Apple's UK site says Samsung devices 'not as cool' in compliance with court ruling

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
As ordered by a U.K. judge, Apple has updated its regional website to state that Samsung did not infringe on its patented iPad design, and also included the judge's determination that Samsung devices are "not as cool."

Judgement


A link to the text-only addition to Apple's website can be found in the footer of its U.K. page. The link is entitled "Samsung/Apple UK judgement."

The text is presented on a blank page with no links, logos or other information. It lets visitors know that the High Court of Justice in England and Wales ruled on July 9, 2012, that Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe on Apple's design patent No. 0000181607-0001.

It goes on to state that the judge made "several important points" when comparing Apple's own design to that of Samsung's products. In particular, the judge said that the iPad "is an understated, smooth and simple product. It is a cool design."

In contrast, the judge found that Samsung's products are "almost insubstantial members" of the company's product lineup with "unusual details on the back."

"They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicty which is possessed by the Apple design," the judge wrote. "They are not as cool."

The statements came from a ruling by Judge Colin Birss in July, when he found that Samsung's products were distinctive from Apple. Apple attempted to appeal the decision, but lost last week.

Birss ordered Apple to run advertisements on its UK website as well as in British magazines and newspapers, declaring Samsung did not copy the iPad. The Web notice is to remain active at least six months, while other ads would be taken out in various print publications as a consolation for the "damaging impression" Samsung suffered a result of the suit.

Apple argued unsuccessfully in court that mentioning Samsung on its site would be in effect a free advertisement for its rival.

The full text from Apple's statement is included below:

Samsung / Apple UK judgment



On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited?s Galaxy Tablet Computer, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple?s registered design No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High court is available on the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html.

In the ruling, the judge made several important points comparing the designs of the Apple and Samsung products:

"The extreme simplicity of the Apple design is striking. Overall it has undecorated flat surfaces with a plate of glass on the front all the way out to a very thin rim and a blank back. There is a crisp edge around the rim and a combination of curves, both at the corners and the sides. The design looks like an object the informed user would want to pick up and hold. It is an understated, smooth and simple product. It is a cool design."

"The informed user's overall impression of each of the Samsung Galaxy Tablets is the following. From the front they belong to the family which includes the Apple design; but the Samsung products are very thin, almost insubstantial members of that family with unusual details on the back. They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool."

That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 18 October 2012. A copy of the Court of Appeal?s judgment is available on the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.

However, in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.
«13456789

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 167
    leighrleighr Posts: 172member
    This has become farcical. A blind man could tell that Samsung copied the look of the iPad, the look and function of their accessories, even the adverts are so closely copied from Apple's adverts that even seasoned Apple users have confused the two. With so many other rulings around the world stating the obvious, that Samsung blatantly copied Apple, this UK judge has made himself look like an absolute idiot.
  • Reply 2 of 167
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member


    Nicely done. LOL


     


    Gotta hand it to Apple, for their "creative compliance."   image

  • Reply 3 of 167
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,105member


    If anything this works in their favour. Anyone reading it is simply reminded that Apple is cool and Samsung is not, a judge says so so it must be true. 

  • Reply 4 of 167
    neo42neo42 Posts: 287member
    Looks like Apple failed to follow court order here
  • Reply 5 of 167
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,261member
    Very clever, totally the letter of the law, they are free to quote the judge ( in fact that is beyond the call of duty). In doing so they knock Samsung.
  • Reply 6 of 167
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,261member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post



    Looks like Apple failed to follow court order here


    The court order was to link to the judgement and to say that Samsung did not infringe their patent. Thats the first paragraph. They then went on to quote the judge, and are free to quote other juristrictions, as they wish. The order is complied with in the first paragraph. 

  • Reply 7 of 167
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,476member


    AI, which is it, Did or Did not Infringe, please make up you minds here


     


     


    Quote:


    As ordered by a U.K. judge, Apple has updated its regional website to state that Samsung did infringe on its patented iPad design, and also included the judge's determination that Samsung devices are "not as cool."



     


    Quote:


    The text is presented on a blank page with no links, logos or other information. It lets visitors know that the High Court of Justice in England and Wales ruled on July 9, 2012, that Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe on Apple's design patent No. 0000181607-0001.



     


    But you have to give apple credit for using the judges words against Samsung. I bet the judge will hear about giving personal opinions in a case like this again.

  • Reply 8 of 167
    Not even a fair fight: a legal ruling vs the PR machine of an innovative company like Apple.

  • Reply 9 of 167
    neo42neo42 Posts: 287member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


    The court order was to link to the judgement and to say that Samsung did not infringe their patent. Thats the first paragraph. They then went on to quote the judge, and are free to quote other juristrictions, as they wish. The order is complied with in the first paragraph. 



     


    Basically it says Samsung was found not guilty by this court, but guilty by these other courts.  By tacking on the commentary they are undermining the intent of the court.

  • Reply 10 of 167

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post



    Looks like Apple failed to follow court order here


     


    Agreed. This has contempt of court written all over it. 

  • Reply 11 of 167
    I approve :D
  • Reply 12 of 167

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by e_veritas View Post


     


    Agreed. This has contempt of court written all over it. 



     


    British humor?!

  • Reply 13 of 167
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,657member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post


     


    Basically it says Samsung was found not guilty by this court, but guilty by these other courts.  By tacking on the commentary they are undermining the intent of the court.





    The judge didn't say they couldn't tack on additional commentary. The judge said Apple had to say Sammy didn't infringe and the site does say that.

  • Reply 14 of 167


    And why is that?  There was nothing in the decree that prevented Apple from adding additional information.  This whole thing is stupid.  

  • Reply 15 of 167

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post




    The judge didn't say they couldn't tack on additional commentary. The judge said Apple had to say Sammy didn't infringe and the site does say that.



    I am quite sure some people in cupertino had their fun posting this link.

  • Reply 16 of 167
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    I love it!

    Samsung Products:

    Designed for Humans. Uncool ones.
  • Reply 17 of 167
    pendergastpendergast Posts: 1,358member
    neo42 wrote: »
    Basically it says Samsung was found not guilty by this court, but guilty by these other courts.  By tacking on the commentary they are undermining the intent of the court.

    At times like this, it's so nice having a resident legal scholar in our midst.
  • Reply 18 of 167

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post




    The judge didn't say they couldn't tack on additional commentary. The judge said Apple had to say Sammy didn't infringe and the site does say that.



     


    Sounds good to me....do you really think a UK judge is going to buy that pitch though???


     


    I fear this will end very badly for Apple. They were already given a reprieve during the appeal to only include a PROMINENT link on the homepage instead of the actual apology. However, a link in the last section of a page scanned in the English language (lower right), in the smallest font used on the page, is the exact opposite of prominent. And good luck convincing any judge that this "apology", taken in its entirety (which is how a court will evaluate it), meets the criteria of this court ruling.

  • Reply 19 of 167


    Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

    Looks like Apple failed to follow court order here


     


    Looks like you don't understand law at all. 


     


    What, you don't like the use of legal loopholes when they're NOT being used to let a psychotic, pathetic company worm their way out of being publicly humiliated and dishonored for their crimes?


     


    Bolded so all the trolls can see it. 


     


    This paragraph on the Apple page should have been larger than the rest and in bold. image






    However, in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.


  • Reply 20 of 167


    Contempt of court. Slap Apple with a multi- £billion fine.


     


    Should give the UK balance of payments a welcome boost...

Sign In or Register to comment.