Apple may have followed the form but they certainly have not followed the substance of the judge's order.
The judge's orders were to state that Samsung's product does not "copy" Apple's product; not to go ahead and throw in extraneous information to try and mitigate their admission. Not only that, they compared the UK's ruling with rulings from other countries, which has no relationship with the one in the UK!. Apple basically said FU to the authority of the UK judgement
Apple was never required to state that the product 'does not copy' and was never required to apologise. Apple was told to display the judgement on its website; it was never told to pretend to agree with it.
They are entitled to include the judge's comments because his comments were the reason for the judgement. Including the judgements from the other countries? That's probably playing a little fast and loose.
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.".
Wrong.
Under UK law "infringement of a design patent" and "copying" are not the same thing.
"Samsung blatantly copied Apple yet did not infringe Apple's design patent" is a perfectly valid statement.
Yep. Thought so: your denseness is only matched by the seemingly clueless obtuseness.
His question (I am quoting): "Provide us with examples of this happening to other companies before Apple."
Go on, please provide us with examples.... We'll wait.
To the contrary, his basic question revolved around this, just as I said:
"You don't know why it would matter?
If this has never happened before (and I think it's a first) then its a precadent setting ruling. Apple has every right to fight this tooth and nail if they are the first company in the UK that has ever had to post up such a notice. If this is common in the UK then Apple has no right to complain since it's an accepted practice."
Apple was instructed to put "the notice" (that particular statement) "on the Apple homepage." Apple argued that it would clutter things up, and asked if they could just link to it. The appeals court, said "yeah that's reasonable; provide a link to the notice."
One could argue that the expectation was that the link would go to a page with nothing but the notice.
"In my judgment, Apple are carefully trying to say something which contains an innuendo that Samsung infringe without actually saying it. The reference to copying is exactly that. It is clear that copying plays no part in this case for Registered Community Design infringement, but to many people outside the circles of intellectual property law to say something infringes a Registered Community Design and to say someone copied your design or your product is to say the same thing."
Clearly the court was sensitive to word choice and context. A link to "the statement" shouldn't be a link to "the statement plus some other stuff that Apple feels like adding."
No big deal, Apple just needs to delete the other stuff.
So why is this judge stepping outside the bounds of the law with all this drivel about "innuendo" and opinions on how people will interpret factual statements?
A judge's job is to break things down to a black and white interpretation of the law and make a decision based on that interpretation.
In this case they are not doing that and Apple should appeal, given the fairly strong grounds these incompetent judges have handed them.
I agree, the punishment is apt. This sends a strong message to the community that even the biggest co. will be punished if they make false court appeals and waste court's (and government's) valuable time/money. Next time, co.s will think twice, do their homework about preexisting work (instead of putting indirect pressure on the courts and defendant lawyers to do that), and make sure they have a valid case before appealing. Of course, this is all assuming that it's shameful to admit one's guilt and post it on one's face, irrespective of anyone reading that post. If co.s (including Apple) don't think that way, they might continue appealing.
Apple is the defendant in this case, Samsung is the plaintiff.
So what you are saying is Samsung should be punished for initiating this legal action?
They did exactly what the ruling demanded, to the letter.
Look, I was amused by Apple's response, and I think that in an American court it might be regarded as complying with the letter of the law. But judges have wide latitude to decide when they're being met with disrespect.
This is a British court, not an American court. Their judges have even wider latitude to decide when they're being disrespected. This goes well beyond compliance to the letter of the law.
Apple likes to thumb its nose at competitors and detractors. Normally this amuses me. But doing that to a judge is, perhaps, unwise.
In this case they are not doing that and Apple should appeal, given the fairly strong grounds these incompetent judges have handed them.
They have appealed. . . twice now. In both cases the Appeals Court upheld the order to publish, with minor changes to the original order handed down several weeks ago.
