or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › UK judge rules Apple must advertise Samsung did not copy the iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

UK judge rules Apple must advertise Samsung did not copy the iPad

post #1 of 301
Thread Starter 
Apple has been ordered by a U.K. judge to advertise on its website and in British newspapers that Samsung's Galaxy Tab did not copy the design of the iPad.

The decision from Judge Colin Birss means Apple will have to post the notice on its U.K. website for six months, as well as "several newspapers and magazines to correct the damaging impression" that Samsung copied the iPad, according to Bloomberg. The same judge said in a ruling earlier this month that the Samsung Galaxy Tab is not "cool" enough to be mistaken for an iPad.

An attorney representing Apple argued before the court that mentioning Samsung on Apple's official website would amount to "an advertisement" for its rival.

Birss determined that Samsung's products, including the Galaxy Tab, are distinctive from Apple, as they are thinner and have "unusual details" on the back. Apple does have the ability to appeal the judge's decision.

Galaxy Tab 10.1


While Apple has had a hard time fighting Samsung in court in the U.K., it has had success against the Galaxy Tab in other countries. For example, last month U.S. District Court Judge Lucky Koh found that Samsung infringed on Apple's design patents, and issued a temporary injunction prohibiting sales of the device.

Apple has also successfully argued for temporary injunctions in Australia and Germany. Samsung dodged the German injunction by releasing a slightly-redesigned Galaxy Tab 10.1N. Meanwhile, the Australian ban was overturned last November.
post #2 of 301

Hahahaha! Maybe Tim Cook should also have to write "I will not call Samsung names anymore" 100 times on a chalkboard.

post #3 of 301

That is completely stupid. Appeal.

GIGO. The truth in all of life.
Reply
GIGO. The truth in all of life.
Reply
post #4 of 301

Oh boy. I've got my popcorn ready for this thread.

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #5 of 301

That is completely insane.

Long FB, AMZN
Schlong AAPL

Reply

Long FB, AMZN
Schlong AAPL

Reply
post #6 of 301
Is there precedence for a ruling like this?
post #7 of 301

lol.

post #8 of 301

Yeah, what kind of ruling is this? Does not seem professional at all....

post #9 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiles77 View Post

That is completely stupid. Appeal.

Apparently they cant appeal - Apple should move all its infrastructure in the UK to Ireland. Not that it has much. 

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #10 of 301

Can you imagine how SJ would have reacted to this?

 

If I were Apple I would include in the "statement" a picture of the two devices side by side along with the date they were introduced.  "According to the [insert name of the court here] the Samsung device shown here that came out a year after the iPad is not a copy of the iPad.  They've instructed us to tell you that.  Have a nice day."

post #11 of 301

Complete rubbish.  Apple fought the patent battle in court.  Asking them to advertise for Samsung is unreasonable and akin to public humiliation.  This judge needs to be removed from the bench.  Frankly, to think that Samsung didn't share Apple's ideas with their other business units is wholly impossible and unreasonable to think.  Of course they copied Apple, making just enough changes to not have an outright mirror image of the iPad.

post #12 of 301

Advertisement:

 

"Samsung did not copy the design of the iPad.

 

"(Samsung's tablets) do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design," Judge Birss said in his ruling. "They are not as cool."

oneof52
Reply
oneof52
Reply
post #13 of 301

It has to start somewhere. I am glad the judge ruled that way. The idea the square is invented by Apple is absolutely absurd. I like Apple products and all, but this one was a stupid suit to begin with. 

post #14 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiles77 View Post

That is completely stupid. Appeal.

According to the article "Apple does not have the ability to appeal the ruling"

post #15 of 301

Does Sammy have to post "Not cool enough to be confused with an iPad" where they sell the Tabs?
 

post #16 of 301
Talk about violating free speech by forcing an entity to engage in specific speech.

Reminds me of a U.S. judge who ordered a man to post an apology to his ex on Facebook every day for several months.

Judges these days seem to be on a power trip.
post #17 of 301

How  humiliating for Apple.

 

And so much for those who claimed that Apple's legal losses are not damaging its image with consumers.  Even were that true in the past, this would put an absolute end to any notion that consumers are not aware of apple's legal tactics.

post #18 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealestmc View Post

It has to start somewhere. I am glad the judge ruled that way. The idea the square is invented by Apple is absolutely absurd. I like Apple products and all, but this one was a stupid suit to begin with. 

 

Coke didn't invent the bottle yet no one is able to copy the curve design.

 

It's not about the "square" or "rectangle", it's the fact Sammy mimic'd the iPad in many ways.

post #19 of 301

In for what will be an epic thread

 

dyups9.gif

post #20 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiles77 View Post

That is completely stupid. Appeal.

 

Indeed.  There is no way Apple can really do this without looking completely weak and foolish.  

 

What an absolutely outrageous, one-sided order for the judge to make.  More evidence of how completely ridiculous the UK has become now.  

post #21 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax View Post

Can you imagine how SJ would have reacted to this?

 

If I were Apple I would include in the "statement" a picture of the two devices side by side along with the date they were introduced.  "According to the [insert name of the court here] the Samsung device shown here that came out a year after the iPad is not a copy of the iPad.  They've instructed us to tell you that.  Have a nice day."

