Subject to anything that may be submitted by either side I would propose the following:
On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet Computers, 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 [link given].
That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on ….. A copy of the Court of Appeal's judgment is available on the following link […]. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.
The order did not say, "also include any additional commentary that you see fit."
Unfortunately djsherly, it appears that the majority of posters on here simply don't get it; or are that arrogant that they genuinely believe that what apple did was perfectly acceptable. It's laughable; why would any sane judge accept a snidey, sarcastic comment as following their instruction? They knew that what they were doing was exactly what the court presumed a professional company wouldn't do. If anything I'm surprised it took the court this log to haul them back in. Yet more legal time wasted by the idiotic legal teams involved in apple's never ending (mostly failed) legal quest, which ultimately is to try to retain them market share for them in a market that they are losing. And before anyone claims that's bs; go check some simple statistics on global smart phone sales - Google Android & particularly Samsung have this market in their pocket. Yes, apple kick started the market which we could be thankful for as look at the phone availability now; but to act as they are looks like the behaviour of a company knowing they've lost the market & are also losing the respect of potential & existing customers.
Subject to anything that may be submitted by either side I would propose the following:
On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet Computers, 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 [link given].
That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on ….. A copy of the Court of Appeal's judgment is available on the following link […]. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.
The order did not say, "also include any additional commentary that you see fit."
Unfortunately djsherly, it appears that the majority of posters on here simply don't get it; or are that arrogant that they genuinely believe that what apple did was perfectly acceptable. It's laughable; why would any sane judge accept a snidey, sarcastic comment as following their instruction? They knew that what they were doing was exactly what the court presumed a professional company wouldn't do. If anything I'm surprised it took the court this log to haul them back in. Yet more legal time wasted by the idiotic legal teams involved in apple's never ending (mostly failed) legal quest, which ultimately is to try to retain them market share for them in a market that they are losing. And before anyone claims that's bs; go check some simple statistics on global smart phone sales - Google Android & particularly Samsung have this market in their pocket. Yes, apple kick started the market which we could be thankful for as look at the phone availability now; but to act as they are looks like the behaviour of a company knowing they've lost the market & are also losing the respect of potential & existing customers.
Subject to anything that may be submitted by either side I would propose the following:
On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet Computers, 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 [link given].
That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on ….. A copy of the Court of Appeal's judgment is available on the following link […]. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.
The order did not say, "also include any additional commentary that you see fit."
Unfortunately djsherly, it appears that the majority of posters on here simply don't get it; or are that arrogant that they genuinely believe that what apple did was perfectly acceptable. It's laughable; why would any sane judge accept a snidey, sarcastic comment as following their instruction? They knew that what they were doing was exactly what the court presumed a professional company wouldn't do. If anything I'm surprised it took the court this log to haul them back in. Yet more legal time wasted by the idiotic legal teams involved in apple's never ending (mostly failed) legal quest, which ultimately is to try to retain them market share for them in a market that they are losing. And before anyone claims that's bs; go check some simple statistics on global smart phone sales - Google Android & particularly Samsung have this market in their pocket. Yes, apple kick started the market which we could be thankful for as look at the phone availability now; but to act as they are looks like the behaviour of a company knowing they've lost the market & are also losing the respect of potential & existing customers.
There's no talking with Apple fanboys, you should all know this by now lol.
They will NEVER admit that they think Apple is in the wrong - even when they catch the CEO having sex with a 9 year old Philippino boy they will STILL say that Apple was just following the letter of the law.
Simple fact is, Apple came off looking childish and petulant. They were ordered to put a simple statement and the one they posted made THEM look stupid, not Samsung. The longer it stays up, the stupider Apple look. Well played PR team. LOL.
UK judge rules that Apple has to post a certain notice on their website.
Posters say that the rogue judge's ruling will never be upheld on appeal.
Judgment upheld on appeal by three other judges.
Posters say Apple should add extra snark to water down the judge's ordered notice.
Apple posts notice with added commentary.
Posters say that it's totally compliant with the judge's order and there's nothing the court can do about it.
Same three judges say it's not compliant and order Apple to fix it.
Posters make new predictions.
Honestly, I'm not sure why any of the previous posters has any faith in their predictions. Sure, there were some posters who said "In my opinion, it should be A, but that's probably not which way the court will go." No issue with those folks. But if you go back and look at those older threads and these, it's chocked full of people making bold predictions that they have been utterly wrong about. I'm not talking about opinion, I'm talking about prediction of what will actually happen.
And yet those posters keep putting their predictions out there like they're fact. I guess they're hoping they'll eventually get to their "stopped clock" point...
Very good, but you missed "insult the judge, insult the country of origin of the judge, and at all stages insult anyone who offers any dissenting opinion."
