or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple posts new notice saying Samsung didn't copy iPad on UK website
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple posts new notice saying Samsung didn't copy iPad on UK website

post #1 of 171
Thread Starter 
As required by a court ruling, Apple within 48 hours updated the front page of its website in the U.K. to say Samsung's Galaxy tablet computers did not copy the design of the iPad.

UK


At the bottom of the page, Apple's statement in a large font size tells visitors that its previous legal notice, published on Oct. 25, was "inaccurate and did not comply with the order of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales." It includes a link to the new, full, correct statement.

Like the previous post, the full text is featured on a blank white webpage with no images, though links to judgements are included. It acknowledges that the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 co not infringe on Apple's Community registered design No. 0000181607-0001.

The last statement included a quote from Judge Colin Birss who said in court that Samsung's devices were "not as cool" as Apple's. But that statement and its placement on Apple's website were found to be in breach of the original order, and the court ordered Apple on Thursday to revise it within 48 hours.

The new statement is required to remain on the front page of Apple's U.K. website until December 14. The revised statement was required to have at least 11-point font.

The full revised statement is included below:

Samsung / Apple UK judgment



On 9 July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited?s Galaxy Tablet Computers, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple?s Community registered design No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of
the High Court is available from

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html.

That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales on 18 October 2012. A copy of the Court of Appeal?s judgment is available from www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html. There is no injunction in respect of the Community registered design in force anywhere in Europe.
post #2 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

 There is no injunction in respect of the Community registered design in force anywhere in Europe.

And yet Samsung still cannot sell any tablets.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #3 of 171

Says nothing about copying. Says they didn't infringe. AGAIN. Get the titles right.

post #4 of 171

Unnecessary. Apple should not have been made to do this.

post #5 of 171
This is really a ridiculous requirement by the High Court of Englad; it's quite obvious that Samsung is a imitator and copied Apple! To suggest otherwise tells us all, how envious people are of Apple.

Where's the chalk board, "I will not state Samsung copied Apple, when they really did copy Apple."
post #6 of 171

I would have punched the judge in the face and said, "This is dumb."

 

I understand that a court needs to have the power to make a public declaration, but it seems really odd to me that any government body has the power to put (written) words in someone's (proverbial) mouth.

 

edit: ugh... the comments have been skinned to match the new theme.

post #7 of 171

You wouldn't really know its there until you read the mall print at the ottom of the page:D
post #8 of 171
And did you hear the reason Apple had to put that statement on its website?
Consumers could be confused because the Tabs could be illegal...
Utterly insane, as if one consumer would be confused, and even if they did buy an 'illegal' device, so what.
Will the English police confiscate it then?

The real reason (I think) is that the English court is showing its 'power'.
We can make big Apple say anything we want.

The other points are also insane, the Tab's were all banned in Europe a few months ago, and recently the German court banned the Tab 7.7 (whatever, who cares) specifically.
So it's a fact that the court decision isn't Europe wide. In fact only some laws are union wide and most are not upheld by most countries anyway.
The 10.whatever tabs are adapted by Samsung to 10.whatever.N tabs and on that ground accepted again in Europe.

What a mess, I remember a Dutch court ordering the PirateBay to shutdown (several times).
I think that's the definition of "being laughed off the planet".

J.
post #9 of 171

Doesn't matter anymore.  The first posted verbiage was far more damaging than this.  People will remember the "Not as cool as the iPad" phrase, while this wording will fade from people's memory much like Samsung's tablet.  "High Court of England" indeed.  "High" as in what the judge was smoking when he made this ridiculous ruling.  This court is now being mocked the world over and this judge will be remembered as the attention grabbing doofus who started it all.   He will probably write a tell-all book next and start making the talk-show rounds like the rest of the "15 minute" media wh#$es.  It is a shame the judges who heard the appeals had to go along with this to save face and did not have the cajones to make their own judgements.  Oh well, life goes on.  It would be funny if the price of iDevices in the UK suddenly went up (not going to happen of course).  They could call it the "Birss Value-Added Tax" imposed because of the increased "coolness" of the device, much like the dealer mark-up for popular automobiles.  See how popular that judge would be in the UK then. 

post #10 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by malo View Post

This is really a ridiculous requirement by the High Court of Englad; it's quite obvious that Samsung is a imitator and copied Apple! To suggest otherwise tells us all, how envious people are of Apple.
Where's the chalk board, "I will not state Samsung copied Apple, when they really did copy Apple."

It should be noted that most judgements seem to have gone against Apple across the globe. I don't personally agree with the decision in this case, but most courts do.
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
post #11 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider 
inaccurate and did not comply with the order

It was one of those anyway. The court is now forcing Apple to lie to the public to protect the corrupt. British justice at its best.
post #12 of 171

Quote:
Originally Posted by malo View Post

This is really a ridiculous requirement by the High Court of Englad; it's quite obvious that Samsung is a imitator and copied Apple! To suggest otherwise tells us all, how envious people are of Apple.
Where's the chalk board, "I will not state Samsung copied Apple, when they really did copy Apple."

