Apple ordered to pay Samsung legal fees for 'misleading' UK notice - Page 2

It is becoming apparent that attacking judiciaries also attacks the country of the said judge. iDevices are world wide and are really best served by not being marginalised.

If anyone wants this buffoon's email, here it is:

I am not sure what to think about all this. While I understand that the judges were upset with the original notice, it seems that this has become personal for them with their statements about Apple's 'integrity'.

Reading UK papers which reflect widespread anti-Apple sentiment, one would wonder how the UK could remain a prime market for Apple. Perhaps we are seeing the more sensationalist views.

If you're going to be so boneheaded you could at least post your own email as well?!

 

delete!

I hope that the lack of integrity involved in this incident is entirely atypical of UK judges.

I wonder if Apple can just take a credit memo against the 1.1 B owed.

And now you have an irrational hatred for Apple, see a pattern?...


thus Exactly how did you Lose respect for Apple ?.

Apple keeps surprising me that they are continually state-of-the-art... at the start they were SOTA in the design of their products... and then with their products proper using a: mouse, icon desktop, usb, firewire.

then products ...harddrives in a Portable player, Flash memory in a portable player, The smallest music player, The first touchscreen music player, The first truly useful touchscreen phone, The first Affordable tablet computer,
The first retina display iPhone, iPad, and iPod... and The list goes on if you want to get into the specific instances.
Edited by haar - 11/12/12 at 7:31am

Likely Apple's thoughts as well.

This 'punishment' really does not fit the crime. It is not libel or slander to file a lawsuit which is the only time that Apple ever said that Samsung (by name and product mention) was copying. And unless the court orders that a case is sealed and mouths are to be kept shut its not a crime to talk about suits in progress.

This apology punishment is no fitting to actual libel/slander and never should have been ordered in the first place. It reeks of the court (ie this judge) having a bias of some kind or another against Apple. That the judge was stupid and didn't prohibit adding additional text etc is not Apple's issue either. They were given the opening and they took it, to show how dumb the whole ruling was. They aren't likely to fight this fees thing because its a small price to have gotten the word out about what was said, in full.

And the US case showed that Samsung's public claims they weren't paying attention to the 'other boys' when creating their designs was false. But was it 'legal' thief of a protectable design or just 'heavy inspiration'. The UK court seems to be saying the latter. The design doesn't fit with what can be legally protected. So, even if they did clone the iPhone, iPad etc, too damn bad for Apple. But hey the name is on the back so folks will know what they are getting right? Maybe. Given folks like my grandfather who thinks 'iPad' is the name for all tablet shaped computer things, he would probably think the Galaxy is just Samsung's iPad same as Dell and HP both have their Windows computers

Charlituna, take 3 or 4 minutes and read the last ruling. It may help clear up what appears to be some misconceptions you have about the order, which by the way wasn't the order of a single judge. There were five judge's involved over the course of the rulings.

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1430.html

Wrong on two counts.

 

First, Apple didn't file the lawsuit, Samsung filed for clarification on whether they infringed on Apple's registered design.

 

Second, the whole reason Apple had to post the statement on their website is because they made the following statement after Samsung were ruled to have not infringed:

 

Too many people here don't understand what they are talking about, which is amazing considering how much this has been debated on these and other forums.

We both agree on this.

 

...and a season pass to Chelsea FC home games, in their major sponsor's corporate box.

 

So who are abusing standards essential based patents in an attempt to ban products from sale?

 

It's good to know that you condone this, it shows the type of person you are.

 

Why don't you attribute your quote to the proper source?

 

I'll give you a hint, it wasn't Colin Birss.

No lesson to learn from people like yourself.

 

I dont have hate for Apple. I own Apple shares. I'm a part owner of the company.

 

My contribution to this site and others is the instigate Apple to be better company by exposing or discussing its faults so that they will become a better one in the future. Anything wrong with that? Perhaps you shouldn't jump to conclusions before knowing the full picture, hm?

Correct. That quote came from one of the appeals judges, Justice Robin Jacob. I've no idea if Judge Birss, the original trial judge, also commented that he owned Apple products too. Quite possible.

 

Galbi, I have it on good authority that you, in fact, are not a part-owner.

 

I quote YOU yesterday at 1:12PM:

 

"Dont worry. Apple's share price will dip into the $400 sooner than expected. I've already sold mine. :D"

 

Here's the link in case you forgot. Post #52.

