UK judge rules Apple must advertise Samsung did not copy the iPad

1246716

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 315
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ktappe View Post


    I would take this a step further:  "Courts in Germany, Australia, and the U.S. have ruled Samsung copied the iPad. In spite of this, UK court [insert name here] has instructed us to tell UK (and only UK) buyers the opposite. So here: 'Samsung did not copy the iPad.' But only in the UK did they not do this. Now you know."



    Have courts anywhere else ruled definitively that Samsung's Tab copied Apple's iPad? In the US Apple is asserting a design patent that may or may not be the design actually used for the iPad, and  it's still only a preliminary ruling issued so far rather than definitive. In Australia it was also in conjunction with a preliminary ruling too IIRC, and the High Court there overturned the "slavish copy" injunction claim anyway. In Germany it was again a community design being asserted, not a ruling on the Tab looking too much like the iPad.


     


    If you have something different where a court has ruled a Samsung Tab is a copy of an Apple iPad perhaps you could link it? I'm not aware of one but that's not proof it hasn't happened.

  • Reply 62 of 315


    Apple should just write on their website "Samsung's Galaxy Tab did not copy the design of the iPad" but then make the "not" so small that it can only be read with a retina display.

  • Reply 63 of 315
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,403member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SuperJunior View Post


    South Korea fighting!


    Samsung fighting!



    Grow up, Jr.

  • Reply 64 of 315
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    therbo wrote: »
    No one, the judge used common sense.

    Today is a great day for adding trolls to the ignore list, you are all out in the open.
  • Reply 65 of 315
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dpnorton82 View Post



    Is there precedence for a ruling like this?


     


    Only from imbeciles like Judge Posner.

  • Reply 66 of 315
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MBFan85 View Post


    All the more reason for swift, substantive patent/copyright reform........ 



     


    No it is not. Absurd rulings have no relation to any perceived need for "reform".

  • Reply 67 of 315
    rot'napplerot'napple Posts: 1,839member


    If those are the only two stipulations the British Judge issued with no further guidance, well, Apple should have a little fun poking Samsung and the Judge this way, for web have image of iPad came first, give date, have it dissolve into image of Samsung tablet, give date, then have it dissolve and then text comes up saying, "Samsung didn't copy Apple's iPad. Huh? You be the Judge!" Something similar for papers.

  • Reply 68 of 315
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member


    Just curious, did this judge rule that Apple committed libel?  If not I don't understand why they would be required to mention anything on their website or in print.  I don't remember Apple ever referencing Samsung on their website, or any executive from Apple specifically referencing this lawsuit in public.

     

  • Reply 69 of 315
    jmgregory1jmgregory1 Posts: 474member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post


    Well when you go all about the place saying


     


    "SAMSUNG STOLE OUR DESIGN, THEY ARE COPIERS, THEY STOLE IT, THEY STOLE IT I TELL YOU. HEY EVERYONE, SAMSUNG STOLE OUR DESIGN!!!!"


     


    Well, that does very bad damage to Samsung's public image. So when you lose in court and it is found that Samsung did NOT copy your design, well, it seems only fair for you to have to correct the wrong you put into people's minds. 


     


    And please, before you start. I speak solely on the court of law in this jurisdiction. It is not a matter of Apple's or our opinion, its what the court decides. In the US, I believe Samsung would be able to sue for stupid damages of a billion dollars, seeing as what you can get for a slip and fall in a grocery store. So maybe in the UK, this is the equivalent. 


     


    And of course it didn't help after the decision that Apple put out a statement basically saying "Pssshhh, WHATEVER!! Screw you UK court system, you can all suck it" Matter of fact I remember pointing it out at the time on this forum as a very weird thing for Apple to do. 



    Really?  Really?  Are you freaking trying to be serious, or are you just looking to pick a fight.  Apple NEVER advertised or "go all about the place saying" Samsung did anything.  They rightfully took Samsung to court to support their own patented designs.  It's not only their right to do so, it's their duty to fight for their rights.  Apple wasn't slandering Samsung and Samsung can't counter sue for damages.


     


    Please either go away and peddle your drivel elsewhere or actually read up on what you are talking about before spouting off like this.

  • Reply 70 of 315
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Grow up, Jr.



     


    Jr. has been blocked. Oh, what a feeling.

  • Reply 71 of 315

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    Today is a great day for adding trolls to the ignore list, you are all out in the open.




    You mean anyone not tearing their hair out and dismissing a respected judge as a "lunatic" or the decision as "beyond bizarre?"


     


    Or those who just like a laugh now and again about something that doesn't really affect their lives in any meaningful way unless they choose to make it so?


     


    I just think it's bloody funny.

  • Reply 72 of 315
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post




    You mean anyone not tearing their hair out and dismissing a respected judge as a "lunatic" or the decision as "beyond bizarre?"


     


    Or those who just like a laugh now and again about something that doesn't really affect their lives in any meaningful way unless they choose to make it so?