I like this.

post #22 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax View Post

Can you imagine how SJ would have reacted to this?

 

If I were Apple I would include in the "statement" a picture of the two devices side by side along with the date they were introduced.  "According to the [insert name of the court here] the Samsung device shown here that came out a year after the iPad is not a copy of the iPad.  They've instructed us to tell you that.  Have a nice day."


Agreed, along with an additional statement to the effect of "However, other courts in the United States, Australia and other countries have ruled that the Samsung device was an improper copy."

post #23 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

Apparently they cant appeal - Apple should move all its infrastructure in the UK to Ireland. Not that it has much. 

 

If I was them, I would move their retail operations also.  This just shows that the country has a terribly biased and non-functional legal system.  Why do business at all with a country like that?

post #24 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26 View Post

How  humiliating for Apple.

 

And so much for those who claimed that Apple's legal losses are not damaging its image with consumers.  Even were that true in the past, this would put an absolute end to any notion that consumers are not aware of apple's legal tactics.

Yeah because a single British judge (wearing a whig no doubt) made a ruling?

 

Sure, we can go with that.

 

Or not.

post #25 of 301

Perhaps evidence that the courts are realizing they're being played as pawns in a market competition? Certainly can't be dismissed as a possibility.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #26 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26 View Post

How  humiliating for Apple.

 

And so much for those who claimed that Apple's legal losses are not damaging its image with consumers.  Even were that true in the past, this would put an absolute end to any notion that consumers are not aware of apple's legal tactics.

 

Humiliating?  To have won patent suits in multiple countries, and then have one judge in the UK issue this bizarre decision?  (And I say that as an attorney in Silicon Valley, in an office full of IP lawyers.)

 

And please cite evidence of how "Apple's legal losses are [] damaging its image with consumers."  Would it be the record sales, the cannibalization of PC sales, the ever-rising stock price... ?

post #27 of 301

Made me LOL.

post #28 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierrajeff View Post


Agreed, along with an additional statement to the effect of "However, other courts in the United States, Australia and other countries have ruled that the Samsung device was an improper copy."

I don't believe any US or Australian court has AFAIK. Have any of the other cases progressed past the "likely valid and infringed" stage yet? I believe thus far they've only been preliminary rulings on injunction requests.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #29 of 301
Spot on, let's hope they take your advice - he can't dictate that they do it with good grace! Irony is the perfect riposte.
post #30 of 301

Fat chance in hell Apple will do this. They'd remove all business from the UK before doing something that would negatively affect their other patent cases.

post #31 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

Apparently they cant appeal - Apple should move all its infrastructure in the UK to Ireland. Not that it has much. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

According to the article "Apple does not have the ability to appeal the ruling"

I guess I must be reading the AI article incorrectly when it says, last sentence, para 4: "Apple does have the ability to appeal the judge's decision."

post #32 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

While Apple has had a hard time fighting Samsung in court in the U.K., it has had success against the Galaxy Tab in other countries. For example, last month U.S. District Court Judge Lucky Koh found that Samsung infringed on Apple's design patents, and issued a temporary injunction prohibiting sales of the device.
 
Apple has also successfully argued for temporary injunctions in Australia and Germany. Samsung dodged the German injunction by releasing a slightly-redesigned Galaxy Tab 10.1N. Meanwhile, the Australian ban was overturned last November.

They need one of those who's suing who and who won where type of world maps.

 

Samsung Galaxy Tab did not copy the iPad in the UK but did copy the iPad in Australia. Crazy but true.

 

Perhaps they should close the UK website. I mean shutter it.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #33 of 301

We have to remember speech is not a fundamental right in the UK. Apparently not even in a court of law.


Edited by Cpsro - 7/18/12 at 11:37am
post #34 of 301

Stuff like this makes "British justice" an oxymoron.

 

What a foolish, laughable judge!

post #35 of 301
The judge is freaking out of his mind.. Riding high on a power trip.
No way this can be held up.
Stupid!
post #36 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealestmc View Post

It has to start somewhere. I am glad the judge ruled that way. The idea the square is invented by Apple is absolutely absurd. I like Apple products and all, but this one was a stupid suit to begin with. 

If all you see is a square, I'm glad you are not a judge, or a designer. Tablets before the iPad were square too - do you think they look the same?

post #37 of 301

This is completely stupid. Time for the Queen to use some of her theoretical reserve powers and intervene!

post #38 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClementineOrange View Post

That is completely insane.

You only feel that way because you happen to disagree, otherwise you'd likely deem it judicially 'innovative'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpnorton82 View Post

Is there precedence for a ruling like this?

There certainly is now.

Funny how that works. ;-)
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #39 of 301
I guess that's the cost of being "not cool". 1tongue.gif
"Very disappointing to have people judging something without all the facts." - charlituna.
Reply
"Very disappointing to have people judging something without all the facts." - charlituna.
Reply
post #40 of 301

"Justice is blind" ?.. Forgive me. I could not resist.

 

judge_birss_b.jpg

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • UK judge rules Apple must advertise Samsung did not copy the iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › UK judge rules Apple must advertise Samsung did not copy the iPad