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

[Iconoclysm]

No, I don't waste the time with so biased people like you that insult when you're wrong. I don't waste the time with trolls

Biased in what way? That I disagree with you bashing senselessly without anything to back it up? Insult? Where did I insult? You seem to have taken the time to comment when all you could do was insult but now I ask for something to back up what you've said and you don't comment. That sounds like some major BS to me...

 

[Blueflame1138]

Here's some free copy for Apple

iPad
You can't copy cool​

 

[Iconoclysm]

Apple has only acknowledged this year that they are a Corning's partner.

Yet they were Corning's partner since 2007...do you think Samsung didn't know this? I knew this.

 

[Funkymonk]

behave childish, get treated like one.

 

[tninety]

The iPhone was designed well before the Prada was even revealed. Try again.

Have you considered when the Prada was designed then? Are you dense?

Apple wasn't the first to think of a touch screen phone, it was the first one to market one very successfully.

 

[KnightWRX]

Do you agree that judges merely follow the boundaries of the law? That whether they decide one way or the other that there is more than just a fleeting chance that Samsung actually has done something disingenuous that has these Apple fans pissed off?

Apple fans get pissed off as soon as Apple gets pissed off or a rumor of Apple being pissed off gets out there, it has nothing to do with chances of any wrongdoing by anybody, or even of any actual "pissing off" of Apple actually.

Just look at all the vitriol against Eric Schmidt when even Apple and Steve Jobs only had glowing praises for the guy when he left, and they are the ones who invited him on the board 1 year after Google's acquisition of Andy Rubin's company.

 

[Iconoclysm]

behave childish, get treated like one.

Steal ideas, profit.

 

[KnightWRX]

Yet they were Corning's partner since 2007...do you think Samsung didn't know this? I knew this.

You didn't, it was always a rumor.

 

[Iconoclysm]

Have you considered when the Prada was designed then? Are you dense?

Apple wasn't the first to think of a touch screen phone, it was the first one to market one very successfully.

I have considered when Prada was designed as I've seen both the prototype and the final build. Asking if I'm dense is just as much an insult as calling me dense...

I owned 5 touch screen phones before the iPhone came out - thanks for letting me know that!

 

[GadgetDon]

Just read on another article that the notice is to say that Samsung didn't infringe on Apple's design (which is a far different thing from "did not copy") and that the notice must explain the legal decision. Furthermore, Samsung asked the judge to keep Apple and it's officers from making public statements that the Galaxy infringed on Apple's design, and the judge turned them down, saying the judge had the right to their opinion.

So, a lot more reasonable than the first reporting suggested. The notice on the website still seems a bit much, but if it's something that can be added to, say, the terms of service page, not terrible there either.

And it does seem like the judge wasn't saying Apple had libeled Samsung after all, or he would have enjoined Apple from public statements.

 

[Iconoclysm]

You didn't, it was always a rumor.

It was not a rumor to everyone - and you can bet Samsung is one of them.

 

[lilo777]

That could be called acquisition among many other things. Are patents now innovation? Is it ok now to assume that the patent system works (I'm assuming you think it does not).

Patent system does not work for software and, unlike Apple patents, most Samsung patents are hardware patents. Apple acquired way more patents than Samsung. Remember that infamous auction for Nortel patents?

 

[2bikes]

Samsung knows what Apple is creating long before the market sees it. Not that I believe Samsung is leveraging that to copy Apple's products, as it would result in some even more serious cases. It's interesting though that Samsung has deleted tons of internal emails before submitting evidence to the court.

That is one of the reasons why Apple is trying to eliminate Samsung as a supplier.

 

[LordVic]

Interesting, that's a good explanation, I'll take it. Next: Gorilla Glass? Black bezel/silver body? Green phone icon? Samsung Omnia was the first of these copycat devices, explain away.

you're joking right?

Green phone icon has been the iconic icon and colour of making a call on a cell since well. Day 1.

Gorilla glass is not an apple invention nor innovation. IT was invented, and is a fully owned product of Corning. Its use is up for sale to whomever wishes to pay Corning the rights to use it. Including Apple. Just because apple refuses to aknowledge that the glass used in their devices isn't of their own invention doesn't make it any less so. Apple had been passing off gorilla glass as their own for years, doesn't make it true


this just leaves your entire basis for argument over aesthetics like "black bezels and silver body".

again, the judge in the UK case ruled that Apple didnt own the patent on those because of prior art. 50+ cases were sited in the ruling that lead to this decision.