 

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/154218/apple-and-htc-settle-all-patent-litigation-agree-to-10-year-licensing-deal/40

Well,

 

dismissing Droids commitment to Apple as blah blah blah because Droid is eloquent enough to make his mind about the way Apple does business lately also shows the type of person you are, doesn't it?

 

C

 

See, when you ignore what Apple is doing in reality, just make crap up to meet your perceptions, and make a decision based on that, does it really count as "making up your mind about the way Apple does business lately"? 

Oh? And what "type" of person is that, exactly?

If quoting a post, please snip out the problematic content. It doesn't make sense to object to posting a figure's email while quoting the email as well.

But you're right, we shouldn't make it any easier to harass people than it already is.

What a crock of shit, Galbi.

You're a contrarian, plain and simple.

Your posts on this site are a desperate attempt for attention and the equivalent of you parading before us with your pants pulled down around your ankles and your thumb stuck in your mouth.

If you were to present a more balanced opinion then our respect for you would probably leap an astounding amount, but that's never going to happen, is it?

And thanks for 'making Apple a better company' with your comments, Batman.

What a true super-hero you are. (>_<)

LOL!

Fucking OWNED.

And by himself too!

Too funny!

Like my mama's advice: Always tell the truth and you don't have to remember what you said.

As long as you have a well-reasoned argument as to why you believe he was incorrect in his publication requirement I don't see any harm. If instead it's simply a temper tantrum based on no facts whatsoever I don't see it reflecting well on Apple supporters, or the judge paying the least bit of attention to it. That's simple harassment as JeffDM expects it might amount to.

 

So what do you see as the flaw in the judge's published reasoning or that of the Appeals Court statements supporting it for the most part? You have read the rulings I assume.

Edited by Gatorguy - 11/12/12 at 11:14am

Edited by Slang4Art - 11/13/12 at 3:16am

Yes, and any kind of vigilante justice is a solution.

I'm all for impeding progress if there is a notable risk of that progress being brought about by some kind of mob action.

 

 

 

It's not irrational when there are solid reasons for it. With Microsoft in the 80-90's it was clear they were copying Apple & they were also locking users into their non-removable browser, in attempts to stifle competition. Their browser didn't follow web standards and did harm to the web. Microsoft were successful despite Apple's easier to use interface because they were willing to break competition laws, to sue competitors out of existence and do back room deals with the companies that sold hardware with their OS with extra crapware. The world was a worse place for computer users because of it. Although it did lead up to the creation of Linux which is a good thing.

 

Apple are repeating MS's bad behaviour with iOS - locking users in with the default browser (that is non-removable). Browser competitors cannot use alternative render engines on iOS or access the faster javascript processor that Apple keeps to it's own apps. Podcasts.app does things other competitors cannot do like iTunes integration, and Apple still make a mess of the app. How come Podcasts app ranks highest in App Store searches even though Instacast & Downcast have more ratings & more stars?

 

Apple replaced functioning apps with an inferior one because Steve Jobs wanted to 'go thermonuclear against Google' at the expense of users. Apple ditched MobileMe & made iCloud the only option, but it doesn't work on older devices even with a lesser level of integration. It does however work on ancient Windows versions.

 

Now Apple are being petty in this court case. They lost the case & lost the appeal, shouldn't they just concede defeat, it's pretty clear that the verdict does no actual damage to Apple, just put up the notification and try to do it with some decorum. 

 

Their recent earnings report showed they decreased the tax paid in the UK to less than last years 2% by using dubious accounting procedures. Tax avoidance is something any company with a social conscience shouldn't be doing.

 

Users have no control over undoing Apple's changes to iOS, you can't revert once upgraded. Why can't I use Google Voice search across the OS, even though Apple won't provide Siri for my iPhone. How about allowing me to remove Twitter and Facebook support and letting me insert another service into the system wide share links - nope not allowed.

 

I almost agree with you about the devices, Apples designs are great but they didn't create them in a vacuum or release without seeing other variations from competitors.

Apple didn't 'invent smallest music player'. There were Diamond Rio & Archos devices that were smaller, worse quality, worse capacity & had touch screens before the iPod & iPod Touch was released.

Aside from Retina displays they were not even close to being first to market with the devices you state, Apples success comes from making the products better & easier to use for average users. Apple takes ideas from other manufacturers just as much as Samsung & Microsoft have.

Is it not clear that I love these products (and own many of them), can't you even concede that Apple may not be the most decent company in the world.

