The British legal establishment just proved how backward thinking it is to the world.
You live in a country (judging by your spelling) that executes the mentally ill. I don't think you're in any position to judge a foreign legal system as "backward".
Says nothing about copying. Says they didn't infringe. AGAIN. Get the titles right.
In fact - you have got it wrong. The case was NOT about copying but infringement of a drawn design. Look carefully at the wording of the apology. The case was NOT about whether Samsung copied the iPad itself. Instead, Apple was claiming that Samsung had infringed a particular registered design. The court made clear that the iPad itself may not have been the same as the registered design.
3. Because this case (and parallel cases in other countries) has generated much publicity, it will avoid confusion to say what this case is about and not about. It is not about whether Samsung copied Apple’s iPad. Infringement of a registered design does not involve any question of whether there was copying: the issue is simply whether the accused design is too close to the registered design according to the tests laid down in the law. Whether or not Apple could have sued in England and Wales for copying is utterly irrelevant to this case. If they could, they did not. Likewise there is no issue about infringement of any patent for an invention.
4. So this case is all about, and only about, Apple’s registered design and the Samsung products. The registered design is not the same as the design of the iPad. It is quite a lot different. For instance the iPad is a lot thinner, and has noticeably different curves on its sides. There may be other differences – even though I own one, I have not made a detailed comparison. Whether the iPad would fall within the scope of protection of the registered design is completely irrelevant. We are not deciding that one way or the other. This case must be decided as if the iPad never existed.
5. Other disputes between the parties in other countries have concerned other intellectual property rights. We are not concerned with any of them.
Yes obviously Ive has nothing to do with it...I was just saying that it is a shame that the UK court does not recognize the Apple IP related to the iPad which is designed by Brit.
The case was not concerned with intellectual property - as the judgment said from the Court of Appeal. Look immediately above.
The funniest part? Apple added javascript to their page that ensures, no matter what screen size or resolution you are using, the link and the text on the main page will be below the bottom of your display. You are forced to scroll if you want to see it. Genuis.
At this point, I whole heartedly applaud Apple giving the UK courts the finger, high and proud. For anyone that thinks Apple is being childish, I say they are responding to the court in kind. The order was immature and unreasonable. The response has been ingeniously alike in that regard. I look forward to the courts response. What are they going to do? Order Apple to apologize?
The funniest part? Apple added javascript to their page that ensures, no matter what screen size or resolution you are using, the link and the text on the main page will be below the bottom of your display. You are forced to scroll if you want to see it. Genuis.
At this point, I whole heartedly applaud Apple giving the UK courts the finger, high and proud. For anyone that thinks Apple is being childish, I say they are responding to the court in kind. The order was immature and unreasonable. The response has been ingeniously alike in that regard. I look forward to the courts response. What are they going to do? Order Apple to apologize?
Assuming is was done intentionally to hide the notice I don't look at it as childish at all, nor really something unexpected. Florian Mueller has a different word to describe how another judge might be viewing them when things don't go Apple's way.
Just my personal and completely unimportant opinion but I don't consider it a well thought out move by Apple considering the number of on-going actions they have in other courts and the likelihood of other judges in other courts being aware of how they're handling an unfavorable but not terribly important court decree. The more they drag this out the more Apple keeps it in the news, and the more attention they get. With that said I'm sure Apple has deep enough pockets that they don't need to be very concerned with some court now or later being irritated with them. They're too rich and powerful to be worried.
As useless as unarmed UK bobbies. "Stop or I'll say stop again! And I'll mean it this time!"
Lol!
You are so right. The Yanks have produced such an enviable justice system supported by the brightest, most intelligent police force to become the envy of the world.
The rest of the world models itself on your justice system, your police force, and your favourite sport.
Way to go, rednecks! Keep us inspired, cowboy! Lead the way... Er... On your own.
Well, because Apple did exactly what they were told to do, word for word, and they were made to type it again, identically, because the judge thinks he can do that.
So when is Samsung posting on their website [B]"We have been found guilty by US courts of copying Apple. We copied a lot of stuff from Apple and now we've been caught. Sorry."[/B]
This is the absurdity if being found guilty in one country, and not guilty in another. Samsung having to post this on their site would highlight the studitiy of the UK Courts actions.
I thought apple told the judge that it would take weeks to post this on their website due to technical reasons? I wonder why they lied about that to the judge.
You are so right. The Yanks have produced such an enviable justice system supported by the brightest, most intelligent police force to become the envy of the world.
The rest of the world models itself on your justice system, your police force, and your favourite sport.
Way to go, rednecks! Keep us inspired, cowboy! Lead the way... Er... On your own.
I'm not American, but I'm not so daft to not see the humour in Britain's "police force". Just as I see the comedy of their court system today.
Comments
denial ad nauseum
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
$1 billion awarded to Apple…
That's the "frivolous" bit, yep.
Originally Posted by Zod Buster
world's richest company.. very expensive lawyers, ,and they have to do it again.??????.
They "redid" it by posting the exact same thing they had before.
Originally Posted by Zod Buster
denial ad nauseum
Denial of what? That Samsung copied? I'm seeing that from all manner of fandroid, yes. Apple's not saying that, though.