 

The court ruling only addresses patent infringement, which is a more specific issue than copying. The court is also requiring a "public statement" about the ruling, which Apple-haters gleefully misconstrue as punitive or corrective. It's neither, however. The UK Court is essentially speaking through Apple's website.

"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 #13 of 171

What a retarded thing to do. Apple already lost the case so why add insult to injury?

 

Comparing a tablet that existed before and after the iPad is like day and night after all...everyone knows this.

 

This is an abuse of power and it seems out of line since it is not a black and white situation with an obvious outcome... The British legal establishment just proved how backward thinking it is to the world. Worst, Jony Ive is a Brit !

 

If I were Apple, I would simply put every effort in making sure that the UK does not get any business from Apple. Apple should boycott the British businesses and partners. Fire the ad agency,  architecture firm and all else. This should send a clear message especially now when the UK gov is trying to recrute IT firms and become a "silicon valley" of Europe. 

Money talks. 

post #14 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant View Post

This is an abuse of power and it seems out of line since it is not a black and white situation with an obvious outcome... The British legal establishment just proved how backward thinking it is to the world. Worst, Jony Ive is a Brit ! 

 

Still, yes. I assume Apple sponsored his green card. His nationality is still listed as "British." However, "British" is a very broad label. Ive has nothing to do with the country's judiciary system.

"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 #15 of 171

 

Quote:

​Apple posts new notice saying Samsung didn't copy iPad on UK website

No they didn't.

 

 

Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

As required by a court ruling, Apple within 48 hours updated the front page of its website in the U.K. to say the court ruled that Samsung's Galaxy tablet computers did not copy the design of the iPad.

Fixed it for you. 

post #16 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant View Post

What a retarded thing to do. Apple already lost the case so why add insult to injury?

 

Comparing a tablet that existed before and after the iPad is like day and night after all...everyone knows this.

 

This is an abuse of power and it seems out of line since it is not a black and white situation with an obvious outcome... The British legal establishment just proved how backward thinking it is to the world. Worst, Jony Ive is a Brit !

 

If I were Apple, I would simply put every effort in making sure that the UK does not get any business from Apple. Apple should boycott the British businesses and partners. Fire the ad agency,  architecture firm and all else. This should send a clear message especially now when the UK gov is trying to recrute IT firms and become a "silicon valley" of Europe. 

Money talks. 

 

How did this guy not get Apple's CEO position? ^^

Who the hell is Tim Cook, anyway?

You go get those crazy Brits, replicant!

Yeah!

post #17 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

And yet Samsung still cannot sell any tablets.

Which tablet? And where exactly?
post #18 of 171
The Judge's statement that Samsung's tablet is not as cool as Apple's will forever be a part of the official record. I'd use that all over the website. "iPad. Adjudged Cooler Than the Competition."
post #19 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Says nothing about copying. Says they didn't infringe. AGAIN. Get the titles right.

Well if you want to get to the bones of it, the iPad had nothing to do with it either.

post #20 of 171

Seeing as the new notice is a little harsher than it needed to be (with regards to being so emphatic about being upheld by the appeal court and in force through the European Union), had Apple not been so smart assed the first time (not that I didn't think it was funny), I guess that someone's ear has received a bit of a caning. 

post #21 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant View Post

If I were Apple, I would simply put every effort in making sure that the UK does not get any business from Apple. Apple should boycott the British businesses and partners. Fire the ad agency,  architecture firm and all else. This should send a clear message especially now when the UK gov is trying to recrute IT firms and become a "silicon valley" of Europe. 

Money talks. 

 

Why would Apple take its frustration out on the British people ?

This judge's view does not represent national opinion.

 

It is a bad decision, the judge is an idiot.

 

Apple will move on.

Grocery Stores FEAR Him
Reply
Grocery Stores FEAR Him
Reply
post #22 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSteelers View Post

Doesn't matter anymore.  The first posted verbiage was far more damaging than this.  People will remember the "Not as cool as the iPad" phrase, 

 

Dumb judge shot himself in the foot with that statement. 

 

Apple got his number on it, and he took it very personally. Because Apple made him look like the FOOL that he is. 

 

Apple wins, in any case. 

post #23 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant View Post

 

If I were Apple, I would simply put every effort in making sure that the UK does not get any business from Apple. 

 

LOL there would probably be riots. I remember either a Chinese or Taiwnanese official a few months ago remarking that, hypothetically, a ban on apple gear would not sit well at all with consumers in that country (tongue-in-cheek.)

post #24 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant View Post

If I were Apple, I would simply put every effort in making sure that the UK does not get any business from Apple. Apple should boycott the British businesses and partners. Fire the ad agency,  architecture firm and all else. This should send a clear message especially now when the UK gov is trying to recrute IT firms and become a "silicon valley" of Europe. 

Money talks. 