So you obviously did not read the rulings where the Apple misstatements were explained, which Apple's counsel apparently doesn't strongly disagree with. Your writing to them and saying "I don't like what you did, and you're an idiot" won't get you much.

 

If you can't be bothered with finding out the facts behind the rulings, why they found Apple's original publication did not meet with their approval and included inaccuracies, then support your own position with facts then what do you expect to be gained? I'm sure they already know that Apple supporters think they're idiots, but at the same time many can't be bothered to have a logical argument why.

 

You'll get more attention by being the exception and offering reasoned advice rather than serving up a communication meant only to harass. No doubt those go straight into the bin and never get read by His Honour.

Edited by Gatorguy - 11/12/12 at 11:55am

I am very impressed that you're accusing me of being overly dramatic given your replies in this thread, including this one. I mean, tyranny. Sheesh.

This judge is on a mission to make a name for himslf... But the fact that he can get away with these kinds of calls. Is mindbogglening and absured.

Edited by Slang4Art - 11/13/12 at 3:13am

Edited by Slang4Art - 11/13/12 at 3:03am

You're certainly welcome to prove my assumption wrong by answering what I asked you: What flaws in legal reasoning do you see in Judge Birss publish order, or the subsequent Appeals Court rulings generally supporting him? Further why do you think Apple was 100% correct in their original publish statements considering the court's comments on why Apple's statements were wrong?

 

I'm suggesting you personally can't make a reasoned argument opposing the court's stance, partly because I don't believe you know what the court's stance is, having not read the orders and their supporting detail for yourself. So far you've shown no evidence of having read any of them. Be the exception and prove me wrong.

Edited by Gatorguy - 11/12/12 at 12:54pm

 

Turn by turn is the superior facet of Maps, which Google did not want to provide.

 

You can still access the "superior" maps, complete with their own flaws i.e. incapability of giving voice directions via Safari.

 

Google is the new "Microsoft", embrace, extend, extinguish is what they took from 90's Microsoft, just ask Skyhook for one example out of dozens of discarded projects.

 

Just as Microsoft wanted to be on every desktop, Google wants to be involved in every facet of web use, watching, gathering, selling, advertising, they want absolute control.

 

Apple don't, you can buy anything you want, you have that choice, Google proved they don't want people to have a choice when they deliberately overrode Safari's security settings to lie to people and the government about complying with opt out orders.

 

Europe is not a country, these UK judges are acting as a "Community court".

 

"The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity"

I'm still not clear on the intent they keep talking about. They have said on numerous occasions that the case is not about the iPad, it is about the patent, which doesn't look like the iPad but why force Apple to advertise about that?

What exactly is the point in making it clear to the public that Samsung hasn't infringed on a design patent that looks nothing like the iPad and that the public have not been aware of? It seems clear to me that they are trying to create a damaging impression that Samsung hasn't wilfully copied the iPad design. The media is not restricting their reporting to be about the patent:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/18/samsung-galaxy-tab-apple-ipad
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18895384
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2012-10-26/apple-website-publishes-samsung-did-not-copy-ipad-statement/

The headlines are:

"Samsung Galaxy Tab 'does not copy Apple's iPad designs'"
"Apple ordered to run Samsung 'did not copy iPad' adverts"
"Apple website publishes 'Samsung did not copy iPad' statement"

That's not what the court case decided and it looks like these headlines are the true intent of the ruling, which is false and damaging. Apple has tried to create the impression that Samsung copied the iPad, which Samsung did. Anybody can see that. At no point did Apple try to convince the public that Samsung copied the patent so the public were under no false impression about the patent so the advertisements are not justified.

If it's possible to do, Apple should take action against these judges because they haven't justified their reasons for forcing the advertisements. They haven't at any point in time shown that the public were even aware of this patent let alone confused by it. Either these judges are taking it personally or want the publicity but it's distasteful that Apple is made to suffer for it despite being the victim here.

I'd like to see a company do the same to Samsung. C'mon Amazon, just call the Kindle Fire the Kindle Galaxy and design it exactly the same except for the back and undercut them in price. Then we'll see who innovates instead of litigates.

At the very least, Apple should ask the court 2 simple questions:

1. What was the intent of the ruling?
The answer will be that it was to clarify to the public that Samsung doesn't infringe on their patent. So then they should ask:

2. What evidence is there to suggest that the public at large was aware of the patent and confused about whether or not Samsung's product infringed on it?
There is no evidence for this and Apple never advertised the patent so this will show they had no justification for the ruling. Then they can hopefully take action against them.