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

1356789

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 167

    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.



    Agreed and they should be punished for this act. It is irritating when adults cannot simply follow the rule of law. In this case, Apple lost and needs to follow through with the judge's decision in good faith. This post is nothing more than playing a complicated game of semantics. If Apple had followed through, in an honest manner, I would have simply thought, "Okay, Apple did as instructed. Life moves on.". But, now, after reading their post, all I can think about is how Apple choose to act in a childish manner. I am neither an Apple fan or an "other" fan, but this really makes me think less of Apple. Just another example that people won't take responsibility. And yes, Samsung will also have to take responsibility as well.


     


    People make jokes about Apple getting around the court's decision, and don't think twice that it is wrong to do so. I guess that is no different than finding any loophole to avoid paying a person's fair share of taxes. More of the self-entitlement mentality...or better yet, the sandbox "Me!!! Me!!! ME!!!" mentality.


     


    Grow up people.

  • Reply 42 of 167
    Contempt of court??????
    They complied with the exact rulings and even quoted the judge's comments.

    How fair can they get. Of course if you just hate Apple, anything except closing the doors and giving the money back to the shareholders (are you listening Dell) is not acceptable.

    Just a thought.
    Thanks to asdasd for a well focused comment.

    en
  • Reply 43 of 167
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,757member


    LMAO at everyone butthurt about Apple's cleverness. 


     


    They followed the ruling, and their legal dept. cleared the wording.   *shrugs*


     


    If Samsung doesn't like it they can apply to the courts. 


     


    Meanwhile, Apple is selling iPads well into the double digits, and over 100 million in total so far. 

  • Reply 44 of 167
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lamewing View Post


    Agreed and they should be punished for this act. It is irritating when adults cannot simply follow the rule of law. In this case, Apple lost and needs to follow through with the judge's decision in good faith. This post is nothing more than playing a complicated game of semantics. If Apple had followed through, in an honest manner, I would have simply thought, "Okay, Apple did as instructed. Life moves on.". But, now, after reading their post, all I can think about is how Apple choose to act in a childish manner. I am neither an Apple fan or an "other" fan, but this really makes me think less of Apple. Just another example that people won't take responsibility. And yes, Samsung will also have to take responsibility as well.


     


    People make jokes about Apple getting around the court's decision, and don't think twice that it is wrong to do so. I guess that is no different than finding any loophole to avoid paying a person's fair share of taxes. More of the self-entitlement mentality...or better yet, the sandbox "Me!!! Me!!! ME!!!" mentality.


     


    Grow up people.



    In your taxes comparison, it would actually be more like someone getting away with paying exactly what they are legally required to pay. 


     


    I really don't see why people are getting bent about Apple following the order. Did you expect them to get down on the knees and wail an apology? They were order to publish a notice with specific requirements. They did so. Wanting anything more is simply being childish.

  • Reply 45 of 167
    neo42neo42 Posts: 287member

    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.



     


    ... but they declare Samsung DID infringe.  Twice even.

  • Reply 46 of 167

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    In your taxes comparison, it would actually be more like someone getting away with paying exactly what they are legally required to pay. 


     


    I really don't see why people are getting bent about Apple following the order. Did you expect them to get down on the knees and wail an apology? They were order to publish a notice with specific requirements. They did so. Wanting anything more is simply being childish.



    Sigh. No, I don't want the to "wail". I never said anything such as that. I expected them to state that they were wrong in their statement. If they wanted to add something along the lines of "pursuant to court order number xxxxxx we were wrong in our statement regarding Samsung...."


     


    Adding the extra nonsense about the other cases bypasses the actual point of the court's order and they should be held in contempt for the act. 


     


    What more did "I want"? Nothing. Never said I did. Reread my post.

  • Reply 47 of 167
    neo42neo42 Posts: 287member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    In your taxes comparison, it would actually be more like someone getting away with paying exactly what they are legally required to pay. 


     


    I really don't see why people are getting bent about Apple following the order. Did you expect them to get down on the knees and wail an apology? They were order to publish a notice with specific requirements. They did so. Wanting anything more is simply being childish.



     


    Here's the deal, Apple's post is childish.  If you are/were a parent, would you accept this as a proper apology for bullying another kid?  "Sorry for calling you a liar Tommy... but John and Jane's parents say you are!"

  • Reply 48 of 167

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post


     


    ... but they declare Samsung DID infringe.  Twice even.



    Providing more libel...something they should be punished for. If Samsung can be held up by their short and curlies, so should Apple (if and when they make an error...as they did here).

  • Reply 49 of 167
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lamewing View Post


    Providing more libel...something they should be punished for. If Samsung can be held up by their short and curlies, so should Apple (if and when they make an error...as they did here).



