or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's UK site says Samsung devices 'not as cool' in compliance with court ruling
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's UK site says Samsung devices 'not as cool' in compliance with court ruling - Page 3

post #81 of 167

LOL.

 

You know Apple has done something big when so many idiots are getting pissed. BTW, I'm having some legal issues and need a good lawyer to help me out. It seems I've got several to choose from.

post #82 of 167

There it is.

 

LOL, and the true Apple haters in these forums come out to roost. You know who you are. You aren't complaining because Apple didn't comply with the court order. You're complaining because Apple won't give you mea culpa to feed your schadenfreude. Pathetic.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #83 of 167

Bad form Apple.

 

Like Apple, and many here, I think the court decision was the wrong one, but acting like a petulant child and trying to worm your way into turning a court mandated statement into good PR is ridiculous.  They should have just sucked it, no one would have cared about the statement, but this move makes them look like jokers.  I don't know anything about the law in this department and whether they could be found in contempt of court, or in a dubious legal position, but I (a shareholder) hope they are.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #84 of 167
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post
I don't know anything about the law in this department…

 

So, really, why are you saying anything at all about this?


…whether they could be found in contempt of court, or in a dubious legal position, but I (a shareholder) hope they are.

 

Hey, it's today's most contradictory and ignorant statement! 

 

They did what the law said. They cannot be held in contempt. Reading this thread would show you that.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #85 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

LOL.

 

You know Apple has done something big when so many idiots are getting pissed. BTW, I'm having some legal issues and need a good lawyer to help me out. It seems I've got several to choose from.

 

 

Apple, in typical fashion, once again gets the last laugh, flouting watered-down social conventions as they go. 

 

Those in this thread who represent the comfortable, low-risk, milquetoast round pegs in round holes, will naturally be driven batshit crazy by this. 

post #86 of 167
Again I must say that I think there is a typo at the beginning of this Article.

This article says apple wrote that... Samsung did infringe on Patents....


But thats not the outcome of the court case. Samsung did NOT infringe... because not cool.

if You check

http://www.apple.com/uk/legal-judgement/

it clearly says :

Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited%u2019s Galaxy Tablet Computer, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple%u2019s registered design No. 0000181607-0001.

So a lot of the comments here are simply misled by this typo!!!
Can anybody wake up Sam Oliver please
post #87 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I thought it a bit silly myself when it was first ordered. But now with Apple's latest response to the judge's order it does seem to serve a purpose. Apple continues to assert that Samsung is infringing on this design patent even after the EU wide legal judgement that they do not, and apparently the UK judge may have anticipated Apple's continued claims contrary to the ruling.

 

I do not see anywhere in the statement that Apple assert infringement by Samsung. I see factually correct statements that other courts have found that Samsung infringed, and quotes from the UK ruling.

post #88 of 167
It's very funny and very clever but I fear it will be viewed as contempt. Judges don't take kindly to people taking the piss.
post #89 of 167

Muppetry, they can't get much closer than "in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad."

 

BTW, my guess as to the Judge Birss' reasons for making such an order in the first place is apparently dead on correct. See points 44 and 45 from the judges order.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html

 

As an aside, I'm guessing Apple already confirmed they don't have any other cases arriving in that UK court in the foreseeable future.  Any Apple penalties or admonitions in other UK proceedings might consider how Apple complied with this one. With the billions that Apple has they can certainly afford to be a bit arrogant if they wish, and absolutely have the means to back it up. In my opinion tho it wasn't the best way to go about this one, even if may meet the letter of the law and the judge's order. . . . but of course my opinion isn't the one that counts anyway.

 

EDIT: If you read item 51 in the judge's ruling on Apple's appeal, it speaks to the very same issue that Apple is again repeating in their court-ordered notice.

"In my judgment, Apple are carefully trying to say something which contains an innuendo that Samsung infringe without actually saying it. The reference to copying is exactly that. It is clear that copying plays no part in this case for Registered Community Design infringement, but to many people outside the circles of intellectual property law to say something infringes a Registered Community Design and to say someone copied your design or your product is to say the same thing."

 

...Which is why the order to publish was upheld on appeal. Yet Apple again makes the same claims that led to the order in the first place. When this thread first started this morning I disagreed that Apple was in any danger of any further court sansctions on the matter. Now, after reading the reasons behind the order in the first place, I'm not as certain.

