Obviously, you've made an assumption about what I have read, and what I wrote to the judge. Nothing else is obvious, besides perhaps the glaring flaws in your logic, and the baselessness of you "harassing" me. I simply gave the option for folks on both sides of the discussion to contact the judge with comments, which seems to have stuck in your craw. Until you can be bothered to take your own advice, I don't foresee this debate picking up much steam.
You're certainly welcome to prove my assumption wrong by answering what I asked you: What flaws in legal reasoning do you see in Judge Birss publish order, or the subsequent Appeals Court rulings generally supporting him? Further why do you think Apple was 100% correct in their original publish statements considering the court's comments on why Apple's statements were wrong?
I'm suggesting you personally can't make a reasoned argument opposing the court's stance, partly because I don't believe you know what the court's stance is, having not read the orders and their supporting detail for yourself. So far you've shown no evidence of having read any of them. Be the exception and prove me wrong.
They pay what they have to pay because, unlike you, they have brains. It's legal, they are right.
And I can bet that you never used an Apple product before. Hell... Are you even twenty? Are you ashamed of what? Since when can a public company make someone feel ashamed (besides Samsung)? You are just a no-life troll. End of it.
Who here wants to bet that this "droid" was someone else a few days ago?
Stop acting like pathetic douchebag, running around and trying to insult people. Please. You are for sure better than that.
Apple replaced functioning apps with an inferior one because Steve Jobs wanted to 'go thermonuclear against Google' at the expense of users. Apple ditched MobileMe & made iCloud the only option, but it doesn't work on older devices even with a lesser level of integration. It does however work on ancient Windows versions.
Turn by turn is the superior facet of Maps, which Google did not want to provide.
You can still access the "superior" maps, complete with their own flaws i.e. incapability of giving voice directions via Safari.
Google is the new "Microsoft", embrace, extend, extinguish is what they took from 90's Microsoft, just ask Skyhook for one example out of dozens of discarded projects.
Just as Microsoft wanted to be on every desktop, Google wants to be involved in every facet of web use, watching, gathering, selling, advertising, they want absolute control.
Apple don't, you can buy anything you want, you have that choice, Google proved they don't want people to have a choice when they deliberately overrode Safari's security settings to lie to people and the government about complying with opt out orders.
It is becoming apparent that attacking judiciaries also attacks the country of the said judge. iDevices are world wide and are really best served by not being marginalised.
Europe is not a country, these UK judges are acting as a "Community court".
I am not sure what to think about all this. While I understand that the judges were upset with the original notice, it seems that this has become personal for them with their statements about Apple's 'integrity'.
Reading UK papers which reflect widespread anti-Apple sentiment, one would wonder how the UK could remain a prime market for Apple. Perhaps we are seeing the more sensationalist views.
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity"
You're certainly welcome to prove my assumption wrong by answering what I asked you: What flaws in legal reasoning do you see in Judge Birss publish order, or the subsequent Appeals Court rulings generally supporting him? Further why do you think Apple was 100% correct in their original publish statements considering the court's comments on why Apple's statements were wrong?
I'm suggesting you personally can't make a reasoned argument opposing the court's stance, partly because I don't believe you know what the court's stance is, having not read the orders and their supporting detail for yourself. So far you've shown no evidence of having read any of them. Be the exception and prove me wrong.
You've presented no evidence that I haven't. Your bullish posts are a means to prop up your own self-righteous sentiments about how well-adjusted folks ought to behave.
I'll spend a few minutes debunking your crackpot-ness though Ironic that it is you and JeffDM who have not only misused the word harass, but are the ones actually doing such. Here goes —
(a) "Regarding the same patent." No patent of any kind has been involved in Germany or here, still less "the same patent."
patent: agovernmentauthoritytoan individual or organization conferring a right or title, esp. the solerighttomake, use, or sell some invention
Note: the definition says especially, not exclusively. If the courts can use ambiguous or manipulative language, I don't see why Apple shouldn't be allowed to do the same, other than some judges' sore egos.
"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'," Sir Robin said.
To me, a product not being as cool as another is hardly grounds to base its legality on, which is what the court in fact did. So in essence, these products may actually be illegal when viewed by individuals who are not out of touch with the era and field in which the products exist in. If the court wishes to backpedal and explain that the actual physical products are immaterial in this matter, than Birss should be careful to not mention the physical products whatsoever in his ruling, as that is a conflict in logic to begin with.
So, by establishing that both Apple and the court are guilty of the same tactics, we can see that what we are really speaking to is a case of semantics. Apple managed to speak truthfully, citing examples given by the UK court, while also highlighting the absurdity of the decision. If the judges wish for Apple to conduct itself in such a prim and proper manner, then they should be expected to adhere to the same level of professionalism and expertise when making a ruling such as this one. Further, if Apple is at fault in their "omission" of information from their statement, than the court is also equally at fault for their omission of more exacting guidelines for the statement to begin with. Again, I am asking for a little bit of consistency in logic across the board. It appears to me, and other savvy onlookers, that the judges were at best out of their depth, if not corrupted or biased, and Apple played that up, because they sincerely believe that Samsung stole their hard work. It is also a ridiculous punishment to begin with, and if you want to talk about misleading remarks, see Sir Robin's ridiculous statement above. No reasonable person is going to assume that Samsung is somehow illegally selling tablets in such an over-regulated country.
What really happened here is that Apple did in fact comply, but was able to outwit the judges in the process. I've never been one to hold much respect for bullies, so I can't say that Apple's original statement offended me. In fact, I thought it was a brilliant way to make some lemonade. Sadly, absolute power corrupts, and the courts brandish it like a child swinging a broad sword.
You may philosophically disagree with me, but again, I'd like to see you take your own advice and demonstrate why I should even bother to explain myself to you, given the utter lack of respect you've shown here today. Even if my understanding of the case is ignorant, you should remember that my only intent today was to give users an avenue to express their dissatisfaction with the rulings. Why that perturbs you to such an extent is beyond me, but all of the pompous chest beating in the world isn't going to sway me in the least.
You've presented no evidence that I haven't. Your bullish posts are a means to prop up your own self-righteous sentiments about how well-adjusted folks ought to behave.
I'll spend a few minutes debunking your crackpot-ness though Ironic that it is you and JeffDM who have not only misused the word harass, but are the ones actually doing such. Here goes —
(a) "Regarding the same patent." No patent of any kind has been involved in Germany or here, still less "the same patent."
patent: a government authority to an individual or organization conferring a right or title, esp. the sole right to make, use, or sell some invention
Note: the definition says especially, not exclusively. If the courts can use ambiguous or manipulative language, I don't see why Apple shouldn't be allowed to do the same, other than some judges' sore egos.
"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'," Sir Robin said.
To me, a product not being as cool as another is hardly grounds to base its legality on, which is what the court in fact did. So in essence, these products may actually be illegal when viewed by individuals who are not out of touch with the era and field in which the products exist in. If the court wishes to backpedal and explain that the actual physical products are immaterial in this matter, than Birss should be careful to not mention the physical products whatsoever in his ruling, as that is a conflict in logic to begin with.