Of course not, that wasn't the judgement. Not that Apple would be, or have been, particularly hurt by being forced to publicly state that their products have been officially judged to be cooler than Samsung's. Which makes this whole charade all the more stupid, Apple have dug themselves into a hole when they could have been soaring on the back of a lost court case that declared them to be cooler. If that's a lost court case then who needs to win?
But no, they had to be "the rebel", had to bite the hand that was feeding them just because they don't like to lose. Like Apple, hate Apple's legal machine.
Apple have been specifically ordered to provide a link to the judgement which contains the "cooler" statement of Birss, as such they have merely summarised parts of the ruling in order to help with people's understanding.
Apple have been specifically ordered to provide a link to the judgement which contains the "cooler" statement of Birss, as such they have merely summarised parts of the ruling in order to help with people's understanding.
<p id="user_yui_3_7_3_1_1351807044397_666" style="color:rgb(24,24,24);font-family:'lucida grande', verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(226,225,225);">If this has never happened before (and I think it's a first) then its a precadent setting ruling. Apple has every right to fight this tooth and nail if they are the first company in the UK that has ever had to post up such a notice. If this is common in the UK then Apple has no right to complain since it's an accepted practice."</p>
Question answered. I can't read it for you. Again, you're welcome. [SIZE=9px]When insults and name-calling is all you have left to answer with, it's a pretty good sign I've won.[/SIZE]
Thank you! You've shown clearly that this is a first case for this kind of punishment. You've also show us that the judge is using various unrelated laws to cobble together justification for the result he wanted in the first place. You're questioning Apple appealing more than once? Surely you know there's more than one level of appeal in the American judicial system? There may not be in the UK, but that only speaks additionally to the flaws of their system.
Thank you! You've shown clearly that this is a first case for this kind of punishment. You've also show us that the judge is using various unrelated laws to cobble together justification for the result he wanted in the first place. You're questioning Apple appealing more than once? Surely you know there's more than one level of appeal in the American judicial system? There may not be in the UK, but that only speaks additionally to the flaws of their system.
You're welcome. If not the very first at least one of the first instances of a publish order using those provisions of the law. Unlike anantksundaram you took the opportunity to read the answer I provided hours ago.
I swear, there is something in the air that makes the English (and people who move to England) feel superior and smarter than everyoine else in the world. Anyone (non british) who reads about this judge telling Apple they did it wrong is going to see the judge as a idiotic bully. Ok, anyone with a semblance of common sense. I would bet even the lawyers at Samsung are scratching their heads wondering what is up this judge's bum.
The only good thing the English judiciary has done was sentence my ancestor in the 1700's to transportation for stealing 2 shillings, that means I'm now pondering whether to head to the beach on this lovely spring day rather than sitting in a bog in the drizzle, drinking the insipid warm dog's p*ss they call beer waiting for winter to come so the bog freezes over and the drizzle turns to sleet.
To that nameless judge, lost in the mists of time, thanks mate.
You're welcome. If not the very first at least one of the first instances of a publish order using those provisions of the law. Unlike anantksundaram .....
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi
BS.
Substance vs form.
Apple may have followed the form but they certainly have not followed the substance of the judge's order.
The judge's orders were to state that Samsung's product does not "copy" Apple's product; not to go ahead and throw in extraneous information to try and mitigate their admission. Not only that, they compared the UK's ruling with rulings from other countries, which has no relationship with the one in the UK!. Apple basically said FU to the authority of the UK judgement
Apple was never required to state that the product 'does not copy' and was never required to apologise. Apple was told to display the judgement on its website; it was never told to pretend to agree with it.
They are entitled to include the judge's comments because his comments were the reason for the judgement. Including the judgements from the other countries? That's probably playing a little fast and loose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrystalClear
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.".
Wrong.
Under UK law "infringement of a design patent" and "copying" are not the same thing.
"Samsung blatantly copied Apple yet did not infringe Apple's design patent" is a perfectly valid statement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Yep. Thought so: your denseness is only matched by the seemingly clueless obtuseness.
