I don't recall the court saying anything about that initially. You only see the old trope of "changing the rules as the game is played" in children's (HEY LOOK CHILDREN) programs (programmes) as examples of how not to behave. It's the bad guy doing it.
Actually you see it in Apple's App Store rules as well. Funny, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That you believe the UK judgement is objective right only outlines just how completely wrong you are.
I don't believe anything of the sort, I'm generally pretty apathetic to the Apple vs Samsung squabbles. I do, however, believe judgements should be followed in the spirit of their intent, and that multinational corporations shouldn't be petulant.
Thanks. The wrinkle is in "He proposed that instead of requiring the notice to be on the web page itself, it would be sufficient if there were a link provided from that to the notice. There are some links already provided. All that need be added is a link entitled "Samsung/Apple UK judgment." I think that would be appropriate and proportionate."
Apple was ordered to put "the notice" on their home page. They argued that they should be able to just link to "the notice" and the appeals court acquieced. They didn't ask to be replace the notice on the home page with a link to a page with the notice plus some editorial stuff. That's where Apple's in the wrong. They just need to delete the other stuff and call it a day. The judge is wrong about the size of the font on the home page of course.
Legally speaking, how were they wrong? It's easy to say they shouldn't have, but all they did was include factual statements most of which came from the original judge. They weren't instructed not to add anything. They were instructed to make the ruling public in order to clear the air.
If the judges feel Apple was wrong, fine, but back it up with factual reasons. Instead they claim Apple was wrong because the additional info they added was unrtue and incorrect. That argument itself is untrue and incorrect. If a judge has to be dishonest to come to a decision, it probably isn't a good decision.
What they should do is do exactly what the judge states, then under his little thing post, besides the phrase "per court order and court wording", to list all of the other places in the world that Apple is winning judgments in their favor against Sammy for the design. To show that UK is in the minority of siding with Sammy.
UK, Dutch, Japan, S Korea...this can't be minority
All these new single post signups… all from the UK… and all lying…
Humor.
(Oh, sorry, "humour".)
I live in the UK, but I'm not British. So I'm maybe not partial in that regard, but hopefully have some insight into how British society works.
I am an Apple fan boy though, and as such I want Apple to make the best of any situation. I'm not sure if they've actually done that in this case - their attitude could bring bad publicity. But it's a quite interesting and significant case anyway.
All these new single post signups… all from the UK… and all lying…
Humor.
(Oh, sorry, "humour".)
Love it. Some global moderator disagrees with points made so that automatically makes me & anyone else from the UK daring to agree with the legal slap a liar. Should I guess from the level of stupidity shown that Tallest Skill is possibly from the perfect USA?
I notice that several people state that there are no "untruth" in the Apple statement. As it pertains to the UK information, it is correct and accurate. The "Untruth" was in the last paragraph where Apple states:"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.".
According to the Bloomberg article " The court’s initial order to post a notice was designed to correct the impression that the South Korean company was copying Apple’s product. Apple’s post, criticized by judges today, inserted four paragraphs including excerpts of the original“cool” ruling and details of similar German lawsuits that the court today said weren’t true."
So someone at Apple wrote the extra paragraph at the end to basically tell the U.K. judges that they are wrong and everyone should disregard what was decided.
Thanks. I think you're cherry-picking though. It's clear that the appeal judges were pretty annoyed that Apple had tried to seek an alternative verdict in Germany after Judge Birss' earlier finding.
Quote: (Point 59)
Further Judge Birss was not sitting as a purely national court. He was sitting as a Community design court, see Arts. 80 and 81 of the Designs Regulation 44/2001. So his declaration of non-infringement was binding throughout the Community. It was not for a national court - particularly one not first seized - to interfere with this Community wide jurisdiction and declaration.
Quote: (Points 79-81)
But of course Apple had been doing and was continuing to do something inconsistent with the declaration of Judge Birss. It had obtained and was keeping in force the order of the Oberlandesgericht. That said the 7.7 could not be sold throughout Europe. Judge Birss's order said it could.