So, by establishing that both Apple and the court are guilty of the same tactics, we can see that what we are really speaking to is a case of semantics. Apple managed to speak truthfully, citing examples given by the UK court, while also highlighting the absurdity of the decision. If the judges wish for Apple to conduct itself in such a prim and proper manner, then they should be expected to adhere to the same level of professionalism and expertise when making a ruling such as this one. Further, if Apple is at fault in their "omission" of information from their statement, than the court is also equally at fault for their omission of more exacting guidelines for the statement to begin with. Again, I am asking for a little bit of consistency in logic across the board. It appears to me, and other savvy onlookers, that the judges were at best out of their depth, if not corrupted or biased, and Apple played that up, because they sincerely believe that Samsung stole their hard work. It is also a ridiculous punishment to begin with, and if you want to talk about misleading remarks, see Sir Robin's ridiculous statement above. No reasonable person is going to assume that Samsung is somehow illegally selling tablets in such an over-regulated country.
What really happened here is that Apple did in fact comply, but was able to outwit the judges in the process. I've never been one to hold much respect for bullies, so I can't say that Apple's original statement offended me. In fact, I thought it was a brilliant way to make some lemonade. Sadly, absolute power corrupts, and the courts brandish it like a child swinging a broad sword.
You may philosophically disagree with me, but again, I'd like to see you take your own advice and demonstrate why I should even bother to explain myself to you, given the utter lack of respect you've shown here today. Even if my understanding of the case is ignorant, you should remember that my only intent today was to give users an avenue to express their dissatisfaction with the rulings. Why that perturbs you to such an extent is beyond me, but all of the pompous chest beating in the world isn't going to sway me in the least.
The court found the added content to be false and sought to "undermine the intent" of the order, specifically citing a quote from Judge Birss regarding the distinctive nature of Apple products, saying it was taken out of context and "foster[ed] the false notion that the case was about the iPad."
I'm still not clear on the intent they keep talking about. They have said on numerous occasions that the case is not about the iPad, it is about the patent, which doesn't look like the iPad but why force Apple to advertise about that?
What exactly is the point in making it clear to the public that Samsung hasn't infringed on a design patent that looks nothing like the iPad and that the public have not been aware of? It seems clear to me that they are trying to create a damaging impression that Samsung hasn't wilfully copied the iPad design. The media is not restricting their reporting to be about the patent:
"Samsung Galaxy Tab 'does not copy Apple's iPad designs'"
"Apple ordered to run Samsung 'did not copy iPad' adverts"
"Apple website publishes 'Samsung did not copy iPad' statement"
That's not what the court case decided and it looks like these headlines are the true intent of the ruling, which is false and damaging. Apple has tried to create the impression that Samsung copied the iPad, which Samsung did. Anybody can see that. At no point did Apple try to convince the public that Samsung copied the patent so the public were under no false impression about the patent so the advertisements are not justified.
If it's possible to do, Apple should take action against these judges because they haven't justified their reasons for forcing the advertisements. They haven't at any point in time shown that the public were even aware of this patent let alone confused by it. Either these judges are taking it personally or want the publicity but it's distasteful that Apple is made to suffer for it despite being the victim here.
I'd like to see a company do the same to Samsung. C'mon Amazon, just call the Kindle Fire the Kindle Galaxy and design it exactly the same except for the back and undercut them in price. Then we'll see who innovates instead of litigates.
At the very least, Apple should ask the court 2 simple questions:
1. What was the intent of the ruling?
The answer will be that it was to clarify to the public that Samsung doesn't infringe on their patent. So then they should ask:
2. What evidence is there to suggest that the public at large was aware of the patent and confused about whether or not Samsung's product infringed on it?
There is no evidence for this and Apple never advertised the patent so this will show they had no justification for the ruling. Then they can hopefully take action against them.
You may philosophically disagree with me, but again, I'd like to see you take your own advice and demonstrate why I should even bother to explain myself to you, given the utter lack of respect you've shown here today. Even if my understanding of the case is ignorant, you should remember that my only intent today was to give users an avenue to express their dissatisfaction with the rulings. Why that perturbs you to such an extent is beyond me, but all of the pompous chest beating in the world isn't going to sway me in the least.
Good to see that you've at minimum taken a cursory glance at the court's reasoning. So I'm wrong. You have put some thought into it.
I'm still not clear on the intent they keep talking about. They have said on numerous occasions that the case is not about the iPad, it is about the patent, which doesn't look like the iPad but why force Apple to advertise about that?
What exactly is the point in making it clear to the public that Samsung hasn't infringed on a design patent that looks nothing like the iPad and that the public have not been aware of? It seems clear to me that they are trying to create a damaging impression that Samsung hasn't wilfully copied the iPad design. The media is not restricting their reporting to be about the patent:
"Samsung Galaxy Tab 'does not copy Apple's iPad designs'"
"Apple ordered to run Samsung 'did not copy iPad' adverts"
"Apple website publishes 'Samsung did not copy iPad' statement"
That's not what the court case decided and it looks like these headlines are the true intent of the ruling, which is false and damaging. Apple has tried to create the impression that Samsung copied the iPad, which Samsung did. Anybody can see that. At no point did Apple try to convince the public that Samsung copied the patent so the public were under no false impression about the patent so the advertisements are not justified.
If it's possible to do, Apple should take action against these judges because they haven't justified their reasons for forcing the advertisements. They haven't at any point in time shown that the public were even aware of this patent let alone confused by it. Either these judges are taking it personally or want the publicity but it's distasteful that Apple is made to suffer for it despite being the victim here.
I'd like to see a company do the same to Samsung. C'mon Amazon, just call the Kindle Fire the Kindle Galaxy and design it exactly the same except for the back and undercut them in price. Then we'll see who innovates instead of litigates.
At the very least, Apple should ask the court 2 simple questions:
1. What was the intent of the ruling?
The answer will be that it was to clarify to the public that Samsung doesn't infringe on their patent. So then they should ask:
2. What evidence is there to suggest that the public at large was aware of the patent and confused about whether or not Samsung's product infringed on it?
There is no evidence for this and Apple never advertised the patent so this will show they had no justification for the ruling. Then they can hopefully take action against them.
Marvin,
Your repeated use of the word patent suggests you haven't read the rulings. It is actually a 'community design registration' which is different to a patent. There is no "iPad patent" as far as I know. The rulings are worth the time it takes to read, as are post #15, post #22 on here and there is a really clear post in timeline format on Mac Rumors (floating like a beacon amidst a sea of trolls)…
Your 2 questions become irrelevant when you consider Apple had been publicly making statements that said Samsung's devices were infringing Apple's intellectual property. The case was instigated by Samsung to stop Apple doing this. Apple have been spreading the idea that Samsung's products could be pulled from the market any day & may in fact be illegal clones /ripoffs (as happened in Germany, but not for the registered community design discussed in this case).
Apple could try taking even more action against this court decision but since this is judgement is effective across the entire European Union it could face having it's products banned from sale (or other sanctions) across a region that makes up a significant part of it's income. I think the UK alone is 2nd or 3rd in profit by country.
(An aside: this is part of the reason Apples 'double Dutch with an Irish sandwich' Tax dodging scheme bugs me).
Samsung won this case back in June, Apple appealed & lost and continued to make public statements claiming Samsung had copied & infringed their IP, despite losing the case which was intended to clarify that Samsung didn't infringe Apple's IP. The court brought Apple back in after Samsung raised the matter again.