His question (I am quoting): "Provide us with examples of this happening to other companies before Apple."
Go on, please provide us with examples.... We'll wait.
To the contrary, his basic question revolved around this, just as I said:
"You don't know why it would matter?
If this has never happened before (and I think it's a first) then its a precadent setting ruling. Apple has every right to fight this tooth and nail if they are the first company in the UK that has ever had to post up such a notice. If this is common in the UK then Apple has no right to complain since it's an accepted practice."
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/153959/uk-court-orders-apple-to-rewrite-website-statement-saying-samsung-didnt-copy-the-ipad/200#post_2224721
Which I researched and supplied an answer for here:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/153959/uk-court-orders-apple-to-rewrite-website-statement-saying-samsung-didnt-copy-the-ipad/200#post_2224833
Question answered. I can't read it for you. Again, you're welcome.
When insults and name-calling is all you have left to answer with, it's a pretty good sign I've won.
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax
Apple was instructed to put "the notice" (that particular statement) "on the Apple homepage." Apple argued that it would clutter things up, and asked if they could just link to it. The appeals court, said "yeah that's reasonable; provide a link to the notice."
One could argue that the expectation was that the link would go to a page with nothing but the notice.
To put this in context, look at the original ruling at paragraph 51 of http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html the judge wrote:
"In my judgment, Apple are carefully trying to say something which contains an innuendo that Samsung infringe without actually saying it. The reference to copying is exactly that. It is clear that copying plays no part in this case for Registered Community Design infringement, but to many people outside the circles of intellectual property law to say something infringes a Registered Community Design and to say someone copied your design or your product is to say the same thing."
Clearly the court was sensitive to word choice and context. A link to "the statement" shouldn't be a link to "the statement plus some other stuff that Apple feels like adding."
No big deal, Apple just needs to delete the other stuff.
So why is this judge stepping outside the bounds of the law with all this drivel about "innuendo" and opinions on how people will interpret factual statements?
A judge's job is to break things down to a black and white interpretation of the law and make a decision based on that interpretation.
In this case they are not doing that and Apple should appeal, given the fairly strong grounds these incompetent judges have handed them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by period
I agree, the punishment is apt. This sends a strong message to the community that even the biggest co. will be punished if they make false court appeals and waste court's (and government's) valuable time/money. Next time, co.s will think twice, do their homework about preexisting work (instead of putting indirect pressure on the courts and defendant lawyers to do that), and make sure they have a valid case before appealing. Of course, this is all assuming that it's shameful to admit one's guilt and post it on one's face, irrespective of anyone reading that post. If co.s (including Apple) don't think that way, they might continue appealing.
Apple is the defendant in this case, Samsung is the plaintiff.
So what you are saying is Samsung should be punished for initiating this legal action?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
They did exactly what the ruling demanded, to the letter.
Look, I was amused by Apple's response, and I think that in an American court it might be regarded as complying with the letter of the law. But judges have wide latitude to decide when they're being met with disrespect.
This is a British court, not an American court. Their judges have even wider latitude to decide when they're being disrespected. This goes well beyond compliance to the letter of the law.
Apple likes to thumb its nose at competitors and detractors. Normally this amuses me. But doing that to a judge is, perhaps, unwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
In this case they are not doing that and Apple should appeal, given the fairly strong grounds these incompetent judges have handed them.
They have appealed. . . twice now. In both cases the Appeals Court upheld the order to publish, with minor changes to the original order handed down several weeks ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
Of course not, that wasn't the judgement. Not that Apple would be, or have been, particularly hurt by being forced to publicly state that their products have been officially judged to be cooler than Samsung's. Which makes this whole charade all the more stupid, Apple have dug themselves into a hole when they could have been soaring on the back of a lost court case that declared them to be cooler. If that's a lost court case then who needs to win?
