Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

UK Judge Rules Apple Must Publish Notices Acknowledging Samsung Did Not Copy iPad

hahahaha that's great

also Knight is more often right than wrong, it's just that the RFD is quite strong in some of you, don't know why you care so much for a company that's just out to nickel and dime you (as pretty much all corps do)
 
Kaibelf said:
You know what's hilarious? In the UK, someone can accuse someone else of rape and the accused person's name is splashed ALL OVER the papers, but if the charges are found to be a total lie, the accuser is still unable to be identified. Yet here, the judge is making Apple go and publish a notice saying Samsung didn't copy their trade secrets because the final product was essentially too ugly? What a country. :eek:
Click to expand...

Did you just compare crying rape to the iPad/Galaxy Tab lawsuit? And you phrase that like America is perfect...
 
charlituna said:
And I suspect that Apple will appeal on such grounds. They will probably dig around in the laws and found that there is none that gives the judge the right to make such a demand, particularly since at no point did Apple ever have claims that Samsung did copy up on their site (so they aren't being forced to 'right' some libelous claim they published) and appeal saying the Judge is overstepping his authority
Click to expand...

And you're so sure that the judge can't rule this because you're an UK IP expert, don't you?


Here in Spain is very common that the loser of a trial have to public show the results of the trial, being a TV, a radio, a newspaper or any bussiness

----------
MacCassem said:
Judges are supposed to be wise and impartial. I think this particular British judge is just the opposite.
Click to expand...

Exactly why he is not wise and impartial?
 
ziggyonice said:
Before the iPad, tablets sucked.
After the iPad, everyone well... er... copied the iPad.

Image
Click to expand...

u have to take into account that those tablets came out way before and the tech simply wasn't ready. apple was just smart enough to wait til the hardware requirements were there/possible

just take a look at those early iPad prototype drawings

---

back on topic, that ruling is hilarious
 
Rg8SF.jpg
 
2bikes said:
You are correct, they are parts. But getting confused a little about the technology part. MB gives the specs to Hyundai, so they are MBs technology. Hyundai having the specs, changes it a little and puts it`s own brand with using all the research done by MB for years to come up with those specs.
Click to expand...

While your generic process is fine it is unlikely that this is really the issue. Samsung is not accused of copying the chipsets that it manufactures for Apple, which is the main area where the above scenario might take place.

Also, Samsung bests Apple on specs.

Sooner or later, people are going to have to realize that Samsung is not a low cost producer (it manufactures Apple's A5 chipset in Texas). It is instead arguably the most technologically advanced firm in a multitude of technologies that are needed to build smartphones.
 
kdarling said:
Perhaps the judge read about how Apple sent threatening letters to retailers the moment they won the Tab injunction in the USA...

... and decided that if Apple likes to do that when they win, perhaps they should do something similar but opposite when they lose.
Click to expand...
When did Apple ask that retailers or other companies put up a message on their website referring to Apple? The judge mentions "damaging impression". What is he basing that on? I'll bet the average Joe doesn't even know Apple sued Samsung. The only people who care (or get worked up about this stuff) are tech bloggers and the junkies who frequent their sites.
 
I do not know if I am more amazed at how many British intellectual property lawyers there are posting on this site, or how few here can tell the difference between a functionary legal notice and an eye catching advertisement.
 
Peace said:
Is this judge actually serious ?

Why not have Apple hire someone to walk around in front of Apple Stores with a sign that says the same thing. That's just as stupid as this "ruling"
Click to expand...

I think your suggestion is pretty good. It would be an appropriate punishment for Apple liars.
 
ekdor said:
Nice tidy pay check for the judge then... F samsung
Click to expand...

entatlrg said:
Samsung must somehow own that judge.
Click to expand...

How did you come up with this conclusion? Judges are only elected (by general election) in the USA. In other countries, there are no campaigns and therefore what you accuse here is bribary. Really? Sounds like Fanboy to me. So, if someone comes to a different conclusion than you in judgement, they have to be bribed?

PS: I'm not saying the judge is right, but I will not agree on him being something else than independent and impartial on the case.
 
Oletros said:
I like when people try to bend so much reality that the claims became totally nonsense.
Click to expand...

Libel statements imply false statements that are damaging to a reputation. Apple accusing Samsung of copying (in Apple's position) is a true statement, albeit damaging. If the court sides with Apple, then they aren't guilty of libel. If they don't side with Apple, they are are guilty of libel. The onus is on Apple to prove that they made a true statement (since Samsung has and will continue to hold the position that they did not copy).

I wouldn't have thought that accusing another company as copying would be a tough case to prove, but dang was I wrong.

Example of a bad case:
Person A goes to press and calls Person B "a ****"

The case goes to court. Person B demands the court to define what it means to "be a ****" and goes on to show that there is no real "number" to warrant the label. Person A can only present evidence of "multiple relations" but cannot counter the fact that being "a ****" has no real measure. Person A loses.


Example of a solid case:
Person A goes to press and calls Person B "a liar"

The case goes to court. Person A shows that Person B said X when in fact Y happened, proving that Person B lied. Person A wins, continues to go to press calling Person B a liar.
 
entatlrg said:
Samsung must somehow own that judge.
Click to expand...

It also appears that they own all judges except for the judge Lucy who happens to be the judge from the Northern District of California. She'll get around too after her rulings get overturned.
 
I think it's splitting hairs about whether or not they copied it - some folks say they did (I'm one of them) and some say not.

But regardless, I can't understand how a judge can force a company to put a notice on their website? Or even post notices in the newspaper? Usually it's a fine. Am I crazy thinking this has never happened before in any industry?

A few things:

1. Apple will indeed be creative with this no doubt. Or maybe they won't with the initial one, but I'd be surprised if they didn't follow up with different ad the weeks/months after.

2. I believe SJ would be going thermonuclear with this decision - re: someone telling them/him what to do.

3. How closely is Samsung watching this decision regarding other countries in which Apple has blocked or is trying to block Samsung?

Cheers,
Keebler
 
Simplicated said:
My mum was watching a tablet commercial earlier today. She said the tablet in the commercial looked like an iPad, and asked if it was a Samsung Galaxy Tab.

Except, it was an iPad commercial...



Luckily they still have the Ignore List
Click to expand...

Apple copied Samsung, duh.
 
well the judge is actually right if u think about the whole case (ignore who copied who for a second)

apple called them a liar but they lost in court, now they called someone a liar who is free of its charges. so its damaging to samsungs image

thats like calling a woman a bi*** who was proven to be a housewife. now everyone goes on still thinking shes a b**** even though the court ruled that shes just a housewife. its perfectly reasonable to ask from the accuser to make a statement (like an excuse) to make sure everyone knows shes not really a b'***

sry for my english ^^
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back