As the matter developed before us through questioning, Apple first offered to apply to the German court to have the effect of its order limited so as expressly not to apply to the UK. It became evident that was not good enough. Judge Birss's order (which at that point was assumed to be correct, we had not yet decided the appeal) applied throughout the EU because he was sitting as a Community Court. So eventually, but only in Lord Grabiner's reply speech, Apple accepted that the German injunction should be discharged altogether and undertook to this court forthwith to apply to the German court for it to be discharged.
How then does all of that affect the decision as to whether or not there should be a publicity order? The grant of such an order is not to punish the party concerned for its behaviour. Nor is it to make it grovel - simply to lose face. The test is whether there is a need to dispel commercial uncertainty.
Legally speaking, how were they wrong? It's easy to say they shouldn't have, but all they did was include factual statements most of which came from the original judge. They weren't instructed not to add anything. They were instructed to make the ruling public in order to clear the air.
If the judges feel Apple was wrong, fine, but back it up with factual reasons. Instead they claim Apple was wrong because the additional info they added was unrtue and incorrect. That argument itself is untrue and incorrect. If a judge has to be dishonest to come to a decision, it probably isn't a good decision.
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.
They posted "the notice" plus four paragraphs of advertorial undermining the notice.
They generalised the results of the US case - which as another post says actually matched the UK's decision on the aspect that the UK's case was about.
You are a judge, you have expectations of behaviour from professional lawyers. What happened is not what was agreed, and judges definitely look down on lawyers and companies that are not following the spirit of the law.
Thanks. I think you're cherry-picking though. It's clear that the appeal judges were pretty annoyed that Apple had tried to seek an alternative verdict in Germany after Judge Birss' earlier finding.
Even with those statements in mind, Apple's notice did exactly what it was intended to do.
Quote:
How then does all of that affect the decision as to whether or not there should be a publicity order? The grant of such an order is not to punish the party concerned for its behaviour. Nor is it to make it grovel - simply to lose face. The test is whether there is a need to dispel commercial uncertainty.
It was explicitly not intended to be an apology but a statement of fact meant to "dispel commercial uncertainty". The example they give is a company looking to purchase phones but might decide against Samsung because of uncertainty regarding the UK case.
Quote:
83. But I have come to the firm conclusion that such an order is necessary now. The decision of the Oberlandesgericht received much publicity. What was the ordinary consumer, or the marketing department of a potential Samsung customer to make of it? On the one hand the media said Samsung had won, on the other the media were saying that Apple had a German Europe-wide injunction. Real commercial uncertainty was thereby created. A consumer might well think "I had better not buy a Samsung - maybe it's illegal and if I buy one it may not be supported". A customer (and I include its legal department) might well wonder whether, if it bought Samsung's 7.7 it might be in trouble before the German courts. Safest thing to do either way is not to buy.
84. Of course our decision fully understood actually lifts the fog that the cloud of litigation concerning the alleged infringement of the Apple registered design by the Samsung Galaxy 10.1, 8.9 and 7.7 tablets must have created. And doubtless the decision will be widely publicised. But media reports now, given the uncertainty created by the conflicting reports of the past, are not enough. Another lot of media reports, reporting more or less accurately that Samsung have not only finally won but been vindicated on appeal may not be enough to disperse all the fog. It is now necessary to make assurance doubly so. Apple itself must (having created the confusion) make the position clear: that it acknowledges that the court has decided that these Samsung products do not infringe its registered design. The acknowledgement must come from the horse's mouth. Nothing short of that will be sure to do the job completely.
Apple's statement very clearly stated the acknowledgement of the courts decision, posting it verbatim as the first paragraph. The next 3 paragraphs further explored the courts ruling. The last paragraph mentioned other ruling. All were factually accurate.
Love it. Some global moderator disagrees with points made so that automatically makes me & anyone else from the UK daring to agree with the legal slap a liar. Should I guess from the level of stupidity shown that Tallest Skill is possibly from the perfect USA?
Don't lower yourself to his level.
How the guy can be a moderator when behaving so insultingly is beyond me.
I quite like the punishment since it's hard to really punish a company that brings in billions in a month in revenue. That said, the judge has failed to be precise in his punishment which allowed for a great deal of interpretation as we're seeing now. Apple followed it exactly but he was too lazy, stupid, or merely didn't think it through and now he says it's not good enough with an implication of that isn't what he meant. Can UK courts actually operate that way? I don't know but I sure hope not.
