or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › UK court orders Apple to rewrite website statement saying Samsung didn't copy the iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

UK court orders Apple to rewrite website statement saying Samsung didn't copy the iPad - Page 7

post #241 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

...was the court requirement to publish a common one or is this something relatively new. Can you find where I answered his question with a link to an excellent legal explanation? Why don't you tell us what you think his basic question was?

Eric's a big boy. I'm sure he can let me know if my answers weren't sufficient or flawed.

Yep. Thought so: your denseness is only matched by the seemingly clueless obtuseness.

His question (I am quoting): "Provide us with examples of this happening to other companies before Apple."

Go on, please provide us with examples.... We'll wait.
post #242 of 446

First, this is the most ridiculous ruling I've ever heard of.

 

Second, I would love for Apple to include images demonstrating how Samsung "didn't" copy Apple's designs. Let the images speak for themselves.

post #243 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by canucklehead View Post

First, this is the most ridiculous ruling I've ever heard of.

 

Second, I would love for Apple to include images demonstrating how Samsung "didn't" copy Apple's designs. Let the images speak for themselves.

 

Perhaps you should hear more rulings before calling it "most ridiculous" you've "ever heard of". 

 

You say one thing, the other party says another thing. Where do you go to resolve this dispute? Court. 

 

Court ruled one thing. That is the end. Enough said. 

 

If there are other methods of resolving disputes, besides using the legal system, I'm all ears. 

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #244 of 446
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
Kellogs?

 

Yeah, it's 12,000 box tops for the bachelor's. Someone must really like his Frosties.

 

That's Frosted Flakes to us Americans. The name "Frosted Flakes" isn't owned by Kellogg's over there. 

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #245 of 446

Saying things like "show me where" and "what parts we're factually incorrect?" are childish in the extreme. The latest judgement, which this topic is discussing, states that Apple did not comply with the original ruling of the UK court. The statement posted on the website could hardly have been more wilfully subversive of the ORDER Apple had been given, if they put a big 'NOT' right after outlining the actual ruling.

It would be contemptuous (legally and otherwise) for Apple to attempt to argue against this latest judgement, especially when it is clear they were baiting not just the particular judge who made the ruling and those others who have been involved but also an entire judiciary. If Apple is willing to engage in this type of behaviour (and asking for 14 days is taking the Michael) then they cannot be surprised when they are pulled up about it. 

post #246 of 446
Originally Posted by superhoopa View Post
The latest judgement, which this topic is discussing, states that Apple did not comply with the original ruling of the UK court.

 

In what capacity was it noncompliant? 


The statement posted on the website could hardly have been more willfully subversive of the ORDER Apple had been given…

 

They did exactly what the ruling demanded, to the letter.


It would be contemptuous (legally and otherwise) for Apple to attempt to argue against this latest judgement…

 

This latest judgement is, in a sane society, probably legally invalid.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #247 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

 

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121101091853360

 

They showed disrespect to a court of law. Now they are being slapped down for it, end of.

 

Groklaw are a biased group of losers, who lost all relevance when the SCO case was finished.

 

Your link shows selected quotes from news sources, if Groklaw want to be taken seriously as a source then perhaps they should base their dissemination on an actual ruling not some opinion piece based on other selected opinion pieces.

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 #248 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatever71 View Post

For all those on here that believe they know the English & worldwide legal system, please check sites such as groklaw for as much information as you can absorb on the apple samsung ongoing nonsense & other legal stuff.  Information you'll find of interest & which is from a legal point of view:

 

Why Apple didn't comply with the English court order ref Samsung not infringing

Why Apple will very likely not see a penny of the $1bn damages awarded by the US court

Why the Apple win in the US will be overturned

 

Oh, and you could probably learn a thing or two about patents, prior art & why patent trolls such as Apple will ultimately lose in their quest to litigate competition out of the market.

 

And to try to stave off any fandroid type comments I own an iPhone 4s, Galaxy S2 & a Samsung TV which does put me more in the Samsung camp but not in the Android camp.

 

Say what?

 

Are you talking about that rubbish you posted before?

 

The biased opinion piece based on selected quotes from other opinion pieces.

 

Get real, Grocklaw are as irrelevant today as SCO.

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 #249 of 446

No company should be required to make provably false statements anywhere. Samsung did copy Apple and continues to do so. Apple should refuse to comply, and insist that this is a breach of natural justice. It should surround this order from the judges in a mass of information that proves the judgement wrong and allow everyone to form their own opinion. 

 

This kind of thing makes me ashamed to be English. A great country reduced to idiocy in only 60 years.

AppleInsider = Apple-in-cider. It's a joke!

I've used macs since 1985 when I typed up my first research paper. Never used anything else never wanted to.
Reply
AppleInsider = Apple-in-cider. It's a joke!

I've used macs since 1985 when I typed up my first research paper. Never used anything else never wanted to.
Reply
post #250 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


BS. 

 

Substance vs form. 

 

Apple may have followed the form but they certainly have not followed the substance of the judge's order. 

 

The judge's orders were to state that Samsung's product does not "copy" Apple's product; not to go ahead and throw in extraneous information to try and mitigate their admission.  Not only that, they compared the UK's ruling with rulings from other countries, which has no relationship with the one in the UK!. Apple basically said FU to the authority of the UK judgement

 

Apple was never required to state that the product 'does not copy' and was never required to apologise. Apple was told to display the judgement on its website; it was never told to pretend to agree with it.

 

They are entitled to include the judge's comments because his comments were the reason for the judgement.  Including the judgements from the other countries? That's probably playing a little fast and loose.

post #251 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrystalClear View Post

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.". 

 

 

Wrong.

 

Under UK law "infringement of a design patent" and "copying" are not the same thing.

 

"Samsung blatantly copied Apple yet did not infringe Apple's design patent" is a perfectly valid statement.

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 #252 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


Yep. Thought so: your denseness is only matched by the seemingly clueless obtuseness.
His question (I am quoting): "Provide us with examples of this happening to other companies before Apple."
Go on, please provide us with examples.... We'll wait.

To the contrary, his basic question revolved around this, just as I said:

 

 

"You don't know why it would matter?

 

If this has never happened before (and I think it's a first) then its a precadent setting ruling. Apple has every right to fight this tooth and nail if they are the first company in the UK that has ever had to post up such a notice. If this is common in the UK then Apple has no right to complain since it's an accepted practice."

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/153959/uk-court-orders-apple-to-rewrite-website-statement-saying-samsung-didnt-copy-the-ipad/200#post_2224721

 

Which I researched and supplied an answer for here:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/153959/uk-court-orders-apple-to-rewrite-website-statement-saying-samsung-didnt-copy-the-ipad/200#post_2224833

 

Question answered. I can't read it for you. Again, you're welcome.

When insults and name-calling is all you have left to answer with, it's a pretty good sign I've won.


Edited by Gatorguy - 11/1/12 at 2:59pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #253 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax View Post

 

Apple was instructed to put "the notice" (that particular statement) "on the Apple homepage."  Apple argued that it would clutter things up, and asked if they could just link to it.  The appeals court, said "yeah that's reasonable; provide a link to the notice."

 

One could argue that the expectation was that the link would go to a page with nothing but the notice.

 

To put this in context, look at the original ruling at paragraph 51 of http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html the judge wrote:

 

"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."

 

Clearly the court was sensitive to word choice and context.  A link to "the statement" shouldn't be a link to "the statement plus some other stuff that Apple feels like adding."

 

No big deal, Apple just needs to delete the other stuff.

 

So why is this judge stepping outside the bounds of the law with all this drivel about "innuendo" and opinions on how people will interpret factual statements?

 

A judge's job is to break things down to a black and white interpretation of the law and make a decision based on that interpretation.

 

In this case they are not doing that and Apple should appeal, given the fairly strong grounds these incompetent judges have handed them.

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 #254 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by period View Post

I agree, the punishment is apt.  This sends a strong message to the community that even the biggest co. will be punished if they make false court appeals and waste court's (and government's) valuable time/money.  Next time, co.s will think twice, do their homework about preexisting work (instead of putting indirect pressure on the courts and defendant lawyers to do that), and make sure they have a valid case before appealing.  Of course, this is all assuming that it's shameful to admit one's guilt and post it on one's face, irrespective of anyone reading that post.  If co.s (including Apple) don't think that way, they might continue appealing.

 

Apple is the defendant in this case, Samsung is the plaintiff.

 

So what you are saying is Samsung should be punished for initiating this legal action?

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 #255 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

They did exactly what the ruling demanded, to the letter.

 

Look, I was amused by Apple's response, and I think that in an American court it might be regarded as complying with the letter of the law. But judges have wide latitude to decide when they're being met with disrespect.

 

This is a British court, not an American court. Their judges have even wider latitude to decide when they're being disrespected. This goes well beyond compliance to the letter of the law. 

 

Apple likes to thumb its nose at competitors and detractors. Normally this amuses me. But doing that to a judge is, perhaps, unwise. 

post #256 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

In this case they are not doing that and Apple should appeal, given the fairly strong grounds these incompetent judges have handed them.

They have appealed. . .  twice now. In both cases the Appeals Court upheld the order to publish, with minor changes to the original order handed down several weeks ago.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #257 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Of course not, that wasn't the judgement.  Not that Apple would be, or have been, particularly hurt by being forced to publicly state that their products have been officially judged to be cooler than Samsung's.  Which makes this whole charade all the more stupid, Apple have dug themselves into a hole when they could have been soaring on the back of a lost court case that declared them to be cooler.  If that's a lost court case then who needs to win?

 

But no, they had to be "the rebel", had to bite the hand that was feeding them just because they don't like to lose.  Like Apple, hate Apple's legal machine.

 

Apple have been specifically ordered to provide a link to the judgement which contains the "cooler" statement of Birss, as such they have merely summarised parts of the ruling in order to help with people's understanding.

 

Apple should appeal this farce.

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 #258 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by canucklehead View Post

First, this is the most ridiculous ruling I've ever heard of.

 

Second, I would love for Apple to include images demonstrating how Samsung "didn't" copy Apple's designs. Let the images speak for themselves.

Maybe you should check out some rulings from Texas.

post #259 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

Apple have been specifically ordered to provide a link to the judgement which contains the "cooler" statement of Birss, as such they have merely summarised parts of the ruling in order to help with people's understanding.

 

Apple should appeal this farce.

...for a third time?

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #260 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by protaginets View Post

 

But atleast the kid has the satisfaction of knowing the dad won't ever ask for a sandwich from him again, right?

 

The next one will contain boogers, will be filmed being made and eaten then shared on Youtube and linked to on Reddit.

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 #261 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

To the contrary, his basic question revolved around this, just as I said:


"You don't know why it would matter?



 



If this has never happened before (and I think it's a first) then its a precadent setting ruling. Apple has every right to fight this tooth and nail if they are the first company in the UK that has ever had to post up such a notice. If this is common in the UK then Apple has no right to complain since it's an accepted practice."



http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/153959/uk-court-orders-apple-to-rewrite-website-statement-saying-samsung-didnt-copy-the-ipad/200#post_2224721

Which I researched and supplied an answer for here:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/153959/uk-court-orders-apple-to-rewrite-website-statement-saying-samsung-didnt-copy-the-ipad/200#post_2224833

Question answered. I can't read it for you. Again, you're welcome.
When insults and name-calling is all you have left to answer with, it's a pretty good sign I've won.

Thank you! You've shown clearly that this is a first case for this kind of punishment. You've also show us that the judge is using various unrelated laws to cobble together justification for the result he wanted in the first place. You're questioning Apple appealing more than once? Surely you know there's more than one level of appeal in the American judicial system? There may not be in the UK, but that only speaks additionally to the flaws of their system.
post #262 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post


Thank you! You've shown clearly that this is a first case for this kind of punishment. You've also show us that the judge is using various unrelated laws to cobble together justification for the result he wanted in the first place. You're questioning Apple appealing more than once? Surely you know there's more than one level of appeal in the American judicial system? There may not be in the UK, but that only speaks additionally to the flaws of their system.

You're welcome. If not the very first at least one of the first instances of a publish order using those provisions of the law. Unlike anantksundaram you took the opportunity to read the answer I provided hours ago.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #263 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by protaginets View Post

I swear, there is something in the air that makes the English (and people who move to England) feel superior and smarter than everyoine else in the world.  Anyone (non british) who reads about this judge telling Apple they did it wrong is going to see the judge as a idiotic bully.  Ok, anyone with a semblance of common sense.  I would bet even the lawyers at Samsung are scratching their heads wondering what is up this judge's bum.

 

The only good thing the English judiciary has done was sentence my ancestor in the 1700's to transportation for stealing 2 shillings, that means I'm now pondering whether to head to the beach on this lovely spring day rather than sitting in a bog in the drizzle, drinking the insipid warm dog's p*ss they call beer waiting for winter to come so the bog freezes over and the drizzle turns to sleet.

 

To that nameless judge, lost in the mists of time, thanks mate.


Edited by hill60 - 11/1/12 at 4:36pm
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 #264 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbryanh View Post

It's lovely to see that there are still governments that aren't quite as easily purchased as that corporate subsidiary Americans call "Congress."

 

It's better to born into it then, is it?

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 #265 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You're welcome. If not the very first at least one of the first instances of a publish order using those provisions of the law. Unlike anantksundaram .....

In other words, you agree that you lost.

post #266 of 446

Apple should stop being smart arses and sore losers, do what they were told to do and abide by both the letter and spirit of the judgement.

 

The drama that will ensue if they don't, simply won't be worth it.

 

If they don't, I would expect the thread discussing the ensuing consequences to stretch to 70+ pages, not 7.


Edited by cnocbui - 11/1/12 at 3:52pm
post #267 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

meh, you might be right. Maybe someone did stick a pickle in the judge's ass. Actually seem quite likely.

 

Most likely dressed in an Eton uniform while bending over the overstuffed chesterfield to toss another fag on the fire.

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 #268 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Apple should stop being smart asses and sore losers, do what they were told to do and abide by both the letter and spirit of the judgement.

 

The drama that will ensue if they don't, simply won't be worth it.

 

If they don't, I would expect the thread discussing the ensuing consequences to stretch to 70+ pages, not 7.

 

It's the UK, it's "arses", asses are donkeys.

 

Although it has been said, the law is an ass but not in the American sense.

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 #269 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

It's the UK, it's "arses", asses are donkeys.

 

Although it has been said, the law is an ass but not in the American sense.

 



Thanks, you are correct, I slipped up there.

post #270 of 446

**** the UK.

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply
post #271 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor View Post

 

Look, I was amused by Apple's response, and I think that in an American court it might be regarded as complying with the letter of the law. But judges have wide latitude to decide when they're being met with disrespect.

 

This is a British court, not an American court. Their judges have even wider latitude to decide when they're being disrespected. This goes well beyond compliance to the letter of the law. 

 

Apple likes to thumb its nose at competitors and detractors. Normally this amuses me. But doing that to a judge is, perhaps, unwise. 

Yeah, but Tallest Skill apparently thinks that law is a perfect binary discipline. There is either right or wrong. Following the letter of the law is not the end all, be all. There's also intent and disrespect, concepts that (s)he doesn't seem to accept.

post #272 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

 

The judge's orders were to state that Samsung's product does not "copy" Apple's product;

 

Nope, the judges made quite clear that non-infringement of a design patent has nothing whatsoever to do with "copying", they even ordered Apple to post a link to the judgement containing the exact ruling where they made these statements, which Apple duly complied with.

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 #273 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eluard View Post

No company should be required to make provably false statements anywhere. Samsung did copy Apple and continues to do so. Apple should refuse to comply, and insist that this is a breach of natural justice. It should surround this order from the judges in a mass of information that proves the judgement wrong and allow everyone to form their own opinion. 

 

This kind of thing makes me ashamed to be English. A great country reduced to idiocy in only 60 years.

 

Coinciding with the time you joined the EU.

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 #274 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

They have appealed. . .  twice now. In both cases the Appeals Court upheld the order to publish, with minor changes to the original order handed down several weeks ago.

 

This latest ruling is the result of Samsung seeking clarification.

 

Apple has every right to seek clarification regarding Samsung's latest action and reserve the right to question the courts motives based on this request from Samsung.

 

They have every right to present a written submission as was laid out in the original appeal ruling.

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 #275 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post

Surely you know there's more than one level of appeal in the American judicial system? There may not be in the UK, but that only speaks additionally to the flaws of their system.

 

There are, all the way up to the Privy Council.

 

Perhaps Sir Jonathan Ive should seek an audience with the Queen in order to put an end to this nonsense.

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 #276 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

 

This latest ruling is the result of Samsung seeking clarification.

 

Apple has every right to seek clarification regarding Samsung's latest action and reserve the right to question the courts motives based on this request from Samsung.

 

They have every right to present a written submission as was laid out in the original appeal ruling.

Apple's legal counsel was present today when the clarification was issued. Unless Apple's attorneys were asleep they're fully aware of the arguments and discussion, as well as having the opportunity to explain their own position prior to the court's order. Clarification was what the hearing today was for, and it was clarified for both Samsung and Apple at the same time.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20165664

 

An excerpt:

 

"Michael Beloff QC, representing Apple, told judges that the company had thought that it had complied with the court order.

"It's not designed to punish," he (Apple's counsel) said.

"It's not designed to make us grovel. The only purpose must be to dispel commercial uncertainty."

He asked that the company be given 14 days to post the replacement - but the request was firmly denied.

Lord Justice Longmore told Mr Beloff: "We are just amazed that you cannot put the right notice up at the same time as you take the other one down"

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #277 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post

...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre

 

 

Nice Burn!

post #278 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


Yep. And now he's going to look really dumb. Not only for ordering a punishment that is appropriate for libel/slander cases which this was not but also for a poorly performed order and now crying foul because 'that's not what I meant'.

 

He already looks dumb for letting his hunger for publicity get in the way of his job.  He wanted to be the judge who put "big bad Apple" in it's place and ended up looking like an ass because of it.  Apple complied with the ruling as it had to, but now the judge is trying to save face by saying "that's not what I meant" blah blah blah.  If he would not have made such a spectacle of himself with his silly ruling in the first place it would have saved him from this embarrassment.  I could care less what happens from here.  Apple has already won the publicity battle, and used the judge's own comments to do so!  Priceless.

post #279 of 446
Originally Posted by galore2112 View Post
Yeah, but Tallest Skill apparently thinks that law is a perfect binary discipline. There is either right or wrong. Following the letter of the law is not the end all, be all. There's also intent and disrespect, concepts that (s)he doesn't seem to accept.

 

On the contrary, I desire Apple to ignore the letters of this law, even the entire character set in which this law is written, completely disrespect this ruling, this terrible ruling, borne of ludicrous law, one which, while legal, runs contrary to the truth.

 

I care ONLY for Truth. If law gets in the way of that, it can take a hike. Or whatever the equivalent British idiom is.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #280 of 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbryanh View Post

It's lovely to see that there are still governments that aren't quite as easily purchased as that corporate subsidiary Americans call "Congress."

 

All governments are bought and paid for.  To suggest otherwise is foolish and naive.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › UK court orders Apple to rewrite website statement saying Samsung didn't copy the iPad