Maybe Americans are more easily fooled than us Brits? :-)
This case was not about software or design process or copying of multitouch or swipe... but mainly that if in a shop with 2 tablets in front of you can you tell them apart, apple said the customer is too thick but the judges say you'd be a fool if you couldnt recognise them - one clearly has an apple on the back and the other has the word samsung on the front (not to mention shape, feel, colours, buttons etc.) The judge says design ethos is different, the apple is cool, samsung messy.
My wife and I over time (since 2001) have had 5 laptops from 4 manufacturers - all were rectangular with rounded corners. It was obvious a tablet would be a rectangle with rounded corners and there is a vast amount of other prior art.
on to the ruling: the wording of settlement doesnt need to be on the front page, only a "button" saying something like "apple/samsung court judgement" linking to another page that few people will bother to read. For newspapers - who buys those anyway? T3 yes I can see that sort of mag might be an issue to apple, but am sure the right words will be found that will show apple in good light.
Apple went around slinging mud at samsung, so they do have to publicly apologise, however There is still another level of court that apple can appeal to in UK, so it is not case closed yet!
No. ACORN was around before, but ARM (the company) was founded with Apple. The ARM architecture predates the ARM Holdings company we know today but it took off only once it was spun off to ARM Holdings, founded as a partnership between Apple and ACORN.
FWIW I'm not aware of any court anywhere (yet) finding the Galaxy Tab infringes on an Apple Design Patent. Doesn't mean Apple won't stop trying of course.
See when I read it, I think "what was the judge smoking?". First he acknowledges the Samsung was similar to the iPad, to the point of being the same.
What matter would that be even if that was the only point of contention (it isn't). Apple wasn't claiming Samsung was copying any Apple iPad, freely admitting the referenced design patents aren't necessarily used for any Apple product.
It looks like the court document you posted is from after Apple's counterclaim. I will have to review the initial claim by Samsung to see if design patents were referenced, but do not have time at the moment.
However, for the sake of argument, let's assume they DID reference design patents. How does one interpret a request to seek a declaration that their devices do not infringe as making that party the "accuser"? How is that request "accusing" anyone of anything? If Samsung did indeed request this in their original filing, it was most certainly in response to the Apple v HTC lawsuit.
If your trying to suggest that Apple has not been the clear aggressor in all these global lawsuits, you certainly have an uphill battle against you...
The "accuser" in a lawsuit if the claimant. Samsung was the claimant in this case. I never claimed Apple wasn't the aggressor in other cases. In this case, Samsung clearly was the instigator of the lawsuit. So anyone claiming that Apple must suffer much be punished by the UK courts because they filed the suit in the UK, is basing their opinion on flawed information.
And as far as the Apple v HTC lawsuit, again in the UK, it was HTC that sued Apple. So if it was a response to that, then maybe it was because Samsung saw the same thing HTC saw in the UK court system. I wonder what that is.
What matter would that be even if that was the only point of contention (it isn't). Apple wasn't claiming Samsung was copying any Apple iPad, freely admitting the referenced design patents aren't necessarily used for any Apple product.
Because Samsung was asking for a ruling that their tablets didn't copy Apple's product. The judge admits they are the same, but then says they aren't copied.
Apple should put up the notice on their website. And also their cases from other countries. Like Samsung modifying the Galaxy Tab for Germany to avoid infringement after being ruled against. Having to remove features from Galaxy phones after a ruling in The Netherlands. And, of course, the US ruling which will cost Samsung potentially billions (treble damages for willful infringement).
I mean, it's Apple's website. They can't be prevented from printing the truth, can they? The truth as in actual court rulings in their favor over Samsung.
Interesting how most rulings outside of Apples home turf seem to go against apple.
It's just differences in local law.
I think if you asked any of these judges outside of their jobs if Samsung copied they would are that yes they did. But in their jobs they have to follow the rules laid down by those laws and under those rules Samsung didn't 'illegally' copy.
I still think that the ad thing is ridiculous and Apple will file a higher appeal if there is one they can. Otherwise they will likely word it something like 'We have been ordered by the courts to post this message that judge so and so has declared that Samsung did not copy our designs and that their tablet is 'not as cool' as the iPad.' Rather than making it sound like it is coming from Apple's mouth. And then any response to the statement will focus on the latter part of the ruling.
I thought that was a ludicrous judgement, but I guess that is in accordance with English law.