You live in a country (judging by your spelling) that executes the mentally ill. I don't think you're in any position to judge a foreign legal system as "backward".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zod Buster
denial ad nauseum
ad nauseam
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Says nothing about copying. Says they didn't infringe. AGAIN. Get the titles right.
In fact - you have got it wrong. The case was NOT about copying but infringement of a drawn design. Look carefully at the wording of the apology. The case was NOT about whether Samsung copied the iPad itself. Instead, Apple was claiming that Samsung had infringed a particular registered design. The court made clear that the iPad itself may not have been the same as the registered design.
They Court of Appeal said this, the judgment is at http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html:
3. Because this case (and parallel cases in other countries) has generated much publicity, it will avoid confusion to say what this case is about and not about. It is not about whether Samsung copied Apple’s iPad. Infringement of a registered design does not involve any question of whether there was copying: the issue is simply whether the accused design is too close to the registered design according to the tests laid down in the law. Whether or not Apple could have sued in England and Wales for copying is utterly irrelevant to this case. If they could, they did not. Likewise there is no issue about infringement of any patent for an invention.
4. So this case is all about, and only about, Apple’s registered design and the Samsung products. The registered design is not the same as the design of the iPad. It is quite a lot different. For instance the iPad is a lot thinner, and has noticeably different curves on its sides. There may be other differences – even though I own one, I have not made a detailed comparison. Whether the iPad would fall within the scope of protection of the registered design is completely irrelevant. We are not deciding that one way or the other. This case must be decided as if the iPad never existed.
5. Other disputes between the parties in other countries have concerned other intellectual property rights. We are not concerned with any of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant
Yes obviously Ive has nothing to do with it...I was just saying that it is a shame that the UK court does not recognize the Apple IP related to the iPad which is designed by Brit.
The case was not concerned with intellectual property - as the judgment said from the Court of Appeal. Look immediately above.
Originally Posted by de Villiers
In fact - you have got it wrong. The case was NOT about copying but infringement of a drawn design.
Sounds like that's exactly what I'm saying.
The funniest part? Apple added javascript to their page that ensures, no matter what screen size or resolution you are using, the link and the text on the main page will be below the bottom of your display. You are forced to scroll if you want to see it. Genuis.
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/11/03/apple-hides-samsung-apology-on-its-uk-site-so-it-cant-be-seen-without-scrolling/
At this point, I whole heartedly applaud Apple giving the UK courts the finger, high and proud. For anyone that thinks Apple is being childish, I say they are responding to the court in kind. The order was immature and unreasonable. The response has been ingeniously alike in that regard. I look forward to the courts response. What are they going to do? Order Apple to apologize?
Originally Posted by Tulkas
I look forward to the courts response. What are they going to do? Order Apple to apologize?
They'll certainly try.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
They'll certainly try.
As useless as unarmed UK bobbies. "Stop or I'll say stop again! And I'll mean it this time!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
The funniest part? Apple added javascript to their page that ensures, no matter what screen size or resolution you are using, the link and the text on the main page will be below the bottom of your display. You are forced to scroll if you want to see it. Genuis.
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/11/03/apple-hides-samsung-apology-on-its-uk-site-so-it-cant-be-seen-without-scrolling/
At this point, I whole heartedly applaud Apple giving the UK courts the finger, high and proud. For anyone that thinks Apple is being childish, I say they are responding to the court in kind. The order was immature and unreasonable. The response has been ingeniously alike in that regard. I look forward to the courts response. What are they going to do? Order Apple to apologize?
Assuming is was done intentionally to hide the notice I don't look at it as childish at all, nor really something unexpected. Florian Mueller has a different word to describe how another judge might be viewing them when things don't go Apple's way.
Just my personal and completely unimportant opinion but I don't consider it a well thought out move by Apple considering the number of on-going actions they have in other courts and the likelihood of other judges in other courts being aware of how they're handling an unfavorable but not terribly important court decree. The more they drag this out the more Apple keeps it in the news, and the more attention they get. With that said I'm sure Apple has deep enough pockets that they don't need to be very concerned with some court now or later being irritated with them. They're too rich and powerful to be worried.
You are so right. The Yanks have produced such an enviable justice system supported by the brightest, most intelligent police force to become the envy of the world.
The rest of the world models itself on your justice system, your police force, and your favourite sport.
Way to go, rednecks! Keep us inspired, cowboy! Lead the way... Er... On your own.
Originally Posted by Custer
How do you know they will try?
Well, because Apple did exactly what they were told to do, word for word, and they were made to type it again, identically, because the judge thinks he can do that.
Originally Posted by Custer
Which is what, exactly?
… Are you reading before posting?
This is the absurdity if being found guilty in one country, and not guilty in another. Samsung having to post this on their site would highlight the studitiy of the UK Courts actions.
I thought apple told the judge that it would take weeks to post this on their website due to technical reasons? I wonder why they lied about that to the judge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Custer
Lol!
You are so right. The Yanks have produced such an enviable justice system supported by the brightest, most intelligent police force to become the envy of the world.
The rest of the world models itself on your justice system, your police force, and your favourite sport.
Way to go, rednecks! Keep us inspired, cowboy! Lead the way... Er... On your own.
I'm not American, but I'm not so daft to not see the humour in Britain's "police force". Just as I see the comedy of their court system today.
I doubt it.