Apple was then ordered to put the notification of the ruling on it's site & pay to advertise in the UK press with the intent of clarifying Samsung haven't been found to infringe the community design. The ruling on the 9/11/12 breaks down the issue concisely, Apple put up 5 paragraphs of text linked from the homepage, parts of the text was from the court but the majority was composed by Apple from the judges comments & other patent disputes around the world. Apple added the irrelevant nonsense about the iPad patent victory in the US & the ban on Galaxies in Germany, it was never in the court's intent to include the iPad - The iPad was not part of this court case. The additions to the notification by Apple were later found to contain 'false innuendo', be 'misleading by omission' and was 'calculated to produce huge confusion'.
Your post makes it clear Apples last tactic worked incredibly well :^)
Maybe the Reality Distortion Field is back from beyond the grave, Apple are still bending facts to convey their own version of events …hmm I miss Steve.
With regard to the press releases you cited. The media have got things wrong too, it's hardly surprising when you step back & look at all the spin that has been added to this case - it was NEVER about the iPad or about patents, even Apple knew the iPad design wasn't close enough to the registered community design, I don't think they used any iPad as evidence in this case (the June or October court notes will indicate if I'm recalling correctly).
Back in June Apple could have simply said 'we disagree and will appeal the ruling and pursue the intellectual property issues with other cases', instead it kept digging a hole by making the same 'Samsung copied us' statements.
Apple are now being penalised (costs with indemnity) because they have effectively wasted the court time by not following the instructions, being slow to release the newspaper/ magazine advertisements and continuing to spread F.U.D. about Samsung's products. They made a mockery of the courts intent with the notification, added childish javascript to push the notification off the bottom of the homepage (this doesn't seem to be mentioned in the judgement so maybe it was to hide it for a few hours after the change). Apple claimed that it would take 14 days to change the notification text on the server, the judges gave them 48 hours or Apple could bring in a 'note from mom' explaining why it was so hard to make the change. The judge even pointed out Apples lack of integrity in dealing with this issue.
It is difficult to understand the case until you start to consider that Apple actually have been manipulative, devious and downright childish.
It is very easy to see design similarities between Apple & Samsung devices, but actually proving that in a court is another matter.
If you are a moderator you should at least have an understanding of the case, sometimes people who sound like rabid Apple haters are actually sane and telling the truth
Your repeated use of the word patent suggests you haven't read the rulings. It is actually a 'community design registration' which is different to a patent.
It's commonly referred to as a design patent, even in the ruling:
Apple added the irrelevant nonsense about the iPad patent victory in the US & the ban on Galaxies in Germany, it was never in the court's intent to include the iPad - The iPad was not part of this court case.
With regard to the press releases you cited. The media have got things wrong too, it's hardly surprising when you step back & look at all the spin that has been added to this case - it was NEVER about the iPad or about patents, even Apple knew the iPad design wasn't close enough to the registered community design, I don't think they used any iPad as evidence in this case (the June or October court notes will indicate if I'm recalling correctly).
That's why it's confusing when they are now claiming it has nothing to do with the iPad.
- if it's not about the iPad, why was it compared to the Galaxy Tab and why does there need to be a clarification to the public about the design patent when Apple claims the iPad is being copied?
- if it is about the iPad, there's no justification for the advertising because that court case didn't find that Samsung didn't copy the iPad, it only found it didn't infringe on the design patent.
It is difficult to understand the case until you start to consider that Apple actually have been manipulative, devious and downright childish.
It is very easy to see design similarities between Apple & Samsung devices, but actually proving that in a court is another matter.
In a US court, documents were found showing that Samsung had painstakingly gone through every detail in Apple's products with the intention of modifying their products to liken them to Apple's.
You can say Apple is being manipulative, devious and childish but in making the ruling, the judges have been too. They are forcing Apple to advertise about the design patent but knew exactly how it would be received by the press who have gone beyond that to claim the Galaxy Tab doesn't copy the iPad.
"Apple did not contend that either of its famous iPad products should be used as concrete examples of the Apple design. Neither the original iPad nor the iPad 2 are identical to the design. Whether either of them is or is not within the scope of protection would be a matter of debate. To use either as an example of the Apple design would be to beg the question of the true scope of Apple's rights."
Apple were not in court to talk about the iPad & it wasn't used as evidence, but when they left court they were still saying Samsung copied their design for the iPad, which was in opposition to the verdict. Apple could have said Samsung infringed other IP at this time.
"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."
"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."
Read points 23 & 24 of the final ruling discussing Apple's first statement version on Apples site…
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.
That is misleading by omission. For the US jury specifically rejected Apple's claim that the US design patent corresponding to the Community Design in issue here was infringed. The average reader would think that the UK decision was at odds with that in the US. Far from that being so, it was in accordance with it. "
"The third sentence reads:
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 wilfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.
This is calculated to produce huge confusion. The false innuendo is that the UK court came to a different conclusion about copying, which is not true for the UK court did not form any view about copying. There is a further false innuendo that the UK court's decision is at odds with decisions in other countries whereas that is simply not true."
The 'design patent' aka 'registered community design' was also lost by Apple in the states, but they did win with the other patent issues, so you are incorrect stating…
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
And rightly so because Samsung have been found guilty of it.
Samsung have been found guilty of OTHER infringements, but not this design patent.
Points 17 & 20 of the same document highlights that the registered design was not like the iPad, Apple were defending the images in Annex A
The design looks remarkably like a ModBookPro to my eyes.
The requirement to display the statement is not an advertisement as you say. It is just a statement of fact the current page on http://www.apple.com/uk/legal-judgement isn't an advertisement, Apple is simply being forced to display that the case happened & to acknowledge the fact that there is no injunction in the EU for that registered community design.
Apple could have opted to announce the statement on the news or display it in various UK based magazines & newspapers. It is intended to remove the doubt that Apple have been sowing by making consumers think Samsung's product could disappear soon. The UK & EU law doesn't agree.
The Guardian are usually accurate (unless you ask where Tel Aviv is - see Wikipedia :^) ) but since no media reports have clarified that the case is not actually about the iPad, but about a drawing that looks a bit like an iPad I'm having a hard time believing them. There reporting does not tie in well with the court records.
Primary, secondary, tertiary… who you gonna believe?
I suspect this won't convince you anyway, but I'm weirdly fascinated by this car crash of a case. It could have been over several months ago, it makes me wonder if the Apple board overruled the lawyers & took too much control from the people who new how to handle it.
The lawyers would understand the EU courts mean business when the same court has the power to stop companies selling products? Apple just took so long to realise that one fact, which is why the website & press statement looks like it is forcing someone to wear a dunces cap. They were really left with not many other options, when Apple got that statement wrong though they get handed the bill as well.
I thought it was normal practice for the looser of a law suite to pay for all legal fees. Hmm maybe that's just the US. I just want this silly thing to be over.
Apple were not in court to talk about the iPad & it wasn't used as evidence, but when they left court they were still saying Samsung copied their design for the iPad, which was in opposition to the verdict.
How could saying that Samsung copied the iPad oppose the verdict when the case had nothing to do with the iPad? Unless it really did and the judges are lying about it to cover their true motives.
"the US jury specifically rejected Apple's claim that the US design patent corresponding to the Community Design in issue here was infringed. The average reader would think that the UK decision was at odds with that in the US. Far from that being so, it was in accordance with it."
I can partly agree with this as Apple didn't specify that it was 'other patents' but nothing they put in their original statement was false and no more misleading to the public than what the court forced Apple to do. The public has been led to believe that the Galaxy products don't infringe on the iPad at all, which is not the case.