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.
However as the UK is part of the EU, that was an EU-wide verdict.
...
...
Apple should get a new EU legal team.
The EU has 27 member states with at least 27 different legal systems. I say at least, because one member state, the UK, has three, the legal systems of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Yes, the EU has recommendations (Directives) for principles to be legally implemented by every member nation, but these principles are subject to how they're interpreted and implemented within each member state's laws, hence the need for the European Court of Justice to resolve the inevitable arguments and debates.
Couldn't Apple just refuse? What's the worst that could happen? They'll make the UK angry? Surely they can afford to pull out of that market if it comes to that. It's a fairly small market.
No offense intended to UK customers, but a court demanding a written apology like this is just silly.
They would be found in contempt and heavily fined if not barred from doing any business in the UK.
Apple will appeal. You can count on it. They will pull out the exact wording of the order and show they followed it. That they didn't follow the 'spirit' of the order will be found moot etc.
Apple is too big a company to not have their lawyers up to speed on all of this. They knew what they were doing.
They posted "the notice" plus four paragraphs of advertorial undermining the notice.
They generalised the results of the US case - which as another post says actually matched the UK's decision on the aspect that the UK's case was about.
You are a judge, you have expectations of behaviour from professional lawyers. What happened is not what was agreed, and judges definitely look down on lawyers and companies that are not following the spirit of the law.
They obeyed every aspect of the order against them. Nothing they added was factually inaccurate. In fact 3 of the added paragraphs contained only information from the UK court ruling itself. None of that seems disrespectful. Only the last paragraph is questionable at best and it is also factually accurate. Judges shouldn't feel disrespected by facts. Nor should they let personal feelings of disrespect lead them to making up their own facts, like accusing Apple of making statements that are untrue or incorrect. If they have a bone to pick over being disrespected, say that. That shouldn't not (and should not be allowed) to make libelous, untrue statements in order to support their decision. A court that does that is perhaps not worth of respect.
Comments
the judge should have ordered Apple to prominently display:
[B]Samsung Inside[/B] in 12 point black bold font next to every instance of the word iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I don't recall the court saying anything about that initially. You only see the old trope of "changing the rules as the game is played" in children's (HEY LOOK CHILDREN) programs (programmes) as examples of how not to behave. It's the bad guy doing it.
Actually you see it in Apple's App Store rules as well. Funny, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That you believe the UK judgement is objective right only outlines just how completely wrong you are.
I don't believe anything of the sort, I'm generally pretty apathetic to the Apple vs Samsung squabbles. I do, however, believe judgements should be followed in the spirit of their intent, and that multinational corporations shouldn't be petulant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax
Thanks. The wrinkle is in "He proposed that instead of requiring the notice to be on the web page itself, it would be sufficient if there were a link provided from that to the notice. There are some links already provided. All that need be added is a link entitled "Samsung/Apple UK judgment." I think that would be appropriate and proportionate."
Apple was ordered to put "the notice" on their home page. They argued that they should be able to just link to "the notice" and the appeals court acquieced. They didn't ask to be replace the notice on the home page with a link to a page with the notice plus some editorial stuff. That's where Apple's in the wrong. They just need to delete the other stuff and call it a day. The judge is wrong about the size of the font on the home page of course.
Legally speaking, how were they wrong? It's easy to say they shouldn't have, but all they did was include factual statements most of which came from the original judge. They weren't instructed not to add anything. They were instructed to make the ruling public in order to clear the air.
If the judges feel Apple was wrong, fine, but back it up with factual reasons. Instead they claim Apple was wrong because the additional info they added was unrtue and incorrect. That argument itself is untrue and incorrect. If a judge has to be dishonest to come to a decision, it probably isn't a good decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawkBlade
What they should do is do exactly what the judge states, then under his little thing post, besides the phrase "per court order and court wording", to list all of the other places in the world that Apple is winning judgments in their favor against Sammy for the design. To show that UK is in the minority of siding with Sammy.
UK, Dutch, Japan, S Korea...this can't be minority
I live in the UK, but I'm not British. So I'm maybe not partial in that regard, but hopefully have some insight into how British society works.