That may be Apple's next argument. If they can't find an actual law backing this up as a punishment then they could try to go over the judges authority saying he has no legal power to make said punishment or the government has no authority to enforce it. Particularly since they never released damaging ads saying that Samsung copied them. If they had then this would make sense.
Apple's public allegations of copying by Samsung have been ruled to be unwarranted. Apple must now publicly retract those allegations.
Where did Apple 'publicly' allege such a thing. What ads etc. When, outside of court documents, has Apple by name stated that Samsung copied them. Specifically in the UK.
I think you would be hard pressed to find anything. Particularly of a paid advertisement or posting on their website.
The "accuser" in a lawsuit if the claimant. Samsung was the claimant in this case. I never claimed Apple wasn't the aggressor in other cases. In this case, Samsung clearly was the instigator of the lawsuit. So anyone claiming that Apple must suffer much be punished by the UK courts because they filed the suit in the UK, is basing their opinion on flawed information.
Right, I'm confused.
Then Apple must've have done something in the UK to warrant the apology, otherwise they should appeal again.
Given that it was Samsung that sued Apple, this doesn't make any sense. Samsung sued in order to obtain a ruling, pre-emptively, that they did not copy Apple's designs. Any negative impressions they suffered as a result of the suit were at their own request.
Not to mention where is the proof of the damages. For any of these cases. Find conclusive proof that Apple suing Samsung in the UK, or any where, cost Samsung sales and how many
The mandatory advert thing is also not that unusual in UK libel cases: the Sun newspaper had to print a full front page apology, having claimed that Elton John was gay...
This wasn't a libel case and at no point was Apple accused of libel during this case. Nor did Apple paid for ads in anything or put on their site anything that could be seen as libel.
See when I read it, I think "what was the judge smoking?". First he acknowledges the Samsung was similar to the iPad, to the point of being the same.
Which will be included if Apple if forced to put up these ads. In fact, if the wording of the order is vague enough they will put just this and the 'not as cool' part.
This wasn't a libel case and at no point was Apple accused of libel during this case. Nor did Apple paid for ads in anything or put on their site anything that could be seen as libel.
Yes, I know it wasn't a libel case. My point was that it's not uncommon for UK judges to order this if they feel it is warranted (and I think that that is fair enough). Now, the question I have is why they think it is warranted?
I didn't see Apple going against their ruling and releasing inadmissible documents to the press to gain public support, unlike some companies I could mention.
Comments
This case was not about software or design process or copying of multitouch or swipe... but mainly that if in a shop with 2 tablets in front of you can you tell them apart, apple said the customer is too thick but the judges say you'd be a fool if you couldnt recognise them - one clearly has an apple on the back and the other has the word samsung on the front (not to mention shape, feel, colours, buttons etc.) The judge says design ethos is different, the apple is cool, samsung messy.
My wife and I over time (since 2001) have had 5 laptops from 4 manufacturers - all were rectangular with rounded corners. It was obvious a tablet would be a rectangle with rounded corners and there is a vast amount of other prior art.
on to the ruling: the wording of settlement doesnt need to be on the front page, only a "button" saying something like "apple/samsung court judgement" linking to another page that few people will bother to read. For newspapers - who buys those anyway? T3 yes I can see that sort of mag might be an issue to apple, but am sure the right words will be found that will show apple in good light.
Apple went around slinging mud at samsung, so they do have to publicly apologise, however There is still another level of court that apple can appeal to in UK, so it is not case closed yet!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
No. ACORN was around before, but ARM (the company) was founded with Apple. The ARM architecture predates the ARM Holdings company we know today but it took off only once it was spun off to ARM Holdings, founded as a partnership between Apple and ACORN.
Thank you. You beat me to it.
FWIW I'm not aware of any court anywhere (yet) finding the Galaxy Tab infringes on an Apple Design Patent. Doesn't mean Apple won't stop trying of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanVerb
I can't imagine Apple ever complying with that ridiculous order. Who do they think they are in the UK?!
Who do they think they are?
A sovereign people with sovereign courts.
That's who they think they are!
Originally Posted by stike vomit
If Apple want to continue to operate in the UK and avoid financial penalties they must adhere to the law.
Any fine that could be imposed is better than lying to their customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
See when I read it, I think "what was the judge smoking?". First he acknowledges the Samsung was similar to the iPad, to the point of being the same.