 

For those wondering why the order was made to begin with, but lacking the patience to read the entire document to know why, just read items 43 thru 58. It will take less than three minutes.


Edited by Gatorguy - 10/26/12 at 11:11am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #90 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Muppetry, they can't get much closer than "in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad."

 

BTW, my guess as to the Judge Birss' reasons for making such an order in the first place is apparently dead on correct. See points 44 and 45 from the judges order.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html

 

As an aside, I'm guessing Apple already confirmed they don't have any other cases arriving in that UK court in the foreseeable future.  Any Apple penalties or admonitions in other UK proceedings might consider how Apple complied with this one. With the billions that Apple has they can certainly afford to be a bit arrogant if they wish, and absolutely have the means to back it up. In my opinion tho it wasn't the best way to go about this one, even if may meet the letter of the law and the judge's order. . . . but of course my opinion isn't the one that counts anyway.

 

Disagree - they are reporting the findings of other courts, not their own assertions. If you want to argue the technical aspect of compliance with the court order then you have to consider what they wrote, not what you think they might have been trying to imply.

post #91 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Bad form Apple.

 

Like Apple, and many here, I think the court decision was the wrong one, but acting like a petulant child and trying to worm your way into turning a court mandated statement into good PR is ridiculous.  They should have just sucked it, no one would have cared about the statement, but this move makes them look like jokers.  I don't know anything about the law in this department and whether they could be found in contempt of court, or in a dubious legal position, but I (a shareholder) hope they are.

 

So basically, you want the UK court to order Apple to "act more sorry"? You'd like that, wouldn't you.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #92 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

So, really, why are you saying anything at all about this?

 

Hey, it's today's most contradictory and ignorant statement! 

 

They did what the law said. They cannot be held in contempt. Reading this thread would show you that.

 

Congratulations on winning the prize of biggest jerk.  This thread is an Apple forum, not a court of law.  It shows me nothing for sure about whether Apple can/will be held in contempt for something that literally just happened.

 

And I'd appreciate if you'd point out where the logical contradiction is in me saying I don't know specifics about UK law in obligation fulfilment and expressing a hope that Apple is punished for a childish action.  Do you know specifics about this law?  I sincerely doubt it, so pipe down with the fanboy outrage.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #93 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

 

So basically, you want the UK court to order Apple to "act more sorry"? You'd like that, wouldn't you.

I want Apple to act like a grown up company and respect the law and the intent of the law, not try to circumvent judgements with snide underminings.

 

I don't know how UK law can or should enforce that, or if they will.  I merely hope they will, in an effective way.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #94 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Brother 84 View Post

It's very funny and very clever but I fear it will be viewed as contempt. Judges don't take kindly to people taking the piss.

 

Factual statements, including on-record statements made by the court are contempt of court? Judges don't take kindly to having their on-record statements posted on web pages related to the trial? Okay, whatever you say.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #95 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

So, really, why are you saying anything at all about this?

 

Hey, it's today's most contradictory and ignorant statement! 

 

They did what the law said. They cannot be held in contempt. Reading this thread would show you that.

 

Congratulations on winning the prize of biggest jerk.  This thread is an Apple forum, not a court of law.  It shows me nothing for sure about whether Apple can/will be held in contempt for something that literally just happened.

 

And I'd appreciate if you'd point out where the logical contradiction is in me saying I don't know specifics about UK law in obligation fulfilment and expressing a hope that Apple is punished for a childish action.  Do you know specifics about this law?  I sincerely doubt it, so pipe down with the fanboy outrage.

 

When in doubt, anthropomorphize and demand retribution.

post #96 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

 

Disagree - they are reporting the findings of other courts, not their own assertions. If you want to argue the technical aspect of compliance with the court order then you have to consider what they wrote, not what you think they might have been trying to imply.

Check my EDIT comment in post 89 and I think your opinion may change.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #97 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

 

Basically it says Samsung was found not guilty by this court, but guilty by these other courts.  By tacking on the commentary they are undermining the intent of the court.

 

Under the law, insanity such as that shown by Birss in this ruling negates the formation of intent.