Original statement is now gone from the Apple UK site. At least Apple have managed to comply with the court in that regard. 24 hours left to get the revised statement up, unless Tim fancies explaining himself to the court.
Apple got the order to put this EXACT quote (and link) on its webpages - nothing more nothing less:
“On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronics (UK) Limited’s Galaxy Tablet computers, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple's registered design 000181607-0001.
A copy of the full judgment of the High Court is available via the following link [insert hyperlink].”
How hard it is to follow this?
If they did EXACTLY that without WHINING about German and US courts everything would have been fine.
But Apple being Apple ...
You state "nothing more nothing less", care to point out the precise point at which the judgement and original appeal ruling states this?
Reporting true statements of fact is not whining.
The whining from Samsung and these Judges is enough to drown out Heathrow.
Unfortunately djsherly, it appears that the majority of posters on here simply don't get it; or are that arrogant that they genuinely believe that what apple did was perfectly acceptable. It's laughable; why would any sane judge accept a snidey, sarcastic comment as following their instruction? They knew that what they were doing was exactly what the court presumed a professional company wouldn't do. If anything I'm surprised it took the court this log to haul them back in. Yet more legal time wasted by the idiotic legal teams involved in apple's never ending (mostly failed) legal quest, which ultimately is to try to retain them market share for them in a market that they are losing. And before anyone claims that's bs; go check some simple statistics on global smart phone sales - Google Android & particularly Samsung have this market in their pocket. Yes, apple kick started the market which we could be thankful for as look at the phone availability now; but to act as they are looks like the behaviour of a company knowing they've lost the market & are also losing the respect of potential & existing customers.
What Apple should do then is make no statement at all and only provide a link to the ruling.
That should shut those idiot judges up.
They can leave it like that until the appeals process is exhausted, including to the EU.
Cut through the confusing, dithering rulings of these obviously incompetent fools.
There's no talking with Apple Samsung fanboys, you should all know this by now lol.
They will NEVER admit that they think Apple Samsung is in the wrong - even when they catch the CEO having sex with a 9 year old Philippino boy they will STILL say that Apple Samsung was just following the letter of the law.
Simple fact is, Apple came off looking childish and petulant. They were ordered to put a simple statement and the one they posted made THEM look stupid, not Samsung. The longer it stays up, the stupider Apple look publicly released documents the judge told them were not admissible, just to make sure the jurors saw them, and shredded documents they were told would be required as evidence. Well played PR legal team. LOL.
Fixed that for you.
Okay, I give up—I tried HTML, BBCode, bare "s", spelling out "strike". Everyone but the OP is probably smart enough to figure it out....
OK...who would have guessed that "abc" meant "strike through"?
Calling these judges idiotic just shows up your own ignorance.
To become a QC takes remarkable intelligence and hard work. These aren't judges from some backwater US state.
To become a Lord requires being born to the role, usually via inbreeding, which interestingly enough is also often associated with backwater US states.
Very good, but you missed "insult the judge, insult the country of origin of the judge, and at all stages insult anyone who offers any dissenting opinion."
Yeah, why not, it's called freedom of speech.
Perhaps when you get off your knees long enough and stop grovelling at the feet of your "betters", you may come to understand this.
Just because someone is born a Lord it doesn't make them any better than anyone else, except in the eyes of hard done by UK subjects.
To become a Lord requires being born to the role, usually via inbreeding, which interestingly enough is also often associated with backwater US states.
Hey man, the olden days sent a rider, they want their prejudices back.
Only about 12% of the House of Lords are hereditary peers, likely to be 0% within the next decade, and inbreeding doesn't happen.
The ECJ is the highest court for questions of EU law. This case is under British law, not EU law. The ECJ is irrelevant in this case, unless Apple wants to argue that Britain's decision violates EU law.
The relevant highest court for this case is...the Supreme Court. It has existed only since 2009. Before that it would've made sense to talk about the Privy Council.
I realize we're (almost) all Apple cheerleaders here, but if I were Apple I'd simply issue the bare-bones statement the judge originally had in mind, without trying to turn him into an involuntary ad subject. That's what ticked him off.
Yeah, I'm mad at them about that...now that they've appointed Jonathan Sumption to the Supreme Court, he'll never finish his series on the Hundred Years War! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Sumption
Very good, but you missed "insult the judge, insult the country of origin of the judge, and at all stages insult anyone who offers any dissenting opinion."