I think the judges made an unfair verdict and Apple responded in kind. Samsung has been found guilty of infringing Apple's products and Apple is not giving up making the public aware of this. The UK court wanted to deceive the public into thinking that only a US court could find Samsung guilty by forcing Apple to publish a misleading statement about a design patent the public at large weren't aware of that doesn't look like the iPad.
Google even thought Samsung was ripping off Apple:
I think you're confused. That document does not compare the iPad and Tab at all, only the Tab and the community design in question. In fact, the word "iPad" only appears 5 times in the document and that isn't to compare it with the Tab.
Quote:
Apple did not contend that either of its famous iPad products should be used as concrete examples of the Apple design. Neither the original iPad nor the iPad 2 are identical to the design. Whether either of them is or is not within the scope of protection would be a matter of debate. To use either as an example of the Apple design would be to beg the question of the true scope of Apple’s rights.
Quote:
A designer wishing to make a thinner product has to choose to put fewer components inside the casing but that is another example of the trade off between function and aesthetics. A designer could choose to trade lower functionality (say shorter battery life) for aesthetics (say a thinner device). I imagine it would have been practically impossible to build a device as powerful as the Galaxy tablets in 2004 with the same profile but that is a function of the capabilities of the particular tablet devices. The design corpus is not limited to powerful tablet computers with all the functions of a Galaxy tablet or an iPad. In 2004 the design corpus included designs which are thicker than or the same thickness as the Apple design and some which are even thinner, including item 35, the AIPTEK tablet.
Quote:
Even if the designer wishes to give the display the ability to turn from landscape to portrait format or vice versa, there is no need to avoid orientation features on the front. Samsung submitted that the TC1000 had this capability. Assuming it does, albeit in a slower and less elegant manner than the Galaxy tablets (or the iPad for that matter), it shows an example of a device with that change of format capability but also has detailing on the front which distinguishes landscape from portrait orientation such as the brand name (Compaq) and other indicators.
So three of the occurrences are stating Apple did not contend the iPad should be used as an example of the design. The other two occurrences are used as general reference to tablets. Not once is the iPad compared with the Tab.
How could saying that Samsung copied the iPad oppose the verdict when the case had nothing to do with the iPad? Unless it really did and the judges are lying about it to cover their true motives.
This community patent is Samsung's best guess for the 'IP' that Apple will use against them to claim 'copying of the iPad'.
Part of a pre-emptive strike chosen somewhere they think they can stand to make their case. It is also a jurisdiction that Apple basically slandered Samsung with the copying illegally accusations.
Apple had used this design patent in the US (& lost that part of the case). The German case may have included it too, ultimatley in Germany it wasn't the design patent that caused the injunction on Samsung.
The court here found Samsung to not infringe this community design, the court has no other IP to consider, in their eyes this proves Apple's IP is not strong enough to say the Samsung designs infringe. If Samsung don't infringe the community design & this is the best IP Apple have it's apparent that Samsung can't be proven to infringe.
The documents also attempt to point out that copying is not the same as infringing a community patent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
This is another lie, there's a huge document online showing that the UK court has formed a detailed opinion about the iPad vs the Galaxy products:
Is the from the first court case IIRC & the word 'copy' appears 3 times, once in an irrelevant reference to a spanish case, point 114 (not relevant to the idea of S copying A) & twice in this part.
Point 59
"Finally it bears recording that it was common ground before me that copying is irrelevant to the issue of infringement of a Community registered design. Samsung submitted and Apple did not disagree that considering whether a product was produced by copying an article made to the registered design was irrelevant."
Hardly damming proof that Apple have been copied by Samsung, huh Marvin? Seems like the judge is saying both parties agreed the case wasn't about copying? Do you still think I'm lying?
The later documents go on to explain how the publicity surrounding the various cases is muddying the water, e.g. spreading mode FUD about Samsung illegally copying Apple's iPad. It leads to the judges being more & more emphatic about the case not being about copying the iPad.
The court ordered display of the statement in a newspaper is technically 'an advertisement' (that is what buying space in a printed publication is called), but is is not an 'advert for Samsung' & it is is not an 'apology from Apple to Samsung'. It is simply informing the public that Apple acknowledges this case & ruling. It's just pointless semantics to really argue about it. The word ADVERTISEMENT is displayed in some UK press adverts to prevent companies placing adverts that look like newspaper articles and creating the impression that the paper supports that product.
The original problem that got Apple into this case was telling everyone that Samsung illegally copied the iPad. Creating FUD around another competitors products doesn't stand in the European Community.
Apple should put up (the damming evidence & the huge list of copied patents/ designs etc) or shut up (eventually the court attempted to make Apple look foolish because it wouldn't stop spreading FUD that contradicts this ruling).
The judges also said that Apple can continue to spout their opinions elsewhere (and risk libel cases etc), but on the statement page is not the correct place, hence the legal fees on an indemnity basis.
The overall community design that Apple has doesn't hold up in court in this instance. If they have 'Patented the heck out of the iPad' that is great - win the legal cases first, reap the damages money & then start the badmouth campaign.
As for Google's opinion, perhaps they should try Apple, maybe they will come up with a more favourable verdict?
This war isn't over by a long stretch, I have to wonder how getting 6 top intellectual property judges to question your integrity is a win for Apple, surely they intend to bring other cases in the EU, which will involve the judges reading the case history. Perhaps future cases will leave Apple with no leeway to comply with the decision.
p.s.
I think I'm coming down with a cold, ugh :^( it's been fun anyway.
This judge is on a mission to make a name for himslf... But the fact that he can get away with these kinds of calls. Is mindbogglening and absured.
This is just one of a series of abusive and denigrating statements by people who know next to nothing about either the law or the case or the judge.
I do find it telling that so many people resort to invictive and name-calling.
For one thing, Robin Jacob is one of the most distinguished judges in the UK and without doubt the foremost authority on IP law. He is a recognized international expert and a member of the IP Hall of Fame.
He stands so far above the mob here that he would need a telescope to see you :-).
Actually it is somewhat surprising that he even agreed to adjudicate on this matter, which is so utterly trivial that it is rather a waste of the time of the court.
BTW: "Is mindbogglening and absured" speaks volumes to your level of literacy.
It is a sorry statement on the quality of this forum.
That document does not compare the iPad and Tab at all, only the Tab and the community design in question.
Except when he says things like:
"Overall it has undecorated flat surfaces with a plate of glass on the front all the way out to a very thin rim"
you'd have to assume he can tell from the drawing that it has a plate glass surface and not plastic, it doesn't mention what it's made of. There's always the hint he is referencing the product and not the drawing. You're right though it does say 'Apple design' throughout and that was intended to mean the design in the drawing, not the design of the product. That was misinterpreted by almost every news publication:
The headline should really be that the Galaxy Tab wasn't as cool as Apple's drawing, which makes no sense at all as it's a drawing. It's bad enough that the iPad is cooler but Apple's line art? Geez, get it together Samsung.
It also still doesn't explain why they have to advertise about the patent trial verdict when the public was never under the impression that Samsung copied the patent and not the iPad. The public was always under the impression Samsung copied the iPad. The judge said clearly he didn't think the drawing represented the iPad so they didn't in any way prove Samsing didn't copy the iPad.
It is also a jurisdiction that Apple basically slandered Samsung with the copying illegally accusations.
Except they didn't because they didn't contradict the verdict. Samsung has been found guilty of infringing Apple's patents. Are we forgetting the small matter of the $1b fine? This isn't going to be thrown out for juror misconduct as much as I'm certain you and others think it will be.