     


    I just think it's bloody funny.



     


    Yes, those trolls.

  • Reply 73 of 315
    sleepy3sleepy3 Posts: 244member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post


    This kind of ruling enters under the WTF category.


     


    If I were Apple however, I would not appeal. I would just show both devices with slow camera pans, and the 101 things that are similar to all and have the voiceover say; "We have been ordered by the court to mention that Samsung did not copy the iPad." And after showing 10X more apps, more stability, and the industry leading performance, battery life and compatibility you end with "and it wasn't for lack of trying..." or "because they couldn't."


     


    Anyway, I've never heard of a judgement forcing someone to advertise for a competitor - but it's a pretty uncreative ruling with some judge of limited imagination on how a marketing department could use this as cannon fire.


     


    >> I predict this backfires.



    Well lets see. Lets ignore software and only talk about physical look as seen in a store, since this is about design.


     


    Differences:


     


    No home button


    the camera is placed different


    the screen size is diff


    its thinner


    the OS looks totally diff with all those widgets on the screen


    the aspect ratio is diff


    diff volume rocker


    diff volume rocker placement


    diff bezel thickness


    it clearly says Samsung on the back


    There is a metal strip that comes up on the back that isn't there in the ipad


    3.5 mm headphone jack in a diff position


    charging port in diff position


    silver rim around the edge


     


    Similarities:


    Rectangular


    Rounded Edges


     


    Yep, overwhelming evidence that it totally apes the ipad design, or is that its a slate with a screen at the front and that's how slates with screens at the front look?


     


    Lets not forget, this will set the precedent when Apple releases their TV. And if all that needs to be similar is rectangular with rounded or sharp edges, Apple is screwed.

  • Reply 74 of 315
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


     


    If I was them, I would move their retail operations also.  This just shows that the country has a terribly biased and non-functional legal system.  Why do business at all with a country like that?



     


    haters-gonna-hate-18.jpg?w=500

  • Reply 75 of 315


    Apple is busy trying to prevent people from buying the previous generation of Samsung Tab.


    Meanwhile.... http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/electronics/1232597011/  (Tab 2 is selling quite well)


     


    South Korea fighting!


    Samsung fighting!

  • Reply 76 of 315
    nagrommenagromme Posts: 2,834member


    I agree that Samsung tweaked THIS particular design enough to get away with it. (But didn’t they have an earlier design that WAS a more direct iPad copy?) When Apple “advertises” that, they should also include side-by-sides of all the TRULY blatant copying Samsung has done... http://photos.appleinsidercdn.com/samsungvsapple.081911.jpg


    http://dcurt.is/chromebox-samsung


    http://www.idownloadblog.com/2011/09/29/apple-samsung-copycat-2/

  • Reply 77 of 315
    jollypauljollypaul Posts: 328member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Magic_Al View Post


    ...Queen to use some of her theoretical reserve powers and intervene!



     


    She can chase the judge around in circles while the Benny Hill music plays.

  • Reply 78 of 315
    sleepy3sleepy3 Posts: 244member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jmgregory1 View Post


    Really?  Really?  Are you freaking trying to be serious, or are you just looking to pick a fight.  Apple NEVER advertised or "go all about the place saying" Samsung did anything.  They rightfully took Samsung to court to support their own patented designs.  It's not only their right to do so, it's their duty to fight for their rights.  Apple wasn't slandering Samsung and Samsung can't counter sue for damages.


     


    Please either go away and peddle your drivel elsewhere or actually read up on what you are talking about before spouting off like this.



    HAHAHAH


     


    you mad bro? image

  • Reply 79 of 315
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ktappe View Post




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by malax View Post


    Can you imagine how SJ would have reacted to this?


     


    If I were Apple I would include in the "statement" a picture of the two devices side by side along with the date they were introduced.  "According to the [insert name of the court here] the Samsung device shown here that came out a year after the iPad is not a copy of the iPad.  They've instructed us to tell you that.  Have a nice day."



    I would take this a step further:  "Courts in Germany, Australia, and the U.S. have ruled Samsung copied the iPad. In spite of this, UK court [insert name here] has instructed us to tell UK (and only UK) buyers the opposite. So here: 'Samsung did not copy the iPad.' But only in the UK did they not do this. Now you know."



    One of the principles of neurolinguistic programming is that the human brain does not store negation.  If you tell a person "there is not a rattlesnake in your mailbox" the brain stores an image of a


    rattlesnake in the mailbox.  Additionally, the person to whom you said this will probably recall the image every time they open their mailbox from then on.  Apple advertising that Samsung DOES NOT


    copy will implant the association between Samsung and copying, even in the minds of people who knew nothing of the dispute between the two companies.  If I were in Samsung's place, I would not


    want this.

  • Reply 80 of 315

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


     


    Yes, those trolls.



     


    Mate, your signature is a quote from Margaret Thatcher ffs. You lost all credibility with any rational thinker as soon as you put that on.

Sign In or Register to comment.