No kidding. And the people who are doing this now are some of the same ones who were making jokes about "Judge KOHrea" until she sided with them. Then she became a brilliant sage.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly
Subject to anything that may be submitted by either side I would propose the following:
Unfortunately djsherly, it appears that the majority of posters on here simply don't get it; or are that arrogant that they genuinely believe that what apple did was perfectly acceptable. It's laughable; why would any sane judge accept a snidey, sarcastic comment as following their instruction? They knew that what they were doing was exactly what the court presumed a professional company wouldn't do. If anything I'm surprised it took the court this log to haul them back in. Yet more legal time wasted by the idiotic legal teams involved in apple's never ending (mostly failed) legal quest, which ultimately is to try to retain them market share for them in a market that they are losing. And before anyone claims that's bs; go check some simple statistics on global smart phone sales - Google Android & particularly Samsung have this market in their pocket. Yes, apple kick started the market which we could be thankful for as look at the phone availability now; but to act as they are looks like the behaviour of a company knowing they've lost the market & are also losing the respect of potential & existing customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly
Subject to anything that may be submitted by either side I would propose the following:
Unfortunately djsherly, it appears that the majority of posters on here simply don't get it; or are that arrogant that they genuinely believe that what apple did was perfectly acceptable. It's laughable; why would any sane judge accept a snidey, sarcastic comment as following their instruction? They knew that what they were doing was exactly what the court presumed a professional company wouldn't do. If anything I'm surprised it took the court this log to haul them back in. Yet more legal time wasted by the idiotic legal teams involved in apple's never ending (mostly failed) legal quest, which ultimately is to try to retain them market share for them in a market that they are losing. And before anyone claims that's bs; go check some simple statistics on global smart phone sales - Google Android & particularly Samsung have this market in their pocket. Yes, apple kick started the market which we could be thankful for as look at the phone availability now; but to act as they are looks like the behaviour of a company knowing they've lost the market & are also losing the respect of potential & existing customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly
Subject to anything that may be submitted by either side I would propose the following:
Unfortunately djsherly, it appears that the majority of posters on here simply don't get it; or are that arrogant that they genuinely believe that what apple did was perfectly acceptable. It's laughable; why would any sane judge accept a snidey, sarcastic comment as following their instruction? They knew that what they were doing was exactly what the court presumed a professional company wouldn't do. If anything I'm surprised it took the court this log to haul them back in. Yet more legal time wasted by the idiotic legal teams involved in apple's never ending (mostly failed) legal quest, which ultimately is to try to retain them market share for them in a market that they are losing. And before anyone claims that's bs; go check some simple statistics on global smart phone sales - Google Android & particularly Samsung have this market in their pocket. Yes, apple kick started the market which we could be thankful for as look at the phone availability now; but to act as they are looks like the behaviour of a company knowing they've lost the market & are also losing the respect of potential & existing customers.
sorry for the multi posts, post comment button didn't seem to be working!!
There ya go..
Imo the usa traditionally expect that others follow their rules not the other way around. It seems the judge still doesn't get it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
The idiotic UK judges
Calling these judges idiotic just shows up your own ignorance.
To become a QC takes remarkable intelligence and hard work. These aren't judges from some backwater US state.
There's no talking with Apple fanboys, you should all know this by now lol.
They will NEVER admit that they think Apple is in the wrong - even when they catch the CEO having sex with a 9 year old Philippino boy they will STILL say that Apple was just following the letter of the law.
Simple fact is, Apple came off looking childish and petulant. They were ordered to put a simple statement and the one they posted made THEM look stupid, not Samsung. The longer it stays up, the stupider Apple look. Well played PR team. LOL.
Double -post sry
Quote:
Originally Posted by binglyboop
UK judge rules that Apple has to post a certain notice on their website.
Posters say that the rogue judge's ruling will never be upheld on appeal.
Judgment upheld on appeal by three other judges.
Posters say Apple should add extra snark to water down the judge's ordered notice.
Apple posts notice with added commentary.
Posters say that it's totally compliant with the judge's order and there's nothing the court can do about it.
Same three judges say it's not compliant and order Apple to fix it.
Posters make new predictions.
Honestly, I'm not sure why any of the previous posters has any faith in their predictions. Sure, there were some posters who said "In my opinion, it should be A, but that's probably not which way the court will go." No issue with those folks. But if you go back and look at those older threads and these, it's chocked full of people making bold predictions that they have been utterly wrong about. I'm not talking about opinion, I'm talking about prediction of what will actually happen.
And yet those posters keep putting their predictions out there like they're fact. I guess they're hoping they'll eventually get to their "stopped clock" point...
Very good, but you missed "insult the judge, insult the country of origin of the judge, and at all stages insult anyone who offers any dissenting opinion."
Original statement is now gone from the Apple UK site. At least Apple have managed to comply with the court in that regard. 24 hours left to get the revised statement up, unless Tim fancies explaining himself to the court.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathillien
Your point being?
Apple got the order to put this EXACT quote (and link) on its webpages - nothing more nothing less:
“On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronics (UK) Limited’s Galaxy Tablet computers, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple's registered design 000181607-0001.