Facts:
- Samsung has been found guilty of infringing on some of Apple's patents and fined $1b
- Samsung has been found not guilty of infringing a design that doesn't look like the iPad
For one thing, Robin Jacob is one of the most distinguished judges in the UK and without doubt the foremost authority on IP law. He is a recognized international expert and a member of the IP Hall of Fame.
That's fine and I agree with the verdict that Samsung's tablet doesn't look like the drawing and neither does the iPad. I think the decision to force Apple to make a public statement was underhanded, unnecessary and deliberately misleading to the public who have been led to believe that Samsung hasn't copied the iPad as comments in this thread have shown. Having a good track record doesn't excuse people from being held accountable for bad decisions.
Point 13 seems to be where the need for the statement on Apple's site & in the press solidifys.
Mr. Hely publicly made another statement saying Samsung copied Apple AFTER this case had been decided.
Quote: Mr. Hely
"It's no coincidence that Samsung's latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad. This kind of blatant copying is wrong and, as we've said many times before, we need to protect Apple's intellectual property."
It's common practice in these cases of infringement for the infringer to be required to publicly confirm they infringed. The converse is also true, as the judge goes on to rationalise why Samsung are correct - Apple should post the statement to confirm they didn't infringe.
Points14-30 Samsung wanted an injunction too, but the judge didn't think it was appropriate, 'gagging orders' rarely go well for courts.
Point 40
Apple's lawyer doesn't disagree that the court has the right to force a 'non-infringement' to advertise the decision.
Point 46 seems key to the need for the statement.
Overly simplified by me: The more loudly Apple said Samsung copied in public the more need for the statement to clarify. Hely's statement was after Apple had lost this case.
That is why I say Apple were 'basically slandering' - it has nothing to do with the remarks about the US case Apple added to the contested statement. Apple contradicted the court's outcome by continuing to tell the press Samsung copied before the statement was posted.
I have no idea if the $1bn will stand or fall on the basis of Velvin Hogan's behaviour, but according to point 23 of the November case (where the Apple additions to the statement were heard).
For the US jury specifically rejected Apple's claim that the US design patent corresponding to the Community Design in issue here was infringed. The average reader would think that the UK decision was at odds with that in the US. Far from that being so, it was in accordance with it.
This design patent ultimately has failed everywhere Apple have used it in court.
Perhaps Apple have been holding back the 'really damning designs' or the patents that Samsung infringes because this 2004 "rectangular, biaxially symmetrical slab with four evenly, slightly rounded corners" is not an iPad or a Galaxy Tab.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slang4Art
Obviously, you've made an assumption about what I have read, and what I wrote to the judge. Nothing else is obvious, besides perhaps the glaring flaws in your logic, and the baselessness of you "harassing" me. I simply gave the option for folks on both sides of the discussion to contact the judge with comments, which seems to have stuck in your craw. Until you can be bothered to take your own advice, I don't foresee this debate picking up much steam.
You're certainly welcome to prove my assumption wrong by answering what I asked you: What flaws in legal reasoning do you see in Judge Birss publish order, or the subsequent Appeals Court rulings generally supporting him? Further why do you think Apple was 100% correct in their original publish statements considering the court's comments on why Apple's statements were wrong?
I'm suggesting you personally can't make a reasoned argument opposing the court's stance, partly because I don't believe you know what the court's stance is, having not read the orders and their supporting detail for yourself. So far you've shown no evidence of having read any of them. Be the exception and prove me wrong.
Stop acting like pathetic douchebag, running around and trying to insult people. Please. You are for sure better than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Droid
Apple replaced functioning apps with an inferior one because Steve Jobs wanted to 'go thermonuclear against Google' at the expense of users. Apple ditched MobileMe & made iCloud the only option, but it doesn't work on older devices even with a lesser level of integration. It does however work on ancient Windows versions.
Turn by turn is the superior facet of Maps, which Google did not want to provide.
You can still access the "superior" maps, complete with their own flaws i.e. incapability of giving voice directions via Safari.
Google is the new "Microsoft", embrace, extend, extinguish is what they took from 90's Microsoft, just ask Skyhook for one example out of dozens of discarded projects.
Just as Microsoft wanted to be on every desktop, Google wants to be involved in every facet of web use, watching, gathering, selling, advertising, they want absolute control.
Apple don't, you can buy anything you want, you have that choice, Google proved they don't want people to have a choice when they deliberately overrode Safari's security settings to lie to people and the government about complying with opt out orders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aBeliefSystem
It is becoming apparent that attacking judiciaries also attacks the country of the said judge. iDevices are world wide and are really best served by not being marginalised.
Europe is not a country, these UK judges are acting as a "Community court".
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeJay2012
I am not sure what to think about all this. While I understand that the judges were upset with the original notice, it seems that this has become personal for them with their statements about Apple's 'integrity'.
Reading UK papers which reflect widespread anti-Apple sentiment, one would wonder how the UK could remain a prime market for Apple. Perhaps we are seeing the more sensationalist views.
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
You're certainly welcome to prove my assumption wrong by answering what I asked you: What flaws in legal reasoning do you see in Judge Birss publish order, or the subsequent Appeals Court rulings generally supporting him? Further why do you think Apple was 100% correct in their original publish statements considering the court's comments on why Apple's statements were wrong?
I'm suggesting you personally can't make a reasoned argument opposing the court's stance, partly because I don't believe you know what the court's stance is, having not read the orders and their supporting detail for yourself. So far you've shown no evidence of having read any of them. Be the exception and prove me wrong.
You've presented no evidence that I haven't. Your bullish posts are a means to prop up your own self-righteous sentiments about how well-adjusted folks ought to behave.
I'll spend a few minutes debunking your crackpot-ness though
(a) "Regarding the same patent." No patent of any kind has been involved in Germany or here, still less "the same patent."
patent: a government authority to an individual or organization conferring a right or title, esp. the sole right to make, use, or sell some invention
Note: the definition says especially, not exclusively. If the courts can use ambiguous or manipulative language, I don't see why Apple shouldn't be allowed to do the same, other than some judges' sore egos.
"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'," Sir Robin said.
To me, a product not being as cool as another is hardly grounds to base its legality on, which is what the court in fact did. So in essence, these products may actually be illegal when viewed by individuals who are not out of touch with the era and field in which the products exist in. If the court wishes to backpedal and explain that the actual physical products are immaterial in this matter, than Birss should be careful to not mention the physical products whatsoever in his ruling, as that is a conflict in logic to begin with.
So, by establishing that both Apple and the court are guilty of the same tactics, we can see that what we are really speaking to is a case of semantics. Apple managed to speak truthfully, citing examples given by the UK court, while also highlighting the absurdity of the decision. If the judges wish for Apple to conduct itself in such a prim and proper manner, then they should be expected to adhere to the same level of professionalism and expertise when making a ruling such as this one. Further, if Apple is at fault in their "omission" of information from their statement, than the court is also equally at fault for their omission of more exacting guidelines for the statement to begin with. Again, I am asking for a little bit of consistency in logic across the board. It appears to me, and other savvy onlookers, that the judges were at best out of their depth, if not corrupted or biased, and Apple played that up, because they sincerely believe that Samsung stole their hard work. It is also a ridiculous punishment to begin with, and if you want to talk about misleading remarks, see Sir Robin's ridiculous statement above. No reasonable person is going to assume that Samsung is somehow illegally selling tablets in such an over-regulated country.
What really happened here is that Apple did in fact comply, but was able to outwit the judges in the process. I've never been one to hold much respect for bullies, so I can't say that Apple's original statement offended me. In fact, I thought it was a brilliant way to make some lemonade. Sadly, absolute power corrupts, and the courts brandish it like a child swinging a broad sword.
You may philosophically disagree with me, but again, I'd like to see you take your own advice and demonstrate why I should even bother to explain myself to you, given the utter lack of respect you've shown here today. Even if my understanding of the case is ignorant, you should remember that my only intent today was to give users an avenue to express their dissatisfaction with the rulings. Why that perturbs you to such an extent is beyond me, but all of the pompous chest beating in the world isn't going to sway me in the least.
Brilliant post!
I'm still not clear on the intent they keep talking about. They have said on numerous occasions that the case is not about the iPad, it is about the patent, which doesn't look like the iPad but why force Apple to advertise about that?
What exactly is the point in making it clear to the public that Samsung hasn't infringed on a design patent that looks nothing like the iPad and that the public have not been aware of? It seems clear to me that they are trying to create a damaging impression that Samsung hasn't wilfully copied the iPad design. The media is not restricting their reporting to be about the patent:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/18/samsung-galaxy-tab-apple-ipad
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18895384
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2012-10-26/apple-website-publishes-samsung-did-not-copy-ipad-statement/
The headlines are:
"Samsung Galaxy Tab 'does not copy Apple's iPad designs'"
"Apple ordered to run Samsung 'did not copy iPad' adverts"
"Apple website publishes 'Samsung did not copy iPad' statement"
That's not what the court case decided and it looks like these headlines are the true intent of the ruling, which is false and damaging. Apple has tried to create the impression that Samsung copied the iPad, which Samsung did. Anybody can see that. At no point did Apple try to convince the public that Samsung copied the patent so the public were under no false impression about the patent so the advertisements are not justified.
If it's possible to do, Apple should take action against these judges because they haven't justified their reasons for forcing the advertisements. They haven't at any point in time shown that the public were even aware of this patent let alone confused by it. Either these judges are taking it personally or want the publicity but it's distasteful that Apple is made to suffer for it despite being the victim here.
I'd like to see a company do the same to Samsung. C'mon Amazon, just call the Kindle Fire the Kindle Galaxy and design it exactly the same except for the back and undercut them in price. Then we'll see who innovates instead of litigates.
At the very least, Apple should ask the court 2 simple questions:
1. What was the intent of the ruling?
The answer will be that it was to clarify to the public that Samsung doesn't infringe on their patent. So then they should ask:
2. What evidence is there to suggest that the public at large was aware of the patent and confused about whether or not Samsung's product infringed on it?
There is no evidence for this and Apple never advertised the patent so this will show they had no justification for the ruling. Then they can hopefully take action against them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slang4Art
You may philosophically disagree with me, but again, I'd like to see you take your own advice and demonstrate why I should even bother to explain myself to you, given the utter lack of respect you've shown here today. Even if my understanding of the case is ignorant, you should remember that my only intent today was to give users an avenue to express their dissatisfaction with the rulings. Why that perturbs you to such an extent is beyond me, but all of the pompous chest beating in the world isn't going to sway me in the least.
Good to see that you've at minimum taken a cursory glance at the court's reasoning. So I'm wrong. You have put some thought into it.
My apologies
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I'm still not clear on the intent they keep talking about. They have said on numerous occasions that the case is not about the iPad, it is about the patent, which doesn't look like the iPad but why force Apple to advertise about that?
What exactly is the point in making it clear to the public that Samsung hasn't infringed on a design patent that looks nothing like the iPad and that the public have not been aware of? It seems clear to me that they are trying to create a damaging impression that Samsung hasn't wilfully copied the iPad design. The media is not restricting their reporting to be about the patent:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/18/samsung-galaxy-tab-apple-ipad
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18895384
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2012-10-26/apple-website-publishes-samsung-did-not-copy-ipad-statement/
The headlines are:
"Samsung Galaxy Tab 'does not copy Apple's iPad designs'"
"Apple ordered to run Samsung 'did not copy iPad' adverts"
"Apple website publishes 'Samsung did not copy iPad' statement"
That's not what the court case decided and it looks like these headlines are the true intent of the ruling, which is false and damaging. Apple has tried to create the impression that Samsung copied the iPad, which Samsung did. Anybody can see that. At no point did Apple try to convince the public that Samsung copied the patent so the public were under no false impression about the patent so the advertisements are not justified.
If it's possible to do, Apple should take action against these judges because they haven't justified their reasons for forcing the advertisements. They haven't at any point in time shown that the public were even aware of this patent let alone confused by it. Either these judges are taking it personally or want the publicity but it's distasteful that Apple is made to suffer for it despite being the victim here.
I'd like to see a company do the same to Samsung. C'mon Amazon, just call the Kindle Fire the Kindle Galaxy and design it exactly the same except for the back and undercut them in price. Then we'll see who innovates instead of litigates.
At the very least, Apple should ask the court 2 simple questions:
1. What was the intent of the ruling?
The answer will be that it was to clarify to the public that Samsung doesn't infringe on their patent. So then they should ask:
2. What evidence is there to suggest that the public at large was aware of the patent and confused about whether or not Samsung's product infringed on it?
There is no evidence for this and Apple never advertised the patent so this will show they had no justification for the ruling. Then they can hopefully take action against them.
Marvin,
Your repeated use of the word patent suggests you haven't read the rulings. It is actually a 'community design registration' which is different to a patent. There is no "iPad patent" as far as I know. The rulings are worth the time it takes to read, as are post #15, post #22 on here and there is a really clear post in timeline format on Mac Rumors (floating like a beacon amidst a sea of trolls)…
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=16286434&postcount=231
Your 2 questions become irrelevant when you consider Apple had been publicly making statements that said Samsung's devices were infringing Apple's intellectual property. The case was instigated by Samsung to stop Apple doing this. Apple have been spreading the idea that Samsung's products could be pulled from the market any day & may in fact be illegal clones /ripoffs (as happened in Germany, but not for the registered community design discussed in this case).
Apple could try taking even more action against this court decision but since this is judgement is effective across the entire European Union it could face having it's products banned from sale (or other sanctions) across a region that makes up a significant part of it's income. I think the UK alone is 2nd or 3rd in profit by country.
(An aside: this is part of the reason Apples 'double Dutch with an Irish sandwich' Tax dodging scheme bugs me).
Samsung won this case back in June, Apple appealed & lost and continued to make public statements claiming Samsung had copied & infringed their IP, despite losing the case which was intended to clarify that Samsung didn't infringe Apple's IP. The court brought Apple back in after Samsung raised the matter again.
Apple was then ordered to put the notification of the ruling on it's site & pay to advertise in the UK press with the intent of clarifying Samsung haven't been found to infringe the community design. The ruling on the 9/11/12 breaks down the issue concisely, Apple put up 5 paragraphs of text linked from the homepage, parts of the text was from the court but the majority was composed by Apple from the judges comments & other patent disputes around the world. Apple added the irrelevant nonsense about the iPad patent victory in the US & the ban on Galaxies in Germany, it was never in the court's intent to include the iPad - The iPad was not part of this court case. The additions to the notification by Apple were later found to contain 'false innuendo', be 'misleading by omission' and was 'calculated to produce huge confusion'.
