here will actually go out and say, "wow, I always believed that Samsung did not copy Apple, but this verdict changed my mind, they actually copied them".

 

[samcraig]

You wouldn't think this was an Apple site would you.

I'm 100% with Apple. I want them to protect themselves as much as possible against these rip off merchants. They need to otherwise what's the point thinking up new ideas if in the end in means nothing if another company can just rip you off.

How many times does it have to be posted that this ruling has nothing to do (only tangentially) to whether or not Samsung copied or didn't. It has everything to do with Apple misrepresenting the verdict to the public and in doing so, mocking the court in the UK.

----------

So is it debatable when someone convicted of a crime and serves time then breaks parole because they don't feel they were guilty in the first place?

Perhaps a bad analogy - point is - Apple lost their suit. Instead of stating that they would try and appeal or that they didn't agree with the decision - they openly mocked the court.

But more absurd is their behavior of not adhering to the spirit of the lawsuit notification on their website - and people here thinking that Apple didn't do anything wrong.

Be amused. But the second you think Apple followed the court's mandate "just fine" and you lose credibility - to me and most rational thinking adults.

Nobody can "prove" that what Apple did was indefensible. Just because a court ordered something doesn't mean that you cannot fight that in any way you can any less than you should be fighting when a bully tries to cut your throat. I'm not saying the legal system is as broken as not to be trusted at all, but nobody on this forum actually believes in the legal system, neither Apple haters nor fanboys nor people who seem to be neutral. Throughout this entire lawsuit extravagancy for the last few years, basically everyone pointed out numerous times where the patent system or the jury system or the legal system overall has flaws and has to be changed. Nobody seems to be contempt with what's going on, from whatever side they are looking at it.

Hence it's no surprise when certain people say that Apple should have won the U.K. appeal. It doesn't mean they are stupid. It means that they think Apple should have won. And being rational first and foremost means that one has to be consistent. You cannot at the same time think that Apple had to have won, and then think that what Apple did here was indefensible. You already are in a state of mind that thinks the court was the bad guy here, so anything after that has to be consistent with that idea, otherwise you are being irrational. Nobody likes being irrational and they are right. Irrational people arguing is even less useful than rational people arguing.

It'll be exactly the same with the U.S. case. If Samsung loses the appeal as well and Apple is awarded the damages, there will still be people here that won't take that court case seriously and will include it only in parenthesis for any future reference. This will be the same even if the case is retried with a new jury. People who think Apple should have lost that case will keep thinking the same thing. They will keep bringing up any discrepancies with the case at every chance they get. It won't matter what happens and what the judge rules. That won't change people's minds about what the verdict "should" have been. Nobody here will actually go out and say, "wow, I always believed that Samsung did not copy Apple, but this verdict changed my mind, they actually copied them".

 

[iBug2]

How many times does it have to be posted that this ruling has nothing to do (only tangentially) to whether or not Samsung copied or didn't. It has everything to do with Apple misrepresenting the verdict to the public and in doing so, mocking the court in the UK.

Apple mocked the court because they disagreed with the courts decision that they should apologise. They disagreed with the courts decision because they thought that they should have won in the first place. And that was about whether or not Samsung copied them. This is not tangential. This is a direct corollary of the first verdict.

 

[MonkeySee....]

How many times does it have to be posted that this ruling has nothing to do (only tangentially) to whether or not Samsung copied or didn't. It has everything to do with Apple misrepresenting the verdict to the public and in doing so, mocking the court in the UK..

My point was the case in general to be fair but hey ho.

 

[iBug2]

[/COLOR]So is it debatable when someone convicted of a crime and serves time then breaks parole because they don't feel they were guilty in the first place?

That's what people seem to be debating for years in this forum. So apparently you already answered your own question many times before.

Perhaps a bad analogy - point is - Apple lost their suit. Instead of stating that they would try and appeal or that they didn't agree with the decision - they openly mocked the court.

Yes and this was one of their options.

But more absurd is their behavior of not adhering to the spirit of the lawsuit notification on their website - and people here thinking that Apple didn't do anything wrong.

Like I said, I don't think what Apple did was wrong, by that I mean mocking the court. But I think it was wrong that they actually lied while doing it. The cases they mentioned didn't have anything to do with the U.K. case and different patents were involved. I'd prefer if they mocked the court by simply putting the reference to the judge where it was said that iPad was cooler and left out the rest. After all, it's not said anywhere that you cannot mock courts or judges.

Be amused. But the second you think Apple followed the court's mandate "just fine" and you lose credibility - to me and most rational thinking adults.

I didn't think for one second that what Apple did was following the courts mandate "just fine". I wonder if anyone did.