 

Apple has complied with his ruling using true statements.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #98 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

Under the law, insanity such as that shown by Birss in this ruling negates the formation of intent.

 

Apple has complied with his ruling using true statements.

You didn't read the reasons for the order did you?

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #99 of 167

Apple didn't lose its freedom of speech. It can state its opinion and state facts in addition repeating information required by the court order. The court ruling does not create an alternate universe in the UK where no one is allowed to express opinions different than the judge's or discuss facts that contradict the court's finding.

 

Similarly, in some states such as South Dakota, doctors are required by law to read to patients non-factual political statements about abortion because anti-abortion-dominated legislatures passed laws requiring that. However, because we have freedom of speech, there is nothing to stop doctors from immediately following the mandatory statement with contradictory opinion and facts.

 

Government power doesn't extend to redefining reality and forcing people to act like they believe the official belief.

post #100 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic_Al View Post

Apple didn't lose its freedom of speech. It can state its opinion and state facts in addition repeating information required by the court order. The court ruling does not create an alternate universe in the UK where no one is allowed to express opinions different than the judge's or discuss facts that contradict the court's finding.

See point 48 in the judgment I linked above. It mentions that specifically.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #101 of 167

Haha, this is great!

 

Apple is merely complying with the court order and citing the judge's own words!1biggrin.gif

 

Take that Fandroids! Your devices are not cool! The Judge says so, and you can't argue with a judge!lol.gif

 

The same few Fandroids who are butthurt over this are probably the same people who think that Samsung's lame commercials are good.

 

Your devices will never be cool, they're cheap, inferior ripoff products running a crappy ass OS, made for people who do not have very high expectations. Fandroids disgust me.

post #102 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_veritas View Post

 

Sounds good to me....do you really think a UK judge is going to buy that pitch though???

 

I fear this will end very badly for Apple. They were already given a reprieve during the appeal to only include a PROMINENT link on the homepage instead of the actual apology. However, a link in the last section of a page scanned in the English language (lower right), in the smallest font used on the page, is the exact opposite of prominent. And good luck convincing any judge that this "apology", taken in its entirety (which is how a court will evaluate it), meets the criteria of this court ruling.

 

So is this jumped up, nutty UK judge going to accuse his colleagues in other countries of contempt as well?

 

What, is crack legal in England?

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #103 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

I want Apple to act like a grown up company and respect the law and the intent of the law, not try to circumvent judgements with snide underminings.

 

 

How did they "circumvent" the judgment? They stated on their website that those specific Samsung products did not infringe on their patent. You're confusing facts with your personal feelings about Apple. You're projecting contempt; you see what you wish to see.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #104 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

 

How did they "circumvent" the judgment? They stated on their website that those specific Samsung products did not infringe on their patent. You're confusing facts with your personal feelings about Apple. You're projecting contempt; you see what you wish to see.

Apple were under no obligation to put any reference to German or US courts in their statement, and yet they chose to.  That those courts made different judgements to the UK court is presented in a way that suggests the UK court decision is wrong, or at least questionable.  That shows disrespect to the court, or, in other words, contempt.

 

I've already mentioned that I don't particularly agree with the court judgement, but I'm a private individual with little tie to the case.  Apple were the defendant, they lost the case, and they lost the appeal, and in my opinion that's that; they shouldn't be messing around on legally required notices on their website.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #105 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

...nothing more than playing a complicated game of semantics.

 

Welcome to Law 101, lesson 1, topic 1, sentence 1.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #106 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Apple lost and needs to follow through with the judge's decision in good faith. 

 

Bullshit.

 

If a judge condemns one to death, there is no law which states one has to go to the gallows "in good faith", whatever the f*ck that wishy washy statement means.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #107 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

 

Basically it says Samsung was found not guilty by this court, but guilty by these other courts.  By tacking on the commentary they are undermining the intent of the court.

 

 

The intent of the Court is contained in the Order. Namely, for Apple to post on its website that a UK court found Samsung's tablet to not infringe Apple's design patent. Apple has fully complied. If the Court wanted something different, it should have provided Apple with the exact language.

 

Anybody reading the link will know 1) the UK court found Samsung not guilty of infringing the at issue patent, 2) the reason being that the UK judge doesn't think Samsung's products are as cool as Apple's, and 3) other courts in other parts of the world disagree with the UK judge. 

