or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Tulkas

meh, you might be right. Maybe someone did stick a pickle in the judge's ass. Actually seem quite likely.
I included the beer for this reason: Apple included additional facts, some of which were from the court itself. There is no reason to think a court would not want details of it's decision included in the posting of the decision. Just like there is no reason for the son to think the father would be angry about the beer. 
It was a bad analogy. There was no reason for Apple to think the additional facts would upset  the court. Most of the additional statements came from the UK court itself. The last one added factual context to the issue.   Your analogy would be better if the son brought his father a beer with his sandwich and the father beats the boy for suggesting he is an alcoholic.
Would they be able to figure out how to use them?
One could argue that the expectation was that the statement would contain only the text specified by the court, but one would have to argue that without any actual facts supporting that. Maybe I missed it (very possible) but I can find nothing in the ruling that supports the idea that Apple was not allowed to write the notice themselves and expect only to paste the suggested text.
They obeyed every aspect of the order against them. Nothing they added was factually inaccurate. In fact 3 of the added paragraphs contained only information from the UK court ruling itself. None of that seems disrespectful. Only the last paragraph is questionable at best and it is also factually accurate. Judges shouldn't feel disrespected by facts. Nor should they let personal feelings of disrespect lead them to making up their own facts, like accusing Apple of making...
Even with those statements in mind, Apple's notice did exactly what it was intended to do.     It was explicitly not intended to be an apology but a statement of fact meant to "dispel commercial uncertainty". The example they give is a company looking to purchase phones but might decide against Samsung because of uncertainty regarding the UK case.      Apple's statement very clearly stated the acknowledgement of the courts decision, posting it verbatim as the first...
Legally speaking, how were they wrong? It's easy to say they shouldn't have, but all they did was include factual statements most of which came from the original judge. They weren't instructed not to add anything. They were instructed to make the ruling public in order to clear the air.    If the judges feel Apple was wrong, fine, but back it up with factual reasons. Instead they claim Apple was wrong because the additional info they added was unrtue and incorrect. That...
So, apparently no a single person can come up with a single part of Apple's statement that was untrue and incorrect. No one person can provide evidence on how Apple was in breach.     I really an eager to read the actual details of this newest ruling. I want to understand the judges' reasoning here because so far nothing in the media reports is making any sense. Of course these are the same outlets that erroneously reported that Apple was order to apologize, which...
New Posts  All Forums: