Apple publishes statement in UK paper saying Samsung didn't copy iPad - Page 2

The problem with the ruling is that it goes beyond what was at issue. There's no question that Samsung copied Apple. That they did is clear for anyone to see. The legal issue of whether Apple could demonstrate that Samsung infringed on its intellectual property is separate. Legal decisions don't dictate reality. Asking Apple to apologise is ridiculous. Samsung copied Apple. End of story. Google copied Apple. The products would not and could not exist if the iPhone and iPad did not exist. This isn't even remotely at issue. No iPhone, no Galaxy phones. No iPad, no Galaxy Tab. No iOS, no Android. If you believe otherwise, you're irrational. Apple seeking damages for what Samsung did in no way causes confusion because there is no confusion. You have to be literally insane to believe that Samsung's products are not copies. The judge basically asked Apple to apologise for implying that the sky is blue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by poke 

The problem with the ruling is that it goes beyond what was at issue. There's no question that Samsung copied Apple. That they did is clear for anyone to see. The legal issue of whether Apple could demonstrate that Samsung infringed on its intellectual property is separate. Legal decisions don't dictate reality. Asking Apple to apologise is ridiculous. 

I'd agree that it would be ridiculous to ask Apple to apologize in this instance. That's why the court made it clear that wasn't what they required them to do. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson 

 

I wonder why Apple tried to make use of the legal system "over there" then.

 

If the legal system "over there" had made the decision you wanted, you'd think it was fine.

 

The truth is, this was clearly a case in the gray.  If it was clear-cut that Apple would win, Samsung wouldn't have let it goto court - they would have settled out of court.  Thats the exact time you need a third party to decide one way or another.  Just because you like Apple more than you like Samsung doesn't mean Apple are always right.

Samsung is the plaintiff, they are the one's who 'made use of the legal system "over there"'.

They made the "advertising" look so bad, no one will even bother looking 

Quote:

Originally Posted by NelsonX 

Simple. If the stock is going down, then something is wrong fundamentally at Apple. Nexus 4, which is almost as good as iPhone 5 costs 299$ unlocked while the iPhone 5 is between 700$ and 1000$ unlocked! Come on, this is unbelievable greedy! Yes, stock going down will be good for customers in the long run.

Nope, still doesn't make any sense, complete lack of logical connection between statements, as well as to the conclusion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anonymouse 

 

Nope, still doesn't make any sense, complete lack of logical connection between statements, as well as to the conclusion.

Well, the market thinks otherwise. It's 576$ right now. And still going down like a rock.

And right across the top it says "Advertisement"...makes it look like one of those paid articles that is really trying to sell something.

Also, where in the paper did it appear??  Most likely in an area rarely viewed by those skimming the paper.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton 


It would be something if the UK judge ordered Apple to produce a new TV ad, directed by Ridley Scott, exalting the wonderful court-ruled-non-infringing products of Samsung, but fortunately, that dry bit of text is all the court required.

Speaking of Ridley Scott, Apple should get him to do another ad for them again.

I'm sure that 99.3% of people here probably know this already, but he was of course the person behind Apple's 1984 ad.

Apple has good ads, but they've had a few misses lately too. They should mix things up and make some different style ads.

Quote:

Originally Posted by icoco3 

And right across the top it says "Advertisement"...makes it look like one of those paid articles that is really trying to sell something.

 

Also, where in the paper did it appear??  Most likely in an area rarely viewed by those skimming the paper.
 

Probably in exactly the same area that the court "proposed", seeing as this 14pt Arial wall of text is exactly what Apple was asked to do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NelsonX 

Well, the market thinks otherwise. It's 576$ right now. And still going down like a rock.

Time to buy.

It's interesting the effect that elections always seem to have on markets, the uncertainty causes people to pull out, often leading to some juicy profits for astute buyers after the dust settles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolipsismX 

LOL First we get Apple telling the truth, telling the whole truth, but getting a UK judge all riled up because they outsmarted him by including additional truths about other cases in other countries. Now we have this version with long numbers, URLs, and verbiage that few will read.
This has been a fun ride for a court case. Too bad this chapter is likely over.

It's only over when the fat lady sings...

...on Apple's UK website.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NelsonX 

Simple. If the stock is going down, then something is wrong fundamentally at Apple. Nexus 4, which is almost as good as iPhone 5 costs 299$ unlocked while the iPhone 5 is between 700$ and 1000$ unlocked! Come on, this is unbelievable greedy! Yes, stock going down will be good for customers in the long run.

Can't tell if you are serious or not.  The way this is good for customers is if you are customers and Apple stock is the product.  Now is a great time to buy if you have the means.  

Originally Posted by NelsonX 
If the stock is going down, then something is wrong fundamentally at Apple. Nexus 4, which is almost as good as iPhone 5 costs 299$ unlocked while the iPhone 5 is between 700$ and 1000$ unlocked! Come on, this is unbelievable greedy!

This has to be a joke.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolipsismX 

LOL First we get Apple telling the truth, telling the whole truth, but getting a UK judge all riled up because they outsmarted him by including additional truths about other cases in other countries. Now we have this version with long numbers, URLs, and verbiage that few will read.
This has been a fun ride for a court case. Too bad this chapter is likely over.

Yep, I'll miss it.  That wig-wearing fool got burned by Apple showing the world what a total baffoon he was.  Serves him right.  By the time Apple put the legalese in the paper the damage had already been done.  I almost feel sorry for the UK legal system.  They have become the laughing stock of the world's court systems because of one idiot trying to make a name for himself.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTR 

The legal system over there is a joke.

Isn't that how Australia got colonized in the first place?

Quote:

Originally Posted by boredumb 

Isn't that how Australia got colonized in the first place?

Sort of, after the American revolution they had to find somewhere else to send convicts to, otherwise I would have been American or not have existed at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

Which I still don't understand, by the way… So lack of patent infringement means anyone can make anything that looks just like something else and get away with it? It's certainly one thing not to infringe, which Apple has acknowledged, but Apple will NEVER in good faith say they didn't copy.

Apple was fighting on trademark designs, but Apple had not filed a trademark for the iPad. That's why they lost on that one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NelsonX 

Simple. If the stock is going down, then something is wrong fundamentally at Apple. Nexus 4, which is almost as good as iPhone 5 costs 299$ unlocked while the iPhone 5 is between 700$ and 1000$ unlocked! Come on, this is unbelievable greedy! Yes, stock going down will be good for customers in the long run.

Stock price moves can be caused by many different things, and often they have little to do with how the company is being run. Tech companies are especially hard to track because most pundits don't understand tech companies and they certainly don't understand Apple.

But that's fine, because Apple understands that share price is a fashion thing, and is a very poor measure of a company's true value. Still, that doesn't prevent them from playing the game: When Tim Cook apologized for the Maps foulup, Apple's share price dived, and only a few pundits noticed that he made the apology the day before Apple initiated its share buyback programme.

Anyway, none of that is really important, because the biggest flaw in your argument is this: No one buys unlocked iPhones, so no one is paying the prices you quoted. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by hill60 

 

It's only over when the fat lady sings...

 

...on Apple's UK website.

Looks like the fat lady has sung.

Originally Posted by reefoid 
Looks like the fat lady has sung.

Except the statement WASN'T incorrect.

How can anyone possibly defend that nonsense?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quadra 610 

 

You don't need to be a judge to recognize absurdity. 

Then what is the point of having courts or third party independant parties? 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

Except the statement WASN'T incorrect.

Apple calls their original published statement "inaccurate" (their words). Isn't that a less-harsh synonym for incorrect? Not entirely true might be another way of putting it?

I believe this might be where the discussion turns pedantic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NelsonX 

... Nexus 4, which is almost as good as iPhone 5 ...

BTW, NelsonX, we know you have no idea what you are talking about when you say things like this. As Android fans have told us for at least a year now, the Nexus 4 is junk because it doesn't have LTE: a good phone must have LTE. We've been told that repeatedly, as a reason why the iPhone 4S wasn't as good as other phones, it didn't have LTE. So, since the Nexus 4 doesn't have LTE, it must be a piece of crap, and not even in the same class as the iPhone 5.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatorguy 

Apple calls their original published statement "inaccurate" (their words). Isn't that a less-harsh synonym for incorrect? Not entirely true might be another way of putting it?

 

I believe this might be where the discussion turns pedantic.

Oh, GG, you just can't help but say things you know to be BS, can you? We all know that Apple characterized their previous statement as "inaccurate" because the court ordered them to do so, despite the fact that it was entirely accurate. So, basically, the court ordered them to now lie, so the court didn't look like quite the fools they did before.

Originally Posted by Gatorguy 
Apple calls their original published statement "inaccurate" (their words). Isn't that a less-harsh synonym for incorrect?

They were told to call their original statement "inaccurate". There was no inaccuracy in their original statement. There were no falsehoods in their original statement. 

Pedantry would be calling out differences between the words 'inaccurate' and 'incorrect'. That's silly.