So are all tablets and phones that use a black bezel with silver or metal finish infringing? It's too simple a design element to patent.

 

[aerok]

Interesting, that's a good explanation, I'll take it. Next: Gorilla Glass? Black bezel/silver body? Green phone icon? Samsung Omnia was the first of these copycat devices, explain away.

Gorilla Glass is not Apple, green phone icon comes from green send button and has been the norm since first color screen phones.

Black bezel/silver body?
Samsung i750, announced in 2005
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i750-1125.php

 

[Iconoclysm]

Apple fans get pissed off as soon as Apple gets pissed off or a rumor of Apple being pissed off gets out there, it has nothing to do with chances of any wrongdoing by anybody, or even of any actual "pissing off" of Apple actually.

Just look at all the vitriol against Eric Schmidt when even Apple and Steve Jobs only had glowing praises for the guy when he left, and they are the ones who invited him on the board 1 year after Google's acquisition of Andy Rubin's company.

Yet it appears that Apple fans were correct in seeing though the PR as Jobs obviously felt the same way they did.

 

[samcraig]

Lol I bet Apple will include that 'not as cool as iPad' somewhere in their mandatory notice..

And they can legally prove it's true... I don't see why they wouldn't want to point that out

They cant legally prove anything. The word of anyone - even a judge doesn't prove gadget is cool. It's even more ridiculous to think it's "legal" since it was never part of the actual ruling.

And I imagine - if this holds up - they will be required to issue a statement on their website that conforms to some standard/approval of the court. Which I would think wouldn't allow for snarky comments about Samsung not being "as cool.

But good luck with that.

 

[Rot'nApple]

If those are the only two stipulations the British Judge issued with no further guidance, well, Apple should have a little fun poking Samsung and the Judge this way, for web have image of iPad came first, give date, have it dissolve into image of Samsung tablet, give date, then have it dissolve and then text comes up saying, "Samsung didn't copy Apple's iPad. Huh? You be the Judge!" Something similar for papers.

 

[harley3k]

Also

The judge also ordered Apple to be Samsung's butler.

 

[Mr. Gates]

YESSSSSS !

Now go sit in the corner Apple. And think about why being a bully is wrong.

 

[Portaluk]

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.

At the time of writing this "apple ordered to run samsung ads" is the second most popular read story on the BBC news site.

 

[ristlin]

And this has to do with my response with the op exactly how?

Nothing whatsoever. You were caught in the crossfire, so to speak.

 

[JohnDoe98]

Gorilla glass is from a different company all together, so only apple should be allowed to use it? how is that good for the customer exactly?

The question isn't if others are allowed to use it, the question is who copied who. Prior to Jobs' deal with Corning in 2006, the Gorilla Glass had been unused in any portable electronic device. It was developed in the 60s and used in only two different racing car models. Apple brought Gorilla Glass to the market, and then everyone jumped on it. If that's not a clear cut case of copying I don't know what is.

That doesn't mean Samsung or others did anything wrong, sometimes, you need to copy to innovate, but that's quite besides the point. The post you responding to asked to show how the glass case isn't an instance of blatant copying.

 

[samcraig]

Interesting, that's a good explanation, I'll take it. Next: Gorilla Glass? Black bezel/silver body? Green phone icon? Samsung Omnia was the first of these copycat devices, explain away.

Right - that green phone icon is revolutionary.

Picture is from 2001.

REVOLUTIONARY!!!

 

[Rodimus Prime]

The timing of Android transformation and Schimid's service on Apple board is impeccable. Believe what you want, I don't really care.

I suggest you go look at the history.

Google bought Android in what 2003-2004ish. Before Apple even started on the iPhone.

Apple invited Schimid to join its board. Chances are because of Google's bought Android and it was known they were working on a phone OS.

Schimid stay well clear of anything Android related at Google to avoid conflict of interest and to avoid being accused of stealing (expect by Apple fanboys)
As Google got more involved in Android Schimid stopped taking parts in those votes.

Also if you think Board members really get the details of products then you have a lot to learn. They get the big picture but not the little stuff.