I am an Apple fan boy though, and as such I want Apple to make the best of any situation. I'm not sure if they've actually done that in this case - their attitude could bring bad publicity. But it's a quite interesting and significant case anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaramanga89
It looks a shitload better than yours Skil.
We don't have to bring guns to school.
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre
Can we keep the school massacre talk out of the thread please.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
All these new single post signups… all from the UK… and all lying…
Humor.
(Oh, sorry, "humour".)
Love it. Some global moderator disagrees with points made so that automatically makes me & anyone else from the UK daring to agree with the legal slap a liar. Should I guess from the level of stupidity shown that Tallest Skill is possibly from the perfect USA?
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre
Good work Joe, you can use the internet. Did you learn that in the USA or travel abroad for it?
I notice that several people state that there are no "untruth" in the Apple statement. As it pertains to the UK information, it is correct and accurate. The "Untruth" was in the last paragraph where Apple states:"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.".
According to the Bloomberg article " The court’s initial order to post a notice was designed to correct the impression that the South Korean company was copying Apple’s product. Apple’s post, criticized by judges today, inserted four paragraphs including excerpts of the original“cool” ruling and details of similar German lawsuits that the court today said weren’t true."
So someone at Apple wrote the extra paragraph at the end to basically tell the U.K. judges that they are wrong and everyone should disregard what was decided.
I don't understand why the judge should be upset.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html
See #82
Thanks. I think you're cherry-picking though. It's clear that the appeal judges were pretty annoyed that Apple had tried to seek an alternative verdict in Germany after Judge Birss' earlier finding.
Quote: (Point 59)
Further Judge Birss was not sitting as a purely national court. He was sitting as a Community design court, see Arts. 80 and 81 of the Designs Regulation 44/2001. So his declaration of non-infringement was binding throughout the Community. It was not for a national court - particularly one not first seized - to interfere with this Community wide jurisdiction and declaration.
Quote: (Points 79-81)
But of course Apple had been doing and was continuing to do something inconsistent with the declaration of Judge Birss. It had obtained and was keeping in force the order of the Oberlandesgericht. That said the 7.7 could not be sold throughout Europe. Judge Birss's order said it could.
As the matter developed before us through questioning, Apple first offered to apply to the German court to have the effect of its order limited so as expressly not to apply to the UK. It became evident that was not good enough. Judge Birss's order (which at that point was assumed to be correct, we had not yet decided the appeal) applied throughout the EU because he was sitting as a Community Court. So eventually, but only in Lord Grabiner's reply speech, Apple accepted that the German injunction should be discharged altogether and undertook to this court forthwith to apply to the German court for it to be discharged.
How then does all of that affect the decision as to whether or not there should be a publicity order? The grant of such an order is not to punish the party concerned for its behaviour. Nor is it to make it grovel - simply to lose face. The test is whether there is a need to dispel commercial uncertainty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
Legally speaking, how were they wrong? It's easy to say they shouldn't have, but all they did was include factual statements most of which came from the original judge. They weren't instructed not to add anything. They were instructed to make the ruling public in order to clear the air.
If the judges feel Apple was wrong, fine, but back it up with factual reasons. Instead they claim Apple was wrong because the additional info they added was unrtue and incorrect. That argument itself is untrue and incorrect. If a judge has to be dishonest to come to a decision, it probably isn't a good decision.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
How?
They said they would post "the notice".
They posted "the notice" plus four paragraphs of advertorial undermining the notice.
They generalised the results of the US case - which as another post says actually matched the UK's decision on the aspect that the UK's case was about.
You are a judge, you have expectations of behaviour from professional lawyers. What happened is not what was agreed, and judges definitely look down on lawyers and companies that are not following the spirit of the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by webweasel
Thanks. I think you're cherry-picking though. It's clear that the appeal judges were pretty annoyed that Apple had tried to seek an alternative verdict in Germany after Judge Birss' earlier finding.
Even with those statements in mind, Apple's notice did exactly what it was intended to do.
Quote:
How then does all of that affect the decision as to whether or not there should be a publicity order? The grant of such an order is not to punish the party concerned for its behaviour. Nor is it to make it grovel - simply to lose face. The test is whether there is a need to dispel commercial uncertainty.