A copy of the full judgment of the High Court is available via the following link [insert hyperlink].”
How hard it is to follow this?
If they did EXACTLY that without WHINING about German and US courts everything would have been fine.
But Apple being Apple ...
You state "nothing more nothing less", care to point out the precise point at which the judgement and original appeal ruling states this?
Reporting true statements of fact is not whining.
The whining from Samsung and these Judges is enough to drown out Heathrow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatever71
Unfortunately djsherly, it appears that the majority of posters on here simply don't get it; or are that arrogant that they genuinely believe that what apple did was perfectly acceptable. It's laughable; why would any sane judge accept a snidey, sarcastic comment as following their instruction? They knew that what they were doing was exactly what the court presumed a professional company wouldn't do. If anything I'm surprised it took the court this log to haul them back in. Yet more legal time wasted by the idiotic legal teams involved in apple's never ending (mostly failed) legal quest, which ultimately is to try to retain them market share for them in a market that they are losing. And before anyone claims that's bs; go check some simple statistics on global smart phone sales - Google Android & particularly Samsung have this market in their pocket. Yes, apple kick started the market which we could be thankful for as look at the phone availability now; but to act as they are looks like the behaviour of a company knowing they've lost the market & are also losing the respect of potential & existing customers.
What Apple should do then is make no statement at all and only provide a link to the ruling.
That should shut those idiot judges up.
They can leave it like that until the appeals process is exhausted, including to the EU.
Cut through the confusing, dithering rulings of these obviously incompetent fools.
So how do you get to be a Lord anyway?
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Begood
There's no talking with Apple Samsung fanboys, you should all know this by now lol.
They will NEVER admit that they think Apple Samsung is in the wrong - even when they catch the CEO having sex with a 9 year old Philippino boy they will STILL say that Apple Samsung was just following the letter of the law.
Simple fact is, Apple came off looking childish and petulant. They were ordered to put a simple statement and the one they posted made THEM look stupid, not Samsung. The longer it stays up, the stupider Apple look publicly released documents the judge told them were not admissible, just to make sure the jurors saw them, and shredded documents they were told would be required as evidence. Well played PR legal team. LOL.
Fixed that for you.
Okay, I give up—I tried HTML, BBCode, bare "s", spelling out "strike". Everyone but the OP is probably smart enough to figure it out....
OK...who would have guessed that "abc" meant "strike through"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
Calling these judges idiotic just shows up your own ignorance.
To become a QC takes remarkable intelligence and hard work. These aren't judges from some backwater US state.
To become a Lord requires being born to the role, usually via inbreeding, which interestingly enough is also often associated with backwater US states.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
Very good, but you missed "insult the judge, insult the country of origin of the judge, and at all stages insult anyone who offers any dissenting opinion."
Yeah, why not, it's called freedom of speech.
Perhaps when you get off your knees long enough and stop grovelling at the feet of your "betters", you may come to understand this.
Just because someone is born a Lord it doesn't make them any better than anyone else, except in the eyes of hard done by UK subjects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
To become a Lord requires being born to the role, usually via inbreeding, which interestingly enough is also often associated with backwater US states.
Hey man, the olden days sent a rider, they want their prejudices back.
Only about 12% of the House of Lords are hereditary peers, likely to be 0% within the next decade, and inbreeding doesn't happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Yeah, why not, it's called freedom of speech.
Perhaps when you get off your knees long enough and stop grovelling at the feet of your "betters", you may come to understand this.
Just because someone is born a Lord it doesn't make them any better than anyone else, except in the eyes of hard done by UK subjects.
Why are you even talking about Lords? This is a matter of law, not Lords.
I'm actually a republican (means a different thing over here), not that it has any relevance to the thread topic.
I love the implication that because you have freedom of speech you should use it to be a jackass. Because "Yeah, why not". Says a lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor
The ECJ is the highest court for questions of EU law. This case is under British law, not EU law. The ECJ is irrelevant in this case, unless Apple wants to argue that Britain's decision violates EU law.
The relevant highest court for this case is...the Supreme Court. It has existed only since 2009. Before that it would've made sense to talk about the Privy Council.
I realize we're (almost) all Apple cheerleaders here, but if I were Apple I'd simply issue the bare-bones statement the judge originally had in mind, without trying to turn him into an involuntary ad subject. That's what ticked him off.
Yeah, I'm mad at them about that...now that they've appointed Jonathan Sumption to the Supreme Court, he'll never finish his series on the Hundred Years War! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Sumption
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
Very good, but you missed "insult the judge, insult the country of origin of the judge, and at all stages insult anyone who offers any dissenting opinion."
No kidding. And the people who are doing this now are some of the same ones who were making jokes about "Judge KOHrea" until she sided with them. Then she became a brilliant sage.