Your post makes it clear Apples last tactic worked incredibly well :^)
Maybe the Reality Distortion Field is back from beyond the grave, Apple are still bending facts to convey their own version of events …hmm I miss Steve.
With regard to the press releases you cited. The media have got things wrong too, it's hardly surprising when you step back & look at all the spin that has been added to this case - it was NEVER about the iPad or about patents, even Apple knew the iPad design wasn't close enough to the registered community design, I don't think they used any iPad as evidence in this case (the June or October court notes will indicate if I'm recalling correctly).
Back in June Apple could have simply said 'we disagree and will appeal the ruling and pursue the intellectual property issues with other cases', instead it kept digging a hole by making the same 'Samsung copied us' statements.
Apple are now being penalised (costs with indemnity) because they have effectively wasted the court time by not following the instructions, being slow to release the newspaper/ magazine advertisements and continuing to spread F.U.D. about Samsung's products. They made a mockery of the courts intent with the notification, added childish javascript to push the notification off the bottom of the homepage (this doesn't seem to be mentioned in the judgement so maybe it was to hide it for a few hours after the change). Apple claimed that it would take 14 days to change the notification text on the server, the judges gave them 48 hours or Apple could bring in a 'note from mom' explaining why it was so hard to make the change. The judge even pointed out Apples lack of integrity in dealing with this issue.
It is difficult to understand the case until you start to consider that Apple actually have been manipulative, devious and downright childish.
It is very easy to see design similarities between Apple & Samsung devices, but actually proving that in a court is another matter.
If you are a moderator you should at least have an understanding of the case, sometimes people who sound like rabid Apple haters are actually sane and telling the truth
It's commonly referred to as a design patent, even in the ruling:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html
I just shortened it to 'patent'. I don't think it changes things using one term or the other.
And rightly so because Samsung have been found guilty of it.
The iPad has been brought into the case:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jul/09/samsung-apple-cool-ipad-tablet
That's why it's confusing when they are now claiming it has nothing to do with the iPad.
- if it's not about the iPad, why was it compared to the Galaxy Tab and why does there need to be a clarification to the public about the design patent when Apple claims the iPad is being copied?
- if it is about the iPad, there's no justification for the advertising because that court case didn't find that Samsung didn't copy the iPad, it only found it didn't infringe on the design patent.
In a US court, documents were found showing that Samsung had painstakingly gone through every detail in Apple's products with the intention of modifying their products to liken them to Apple's.
You can say Apple is being manipulative, devious and childish but in making the ruling, the judges have been too. They are forcing Apple to advertise about the design patent but knew exactly how it would be received by the press who have gone beyond that to claim the Galaxy Tab doesn't copy the iPad.
I agree and accurate information is welcome no matter which side it supports.
You truly aren't the droid we're looking for.
Sorry this forum tool is a pain to do the quoting, especially from other sites… hopefully this is clear.
Point 8 of the original court hearing.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html
"Apple did not contend that either of its famous iPad products should be used as concrete examples of the Apple design. Neither the original iPad nor the iPad 2 are identical to the design. Whether either of them is or is not within the scope of protection would be a matter of debate. To use either as an example of the Apple design would be to beg the question of the true scope of Apple's rights."
Apple were not in court to talk about the iPad & it wasn't used as evidence, but when they left court they were still saying Samsung copied their design for the iPad, which was in opposition to the verdict. Apple could have said Samsung infringed other IP at this time.
The appeal also clarifies this in points 3 & 4
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html
"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."
"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."
Read points 23 & 24 of the final ruling discussing Apple's first statement version on Apples site…
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1430.html
"The second sentence reads:
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.
That is misleading by omission. For the US jury specifically rejected Apple's claim that the US design patent corresponding to the Community Design in issue here was infringed. The average reader would think that the UK decision was at odds with that in the US. Far from that being so, it was in accordance with it. "
"The third sentence reads:
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 wilfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.
This is calculated to produce huge confusion. The false innuendo is that the UK court came to a different conclusion about copying, which is not true for the UK court did not form any view about copying. There is a further false innuendo that the UK court's decision is at odds with decisions in other countries whereas that is simply not true."
The 'design patent' aka 'registered community design' was also lost by Apple in the states, but they did win with the other patent issues, so you are incorrect stating…
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
And rightly so because Samsung have been found guilty of it.
Samsung have been found guilty of OTHER infringements, but not this design patent.
Points 17 & 20 of the same document highlights that the registered design was not like the iPad, Apple were defending the images in Annex A
of the October hearing.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html
The design looks remarkably like a ModBookPro to my eyes.
The requirement to display the statement is not an advertisement as you say. It is just a statement of fact the current page on http://www.apple.com/uk/legal-judgement isn't an advertisement, Apple is simply being forced to display that the case happened & to acknowledge the fact that there is no injunction in the EU for that registered community design.
Apple could have opted to announce the statement on the news or display it in various UK based magazines & newspapers. It is intended to remove the doubt that Apple have been sowing by making consumers think Samsung's product could disappear soon. The UK & EU law doesn't agree.
The Guardian are usually accurate (unless you ask where Tel Aviv is - see Wikipedia :^) ) but since no media reports have clarified that the case is not actually about the iPad, but about a drawing that looks a bit like an iPad I'm having a hard time believing them. There reporting does not tie in well with the court records.
Primary, secondary, tertiary… who you gonna believe?
I suspect this won't convince you anyway, but I'm weirdly fascinated by this car crash of a case. It could have been over several months ago, it makes me wonder if the Apple board overruled the lawyers & took too much control from the people who new how to handle it.
The lawyers would understand the EU courts mean business when the same court has the power to stop companies selling products? Apple just took so long to realise that one fact, which is why the website & press statement looks like it is forcing someone to wear a dunces cap. They were really left with not many other options, when Apple got that statement wrong though they get handed the bill as well.
How could saying that Samsung copied the iPad oppose the verdict when the case had nothing to do with the iPad? Unless it really did and the judges are lying about it to cover their true motives.
I can partly agree with this as Apple didn't specify that it was 'other patents' but nothing they put in their original statement was false and no more misleading to the public than what the court forced Apple to do. The public has been led to believe that the Galaxy products don't infringe on the iPad at all, which is not the case.
This is another lie, there's a huge document online showing that the UK court has formed a detailed opinion about the iPad vs the Galaxy products:
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/samsung-apple.pdf
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/11/revised-apple-statement-on-ipad-copying-appears-in-uk-papers/
Their marketing department must have been involved at some point.
I think the judges made an unfair verdict and Apple responded in kind. Samsung has been found guilty of infringing Apple's products and Apple is not giving up making the public aware of this. The UK court wanted to deceive the public into thinking that only a US court could find Samsung guilty by forcing Apple to publish a misleading statement about a design patent the public at large weren't aware of that doesn't look like the iPad.
Google even thought Samsung was ripping off Apple:
http://bgr.com/2012/08/16/apple-samsung-patent-trial-ipad-copy-google/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
This is another lie, there's a huge document online showing that the UK court has formed a detailed opinion about the iPad vs the Galaxy products:
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/samsung-apple.pdf
I think you're confused. That document does not compare the iPad and Tab at all, only the Tab and the community design in question. In fact, the word "iPad" only appears 5 times in the document and that isn't to compare it with the Tab.
Quote:
Apple did not contend that either of its famous iPad products should be used as concrete examples of the Apple design. Neither the original iPad nor the iPad 2 are identical to the design. Whether either of them is or is not within the scope of protection would be a matter of debate. To use either as an example of the Apple design would be to beg the question of the true scope of Apple’s rights.