 

For what it is worth, the Judge's order was ridiculous to being with. Apple's view that Samsung infringed was reasonable. This is seen by other courts agreeing. The judge even said the Samsung tablet had a very similar front face to the iPad. The Judge paid particular attention to the back of the device. The part people don't see. Further, I can't think of any similar case where the plaintiff has had to post such nonsense. Based on Samsung's sales, it clearly hasn't been harmed. 

post #108 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Apple were under no obligation to put any reference to German or US courts in their statement, and yet they chose to.  That those courts made different judgements to the UK court is presented in a way that suggests the UK court decision is wrong, or at least questionable.  That shows disrespect to the court, or, in other words, contempt.

 

I've already mentioned that I don't particularly agree with the court judgement, but I'm a private individual with little tie to the case.  Apple were the defendant, they lost the case, and they lost the appeal, and in my opinion that's that; they shouldn't be messing around on legally required notices on their website.

 

 

I had to go to the store to buy cold medicine. While there I  bought a container of Ben and Jerry's ice cream. I was under no obligation to buy the ice cream so, but I choose to do it. As long as Apple complied with the Judge's Order, it was free to do whatever else it wished to do provided it was legal. If the judge wanted Apple to say something specifically, the Judge should have wrote the specific message for Apple. 

 

Moreover, how can the judge complain? First, Apple was the plaintiff, not the defendant. Second, Apple clearly complies in the first paragraph. Third, Apple quotes the judge's basis for finding against Apple. Namely, Samsung's product is not as cool as Apple's product. Clearly, the Judge can't be upset about Apple providing the judge's reasoning for his decision. Fourth, Apple reiterates the Judge's decision in the last paragraph, but points out that in other places in the world different courts disagree. That is also a fact. Is Apple really supposed to not talk about facts? 

 

Setting all that aside. THe judge's order was ridiculous. Based on the other court decisions, Apple's position was clearly reasonable. I can't think of another case where the plaintiff had to post such a notice. The judge was also an idiot. He essentially said the Samsung and iPad tablets are very similar in front, but largely issued his decision based on the back of the devices and the varying weights. When people go into a store to see these devices, the only thing they generally can see is the front. In the California case, the Samsung lawyer couldn't easily pick out which device was the Samsung device when the Judge held both devices up. 

post #109 of 167
"..the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple’s registered design No. 0000181607-0001."

I can't believe it, they really did it. How Embarrassing.

"I invented the rectangle"  - Steve Jobs

"We Bomb you" - USA

Reply

"I invented the rectangle"  - Steve Jobs

"We Bomb you" - USA

Reply
post #110 of 167
Originally Posted by mocseg View Post
"..the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple’s registered design No. 0000181607-0001."
I can't believe it, they really did it. How Embarrassing.


Eventually the English court system will have to apologize to Apple. It all evens out.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #111 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Is Apple really supposed to not talk about facts? 

A fact of German or US law is of no relevance to a UK court-ruled clarification posted on Apple's UK website.  Those facts should not be there, they serve only to undermine the UK judgement.  So no, actually they shouldn't talk about them.

 

It should also be noted that freedom of expression in the UK is not the same as freedom of speech in the US.  See the following about scandalising of judges: http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/docs/cp207_Scandalising_the_Court_for_web.pdf

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #112 of 167

I used to enjoy reading the comments sections of AI because each contributor would add something from their area of expertise that gave me a more rounded understanding of the technical issues. Unfortunately I'm sad that it has largely been taken over by childish trolling (even by one of the moderators!).

post #113 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Muppetry, they can't get much closer than "in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad."

 

BTW, my guess as to the Judge Birss' reasons for making such an order in the first place is apparently dead on correct. See points 44 and 45 from the judges order.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html

 

As an aside, I'm guessing Apple already confirmed they don't have any other cases arriving in that UK court in the foreseeable future.  Any Apple penalties or admonitions in other UK proceedings might consider how Apple complied with this one. With the billions that Apple has they can certainly afford to be a bit arrogant if they wish, and absolutely have the means to back it up. In my opinion tho it wasn't the best way to go about this one, even if may meet the letter of the law and the judge's order. . . . but of course my opinion isn't the one that counts anyway.