It was explicitly not intended to be an apology but a statement of fact meant to "dispel commercial uncertainty". The example they give is a company looking to purchase phones but might decide against Samsung because of uncertainty regarding the UK case.
Quote:
83. But I have come to the firm conclusion that such an order is necessary now. The decision of the Oberlandesgericht received much publicity. What was the ordinary consumer, or the marketing department of a potential Samsung customer to make of it? On the one hand the media said Samsung had won, on the other the media were saying that Apple had a German Europe-wide injunction. Real commercial uncertainty was thereby created. A consumer might well think "I had better not buy a Samsung - maybe it's illegal and if I buy one it may not be supported". A customer (and I include its legal department) might well wonder whether, if it bought Samsung's 7.7 it might be in trouble before the German courts. Safest thing to do either way is not to buy.
84. Of course our decision fully understood actually lifts the fog that the cloud of litigation concerning the alleged infringement of the Apple registered design by the Samsung Galaxy 10.1, 8.9 and 7.7 tablets must have created. And doubtless the decision will be widely publicised. But media reports now, given the uncertainty created by the conflicting reports of the past, are not enough. Another lot of media reports, reporting more or less accurately that Samsung have not only finally won but been vindicated on appeal may not be enough to disperse all the fog. It is now necessary to make assurance doubly so. Apple itself must (having created the confusion) make the position clear: that it acknowledges that the court has decided that these Samsung products do not infringe its registered design. The acknowledgement must come from the horse's mouth. Nothing short of that will be sure to do the job completely.
Apple's statement very clearly stated the acknowledgement of the courts decision, posting it verbatim as the first paragraph. The next 3 paragraphs further explored the courts ruling. The last paragraph mentioned other ruling. All were factually accurate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatever71
Love it. Some global moderator disagrees with points made so that automatically makes me & anyone else from the UK daring to agree with the legal slap a liar. Should I guess from the level of stupidity shown that Tallest Skill is possibly from the perfect USA?
Don't lower yourself to his level.
How the guy can be a moderator when behaving so insultingly is beyond me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I quite like the punishment since it's hard to really punish a company that brings in billions in a month in revenue. That said, the judge has failed to be precise in his punishment which allowed for a great deal of interpretation as we're seeing now. Apple followed it exactly but he was too lazy, stupid, or merely didn't think it through and now he says it's not good enough with an implication of that isn't what he meant. Can UK courts actually operate that way? I don't know but I sure hope not.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by webweasel
However as the UK is part of the EU, that was an EU-wide verdict.
...
...
Apple should get a new EU legal team.
The EU has 27 member states with at least 27 different legal systems. I say at least, because one member state, the UK, has three, the legal systems of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Yes, the EU has recommendations (Directives) for principles to be legally implemented by every member nation, but these principles are subject to how they're interpreted and implemented within each member state's laws, hence the need for the European Court of Justice to resolve the inevitable arguments and debates.
They would be found in contempt and heavily fined if not barred from doing any business in the UK.
Apple will appeal. You can count on it. They will pull out the exact wording of the order and show they followed it. That they didn't follow the 'spirit' of the order will be found moot etc.
Apple is too big a company to not have their lawyers up to speed on all of this. They knew what they were doing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig
They said they would post "the notice".
They posted "the notice" plus four paragraphs of advertorial undermining the notice.
They generalised the results of the US case - which as another post says actually matched the UK's decision on the aspect that the UK's case was about.
You are a judge, you have expectations of behaviour from professional lawyers. What happened is not what was agreed, and judges definitely look down on lawyers and companies that are not following the spirit of the law.
They obeyed every aspect of the order against them. Nothing they added was factually inaccurate. In fact 3 of the added paragraphs contained only information from the UK court ruling itself. None of that seems disrespectful. Only the last paragraph is questionable at best and it is also factually accurate. Judges shouldn't feel disrespected by facts. Nor should they let personal feelings of disrespect lead them to making up their own facts, like accusing Apple of making statements that are untrue or incorrect. If they have a bone to pick over being disrespected, say that. That shouldn't not (and should not be allowed) to make libelous, untrue statements in order to support their decision. A court that does that is perhaps not worth of respect.
Quote:
It's not contempt of court. Apple has followed every instructions to the tee.
I was right. It was contempt of court. lol