    It's not libel if it is 100% true and provable. They mentioned that other courts have decided differently. 100% factual. Therefore not libelous. 

  • Reply 50 of 167
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,167member


    Priceless image

  • Reply 51 of 167
    galbigalbi Posts: 968member
    Apple. basically mocked the orders of the UK judge and made a fool of him.

    Not agreeing with his ruling is one thing, but to bring in other European courts decisions is going too far.
    This is contempt of court.
  • Reply 52 of 167
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post


     


    Here's the deal, Apple's post is childish.  If you are/were a parent, would you accept this as a proper apology for bullying another kid?  "Sorry for calling you a liar Tommy... but John and Jane's parents say you are!"



    I am a parent. Do you think the courts can somehow impose sincerity? The bully could say say "I am soooo sorry Tommy for calling you a liar. You aren't a liar at all. I mean it". Would that be more sincere?


     


    First of all, has anyone read the order itself? Did it order a warm, heartfelt and sincere apology, maybe with gnashing of teeth and rending of clothes? Or did it order that Apple post a notice of the UK court decision that Samsung didn't copy? If the latter, then job done. If the former, then the UK courts are dumber than I thought.


     


    The deal is that Apple's post is not childish. It appears to obey the order, as I understood it. There was no editorializing, but it did include related facts. I see no problem with it unless someone can produce the order itself and show me where it had to be an apology that sounded sincere.

  • Reply 53 of 167


    looks still wrong in the first sentence


     


    ...regional website to state that Samsung did infringe on its ...


     


    should it not say .....Samsung did NOT infringe on its ..


     


     


  • Reply 54 of 167
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,387member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    It's not libel if it is 100% true and provable. They mentioned that other courts have decided differently. 100% factual. Therefore not libelous. 



    Well. .kinda.


     


    I don't believe the mention of the German court is telling the whole story and therefor still a bit misleading. I think I'm correct in remembering that a higher German court overruled the flawed finding of the lower one that found Samsung to infringe. AFAIK only the recent US jury trial finds Samsung to be infringing on that particular design patent, either the US or EU version.  The German, Dutch and UK courts all found they did not.


     


    EDIT: I'll take a few minutes to check for certain later, but the German ruling Apple refers to may be the preliminary one where they suggested ways that Samsung could avoid Apple's design claims on the original Tab. Samsung listened and made minimal changes, and the German court then agreed Samsung was not infringing. In any case I think Apple is only mentioning half the story. The German courts found Samsung in the clear rather than guilty IIRC. 

  • Reply 54 of 167
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,403moderator
    neo42 wrote: »
    ... but they declare Samsung DID infringe.  Twice even.

    Which is accurate as they were found guilty in other courts of law and Apple states that clearly. Apple isn't lying about anything.

    The UK court could have ruled that the page should only state that Samsung didn't infringe on their products but they didn't do that. Apple's lawyers know what they are doing.

    This court was clearly trying to use their ruling to influence other courts by making a global statement - a UK website is not limited to UK residents. If other courts find Samsung guilty, that's their decision to make.
  • Reply 56 of 167
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,167member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post


     


    ... but they declare Samsung DID infringe.  Twice even.



     


    Was that a lie? The judge order did not say Apple cannot mention the outcome of other lawsuits.

  • Reply 57 of 167
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,387member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



    This court was clearly trying to use their ruling to influence other courts by making a global statement - a UK website is not limited to UK residents. If other courts find Samsung guilty, that's their decision to make.


    This ruling of non-infringement applies to the entire EU, not just the UK.

  • Reply 58 of 167
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post



    Apple. basically mocked the orders of the UK judge and made a fool of him.

    Not agreeing with his ruling is one thing, but to bring in other European courts decisions is going too far.

    This is contempt of court.


    The judge made a fool of himself by writing such a petty, childish order. He needed no help from Apple.

  • Reply 59 of 167
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    neo42 wrote: »
    Looks like Apple failed to follow court order here

    Not at all. They were ordered to post the statement by the court. They did.
    It had to be on the front page, in a common font and no less than 14 pt type. With a link to the ruling. It is.

    Yes they took the order by letter of the law, not intent. But that's not contemptible. The Judge likely expected it or he would have been more careful with wording the order. Especially in not prohibiting additional comments from the court record.
  • Reply 60 of 167

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post



    Apple. basically mocked the orders of the UK judge and made a fool of him.

    Not agreeing with his ruling is one thing, but to bring in other European courts decisions is going too far.

    This is contempt of court.


     


    So when there is no contempt of court finding will you and all the others of your ilk posting on this thread come and admit that you were wrong?  You're welcome to post a link to a page where it says "the UK court did not find Apple in contempt but Fandroids throughout the world think Tim Cook and his lawyers deserve to rot in jail for their childishness."

Sign In or Register to comment.