 

EDIT: If you read item 51 in the judge's ruling on Apple's appeal, it speaks to the very same issue that Apple is again repeating in their court-ordered notice.

"In my judgment, Apple are carefully trying to say something which contains an innuendo that Samsung infringe without actually saying it. The reference to copying is exactly that. It is clear that copying plays no part in this case for Registered Community Design infringement, but to many people outside the circles of intellectual property law to say something infringes a Registered Community Design and to say someone copied your design or your product is to say the same thing."

 

...Which is why the order to publish was upheld on appeal. Yet Apple again makes the same claims that led to the order in the first place. When this thread first started this morning I disagreed that Apple was in any danger of any further court sansctions on the matter. Now, after reading the reasons behind the order in the first place, I'm not as certain.

 

For those wondering why the order was made to begin with, but lacking the patience to read the entire document to know why, just read items 43 thru 58. It will take less than three minutes.

 

The problem is that the item you quoted involves Apple using innuendo to say that Samsung infringed without actually saying it. In the website statement, Apple is not using innuendo; it is merely stating facts. 

The judge said Apple products are cool: fact

The judge said Samsung products are thin and insubstantial: fact

 

I'm not sure how he can sanction Apple for merely stating the bare facts, especially when the statements are those he said himself. Nowhere has Apple said the judge was wrong, or complained about the outcome. If he does attempt to suppress the truth then Apple may well decide to take the case further.

 

The only problem I can see is the final paragraph. The judge may decide that the cases in Germany and the US have no bearing and shouldn't be mentioned.

post #114 of 167
Originally Posted by dave2012 View Post
Unfortunately I'm sad that it has largely been taken over by childish trolling (even by one of the moderators!).

 

So either explain what you mean by this or don't expect to be taken seriously either!

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #115 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayz View Post

 

The only problem I can see is the final paragraph. The judge may decide that the cases in Germany and the US have no bearing and shouldn't be mentioned.

Then you and I agree 1smile.gifas that is the section I had a concern with as well. It seems at odds with the courts intent for dealing with the issue discussed in point 51 of the courts decision.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #116 of 167
LOL! (when I heard the judge's order earlier I thought that THIS was exacty what they should do but I doubted Apple without Jobs would have dared to do it. Good for you Cook!)

and the judge had ordered Apple to print the ad in LARGE type as well...

it's time for Apple to run "Samsung UNCOOL" ads in U.K.
samsung can't say anything about it as the judge had determined that fact...
lol.
post #117 of 167
Quote:
So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.

 

Which other courts were those? In the US case it cited, the Galaxy tab was one of the few found not to infringe Apple's products. That leaves only the German court decision (which was invalid as the UK court had already ruled it non-infringing, and their decision should have been valid throughout the EC - the German local court shouldn't have contradicted it, the decision could only be overturned by a superior court.
 

post #118 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davewrite View Post

Good for you Cook!)

You know what they:

"Don't fook with the Cook".
Apple Products: So good that their ‘faulty' products outsell competitor’s faultless ones...
Reply
Apple Products: So good that their ‘faulty' products outsell competitor’s faultless ones...
Reply
post #119 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Apple. basically mocked the orders of the UK judge and made a fool of him.
Not agreeing with his ruling is one thing, but to bring in other European courts decisions is going too far.
This is contempt of court.
Apple did exactly the right thing, by following the rule by the letter.
I am more concerned about people like you, I still don't get it, why you are wasting your time in this forum. You hate Apple that is completely fine with me, but to make yourself ridiculous with such nonsensical statements on an forum hosted and frequented manly by Apple favorable people is beyond my understanding.

Have some fun and try something constructive and creative. It helps! Believe me.
post #120 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davewrite View Post

LOL! (when I heard the judge's order earlier I thought that THIS was exacty what they should do but I doubted Apple without Jobs would have dared to do it. Good for you Cook!)
and the judge had ordered Apple to print the ad in LARGE type as well...
it's time for Apple to run "Samsung UNCOOL" ads in U.K.
samsung can't say anything about it as the judge had determined that fact...
lol.

LOL!!

Looking forward to those ads!

And yes I really love the subtle humor behind Apples link on the UK website.

Well done TC!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's UK site says Samsung devices 'not as cool' in compliance with court ruling