But no, they had to be "the rebel", had to bite the hand that was feeding them just because they don't like to lose. Like Apple, hate Apple's legal machine.
Apple have been specifically ordered to provide a link to the judgement which contains the "cooler" statement of Birss, as such they have merely summarised parts of the ruling in order to help with people's understanding.
Apple should appeal this farce.
Quote:
Originally Posted by canucklehead
First, this is the most ridiculous ruling I've ever heard of.
Second, I would love for Apple to include images demonstrating how Samsung "didn't" copy Apple's designs. Let the images speak for themselves.
Maybe you should check out some rulings from Texas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Apple have been specifically ordered to provide a link to the judgement which contains the "cooler" statement of Birss, as such they have merely summarised parts of the ruling in order to help with people's understanding.
Apple should appeal this farce.
...for a third time?
Quote:
Originally Posted by protaginets
But atleast the kid has the satisfaction of knowing the dad won't ever ask for a sandwich from him again, right?
The next one will contain boogers, will be filmed being made and eaten then shared on Youtube and linked to on Reddit.
Thank you! You've shown clearly that this is a first case for this kind of punishment. You've also show us that the judge is using various unrelated laws to cobble together justification for the result he wanted in the first place. You're questioning Apple appealing more than once? Surely you know there's more than one level of appeal in the American judicial system? There may not be in the UK, but that only speaks additionally to the flaws of their system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague
Thank you! You've shown clearly that this is a first case for this kind of punishment. You've also show us that the judge is using various unrelated laws to cobble together justification for the result he wanted in the first place. You're questioning Apple appealing more than once? Surely you know there's more than one level of appeal in the American judicial system? There may not be in the UK, but that only speaks additionally to the flaws of their system.
You're welcome. If not the very first at least one of the first instances of a publish order using those provisions of the law. Unlike anantksundaram you took the opportunity to read the answer I provided hours ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by protaginets
I swear, there is something in the air that makes the English (and people who move to England) feel superior and smarter than everyoine else in the world. Anyone (non british) who reads about this judge telling Apple they did it wrong is going to see the judge as a idiotic bully. Ok, anyone with a semblance of common sense. I would bet even the lawyers at Samsung are scratching their heads wondering what is up this judge's bum.
The only good thing the English judiciary has done was sentence my ancestor in the 1700's to transportation for stealing 2 shillings, that means I'm now pondering whether to head to the beach on this lovely spring day rather than sitting in a bog in the drizzle, drinking the insipid warm dog's p*ss they call beer waiting for winter to come so the bog freezes over and the drizzle turns to sleet.
To that nameless judge, lost in the mists of time, thanks mate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbryanh
It's lovely to see that there are still governments that aren't quite as easily purchased as that corporate subsidiary Americans call "Congress."
It's better to born into it then, is it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
You're welcome. If not the very first at least one of the first instances of a publish order using those provisions of the law. Unlike anantksundaram .....
In other words, you agree that you lost.
Apple should stop being smart arses and sore losers, do what they were told to do and abide by both the letter and spirit of the judgement.
The drama that will ensue if they don't, simply won't be worth it.
If they don't, I would expect the thread discussing the ensuing consequences to stretch to 70+ pages, not 7.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
meh, you might be right. Maybe someone did stick a pickle in the judge's ass. Actually seem quite likely.
Most likely dressed in an Eton uniform while bending over the overstuffed chesterfield to toss another fag on the fire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
Apple should stop being smart asses and sore losers, do what they were told to do and abide by both the letter and spirit of the judgement.
The drama that will ensue if they don't, simply won't be worth it.
If they don't, I would expect the thread discussing the ensuing consequences to stretch to 70+ pages, not 7.
It's the UK, it's "arses", asses are donkeys.
Although it has been said, the law is an ass but not in the American sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
It's the UK, it's "arses", asses are donkeys.
Although it has been said, the law is an ass but not in the American sense.
Thanks, you are correct, I slipped up there.