What matter would that be even if that was the only point of contention (it isn't). Apple wasn't claiming Samsung was copying any Apple iPad, freely admitting the referenced design patents aren't necessarily used for any Apple product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_veritas
It looks like the court document you posted is from after Apple's counterclaim. I will have to review the initial claim by Samsung to see if design patents were referenced, but do not have time at the moment.
However, for the sake of argument, let's assume they DID reference design patents. How does one interpret a request to seek a declaration that their devices do not infringe as making that party the "accuser"? How is that request "accusing" anyone of anything? If Samsung did indeed request this in their original filing, it was most certainly in response to the Apple v HTC lawsuit.
If your trying to suggest that Apple has not been the clear aggressor in all these global lawsuits, you certainly have an uphill battle against you...
The "accuser" in a lawsuit if the claimant. Samsung was the claimant in this case. I never claimed Apple wasn't the aggressor in other cases. In this case, Samsung clearly was the instigator of the lawsuit. So anyone claiming that Apple must suffer much be punished by the UK courts because they filed the suit in the UK, is basing their opinion on flawed information.
And as far as the Apple v HTC lawsuit, again in the UK, it was HTC that sued Apple. So if it was a response to that, then maybe it was because Samsung saw the same thing HTC saw in the UK court system. I wonder what that is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
What matter would that be even if that was the only point of contention (it isn't). Apple wasn't claiming Samsung was copying any Apple iPad, freely admitting the referenced design patents aren't necessarily used for any Apple product.
Because Samsung was asking for a ruling that their tablets didn't copy Apple's product. The judge admits they are the same, but then says they aren't copied.
I mean, it's Apple's website. They can't be prevented from printing the truth, can they? The truth as in actual court rulings in their favor over Samsung.
It's just differences in local law.
I think if you asked any of these judges outside of their jobs if Samsung copied they would are that yes they did. But in their jobs they have to follow the rules laid down by those laws and under those rules Samsung didn't 'illegally' copy.
I still think that the ad thing is ridiculous and Apple will file a higher appeal if there is one they can. Otherwise they will likely word it something like 'We have been ordered by the courts to post this message that judge so and so has declared that Samsung did not copy our designs and that their tablet is 'not as cool' as the iPad.' Rather than making it sound like it is coming from Apple's mouth. And then any response to the statement will focus on the latter part of the ruling.
That may be Apple's next argument. If they can't find an actual law backing this up as a punishment then they could try to go over the judges authority saying he has no legal power to make said punishment or the government has no authority to enforce it. Particularly since they never released damaging ads saying that Samsung copied them. If they had then this would make sense.
Originally Posted by charlituna
Particularly since they never released damaging ads saying that Samsung copied them. If they had then this would make sense.
Well, it still wouldn't make any sense, there'd just be a semi-legal explanation for doing it.
Where did Apple 'publicly' allege such a thing. What ads etc. When, outside of court documents, has Apple by name stated that Samsung copied them. Specifically in the UK.
I think you would be hard pressed to find anything. Particularly of a paid advertisement or posting on their website.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
The "accuser" in a lawsuit if the claimant. Samsung was the claimant in this case. I never claimed Apple wasn't the aggressor in other cases. In this case, Samsung clearly was the instigator of the lawsuit. So anyone claiming that Apple must suffer much be punished by the UK courts because they filed the suit in the UK, is basing their opinion on flawed information.
Right, I'm confused.
Then Apple must've have done something in the UK to warrant the apology, otherwise they should appeal again.
Not to mention where is the proof of the damages. For any of these cases. Find conclusive proof that Apple suing Samsung in the UK, or any where, cost Samsung sales and how many
This wasn't a libel case and at no point was Apple accused of libel during this case. Nor did Apple paid for ads in anything or put on their site anything that could be seen as libel.
What next, the death penalty for jaywalking?
Which will be included if Apple if forced to put up these ads. In fact, if the wording of the order is vague enough they will put just this and the 'not as cool' part.
"We have been legally required by your court to state that Samsung did not copy Apple."
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Yes, I know it wasn't a libel case. My point was that it's not uncommon for UK judges to order this if they feel it is warranted (and I think that that is fair enough). Now, the question I have is why they think it is warranted?
I didn't see Apple going against their ruling and releasing inadmissible documents to the press to gain public support, unlike some companies I could mention.