If I were Apple I would charge a premium for Apple devices to any judge in the UK, unless they apologized. Not for the ruling. For looking silly in those wigs.

post #25 of 171
Apple would have lost time, money and goodwill if they hadn't complied like this. Now they can move on and concentrate on more constructive things. Good decision!

I wonder how the message might change during the time it's supposed to be up.
post #26 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post


Which tablet? And where exactly?

 

The "smoothly", "shipped" tablets, which are now reported by Samsung as "delivered".

 

As uncool as a UK High court judge's use of "not as cool as" in a ruling.


Edited by hill60 - 11/3/12 at 2:17pm
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 #27 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Amhran View Post

Unnecessary. Apple should not have been made to do this.

 
sweet!  That's what Apple gets for starting all those frivolous lawsuits.
post #28 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by periodd View Post

I guess Samsung felt the same way when the US judge foolishly awarded $1B fine to them

 

The judge didn't award damages, the jury did.

 

There's nothing like the usual ignorance to start my day.

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 #29 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

 

Still, yes. I assume Apple sponsored his green card. His nationality is still listed as "British." However, "British" is a very broad label. Ive has nothing to do with the country's judiciary system.

Yes obviously Ive has nothing to do with it...I was just saying that it is a shame that the UK court does not recognize the Apple IP related to the iPad which is designed by Brit.

post #30 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by amoradala View Post

 

Why would Apple take its frustration out on the British people ?

This judge's view does not represent national opinion.

 

It is a bad decision, the judge is an idiot.

 

Apple will move on.

I think my comment was taken out of context... I don't think Apple should take it out on th UK people but it should assert its IP with its huge economical leverage. That is all. Anyways, I am sure Apple does not need my help on this.  

post #31 of 171
Wow, thanks Apple, now I know that the Galaxy tab doesn't rip off your design. I wouldn't have known otherwise from all your public statements taking stabs at it. Thanks for clearing up the record. lol.gif
post #32 of 171
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post
sweet!  That's what Apple gets for starting all those frivolous lawsuits.

 

All zero of them.

post #33 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

All zero of them.

$1 billion awarded to Apple plus many injunctions against Samsung products in many countries v. one country requiring a notice on a cryptic legalese notice on a website that doesn't say that Samsung didn't infringe on any Apple patents only that in the case in question that court didn't find that Samsung infringed. Only an idiot or a high deluded individual would think Apple isn't far ahead in these legal proceedings.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #34 of 171

world's richest company.. very expensive lawyers, ,and they have to do it again.??????.

if it doesn't work this time... Timmy will have to make a public apology...

post #35 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post
 

A tool that talks?

Just askin'...

 

 

 

Quote:
That's what Apple gets for starting all those frivolous lawsuits

Which lawsuits exactly are you referring to ?

post #36 of 171

denial ad nauseum

post #37 of 171
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
$1 billion awarded to Apple…

 

That's the "frivolous" bit, yep.

 

Originally Posted by Zod Buster View Post
world's richest company.. very expensive lawyers, ,and they have to do it again.??????.

 

They "redid" it by posting the exact same thing they had before. 


Originally Posted by Zod Buster View Post
denial ad nauseum

 

Denial of what? That Samsung copied? I'm seeing that from all manner of fandroid, yes. Apple's not saying that, though.

post #38 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant View Post

The British legal establishment just proved how backward thinking it is to the world.

You live in a country (judging by your spelling) that executes the mentally ill. I don't think you're in any position to judge a foreign legal system as "backward".
post #39 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zod Buster View Post

denial ad nauseum

 

ad nauseam

post #40 of 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Says nothing about copying. Says they didn't infringe. AGAIN. Get the titles right.

 

In fact - you have got it wrong. The case was NOT about copying but infringement of a drawn design. Look carefully at the wording of the apology. The case was NOT about whether Samsung copied the iPad itself. Instead, Apple was claiming that Samsung had infringed a particular registered design. The court made clear that the iPad itself may not have been the same as the registered design.

 

 

They Court of Appeal said this, the judgment is at http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html:

 

3. Because this case (and parallel cases in other countries) has generated much publicity, it will avoid confusion to say what this case is about and not about. It is not about whether Samsung copied Apple’s iPad. Infringement of a registered design does not involve any question of whether there was copying: the issue is simply whether the accused design is too close to the registered design according to the tests laid down in the law. Whether or not Apple could have sued in England and Wales for copying is utterly irrelevant to this case. If they could, they did not. Likewise there is no issue about infringement of any patent for an invention.

 

4. So this case is all about, and only about, Apple’s registered design and the Samsung products. The registered design is not the same as the design of the iPad. It is quite a lot different. For instance the iPad is a lot thinner, and has noticeably different curves on its sides. There may be other differences – even though I own one, I have not made a detailed comparison. Whether the iPad would fall within the scope of protection of the registered design is completely irrelevant. We are not deciding that one way or the other. This case must be decided as if the iPad never existed.

 

5. Other disputes between the parties in other countries have concerned other intellectual property rights. We are not concerned with any of them.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple posts new notice saying Samsung didn't copy iPad on UK website