Quote:
A designer wishing to make a thinner product has to choose to put fewer components inside the casing but that is another example of the trade off between function and aesthetics. A designer could choose to trade lower functionality (say shorter battery life) for aesthetics (say a thinner device). I imagine it would have been practically impossible to build a device as powerful as the Galaxy tablets in 2004 with the same profile but that is a function of the capabilities of the particular tablet devices. The design corpus is not limited to powerful tablet computers with all the functions of a Galaxy tablet or an iPad. In 2004 the design corpus included designs which are thicker than or the same thickness as the Apple design and some which are even thinner, including item 35, the AIPTEK tablet.
Quote:
Even if the designer wishes to give the display the ability to turn from landscape to portrait format or vice versa, there is no need to avoid orientation features on the front. Samsung submitted that the TC1000 had this capability. Assuming it does, albeit in a slower and less elegant manner than the Galaxy tablets (or the iPad for that matter), it shows an example of a device with that change of format capability but also has detailing on the front which distinguishes landscape from portrait orientation such as the brand name (Compaq) and other indicators.
So three of the occurrences are stating Apple did not contend the iPad should be used as an example of the design. The other two occurrences are used as general reference to tablets. Not once is the iPad compared with the Tab.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
How could saying that Samsung copied the iPad oppose the verdict when the case had nothing to do with the iPad? Unless it really did and the judges are lying about it to cover their true motives.
This community patent is Samsung's best guess for the 'IP' that Apple will use against them to claim 'copying of the iPad'.
Part of a pre-emptive strike chosen somewhere they think they can stand to make their case. It is also a jurisdiction that Apple basically slandered Samsung with the copying illegally accusations.
Apple had used this design patent in the US (& lost that part of the case). The German case may have included it too, ultimatley in Germany it wasn't the design patent that caused the injunction on Samsung.
The court here found Samsung to not infringe this community design, the court has no other IP to consider, in their eyes this proves Apple's IP is not strong enough to say the Samsung designs infringe. If Samsung don't infringe the community design & this is the best IP Apple have it's apparent that Samsung can't be proven to infringe.
The documents also attempt to point out that copying is not the same as infringing a community patent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
This is another lie, there's a huge document online showing that the UK court has formed a detailed opinion about the iPad vs the Galaxy products:
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/samsung-apple.pdf
The document …
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/samsung-apple.pdf
Is the from the first court case IIRC & the word 'copy' appears 3 times, once in an irrelevant reference to a spanish case, point 114 (not relevant to the idea of S copying A) & twice in this part.
Point 59
"Finally it bears recording that it was common ground before me that copying is irrelevant to the issue of infringement of a Community registered design. Samsung submitted and Apple did not disagree that considering whether a product was produced by copying an article made to the registered design was irrelevant."
Hardly damming proof that Apple have been copied by Samsung, huh Marvin? Seems like the judge is saying both parties agreed the case wasn't about copying? Do you still think I'm lying?
The later documents go on to explain how the publicity surrounding the various cases is muddying the water, e.g. spreading mode FUD about Samsung illegally copying Apple's iPad. It leads to the judges being more & more emphatic about the case not being about copying the iPad.
The court ordered display of the statement in a newspaper is technically 'an advertisement' (that is what buying space in a printed publication is called), but is is not an 'advert for Samsung' & it is is not an 'apology from Apple to Samsung'. It is simply informing the public that Apple acknowledges this case & ruling. It's just pointless semantics to really argue about it. The word ADVERTISEMENT is displayed in some UK press adverts to prevent companies placing adverts that look like newspaper articles and creating the impression that the paper supports that product.
The original problem that got Apple into this case was telling everyone that Samsung illegally copied the iPad. Creating FUD around another competitors products doesn't stand in the European Community.
Apple should put up (the damming evidence & the huge list of copied patents/ designs etc) or shut up (eventually the court attempted to make Apple look foolish because it wouldn't stop spreading FUD that contradicts this ruling).
The judges also said that Apple can continue to spout their opinions elsewhere (and risk libel cases etc), but on the statement page is not the correct place, hence the legal fees on an indemnity basis.
The overall community design that Apple has doesn't hold up in court in this instance. If they have 'Patented the heck out of the iPad' that is great - win the legal cases first, reap the damages money & then start the badmouth campaign.
As for Google's opinion, perhaps they should try Apple, maybe they will come up with a more favourable verdict?
This war isn't over by a long stretch, I have to wonder how getting 6 top intellectual property judges to question your integrity is a win for Apple, surely they intend to bring other cases in the EU, which will involve the judges reading the case history. Perhaps future cases will leave Apple with no leeway to comply with the decision.
p.s.
I think I'm coming down with a cold, ugh :^( it's been fun anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yojimbo007
This judge is on a mission to make a name for himslf... But the fact that he can get away with these kinds of calls. Is mindbogglening and absured.
This is just one of a series of abusive and denigrating statements by people who know next to nothing about either the law or the case or the judge.
I do find it telling that so many people resort to invictive and name-calling.
For one thing, Robin Jacob is one of the most distinguished judges in the UK and without doubt the foremost authority on IP law. He is a recognized international expert and a member of the IP Hall of Fame.
He stands so far above the mob here that he would need a telescope to see you :-).
Actually it is somewhat surprising that he even agreed to adjudicate on this matter, which is so utterly trivial that it is rather a waste of the time of the court.
BTW: "Is mindbogglening and absured" speaks volumes to your level of literacy.
It is a sorry statement on the quality of this forum.
Except when he says things like:
"Overall it has undecorated flat surfaces with a plate of glass on the front all the way out to a very thin rim"
you'd have to assume he can tell from the drawing that it has a plate glass surface and not plastic, it doesn't mention what it's made of. There's always the hint he is referencing the product and not the drawing. You're right though it does say 'Apple design' throughout and that was intended to mean the design in the drawing, not the design of the product. That was misinterpreted by almost every news publication:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/09/uk-judge-says-galaxy-tab-not-as-cool-as-ipad-awards-samsung-w/
The headline should really be that the Galaxy Tab wasn't as cool as Apple's drawing, which makes no sense at all as it's a drawing. It's bad enough that the iPad is cooler but Apple's line art? Geez, get it together Samsung.
It also still doesn't explain why they have to advertise about the patent trial verdict when the public was never under the impression that Samsung copied the patent and not the iPad. The public was always under the impression Samsung copied the iPad. The judge said clearly he didn't think the drawing represented the iPad so they didn't in any way prove Samsing didn't copy the iPad.
Except they didn't because they didn't contradict the verdict. Samsung has been found guilty of infringing Apple's patents. Are we forgetting the small matter of the $1b fine? This isn't going to be thrown out for juror misconduct as much as I'm certain you and others think it will be.
Facts:
- Samsung has been found guilty of infringing on some of Apple's patents and fined $1b
- Samsung has been found not guilty of infringing a design that doesn't look like the iPad
Conclusion:
- Samsung copied the iPad
That's right but the case wasn't about the iPad either so what does that prove?
That's fine and I agree with the verdict that Samsung's tablet doesn't look like the drawing and neither does the iPad. I think the decision to force Apple to make a public statement was underhanded, unnecessary and deliberately misleading to the public who have been led to believe that Samsung hasn't copied the iPad as comments in this thread have shown. Having a good track record doesn't excuse people from being held accountable for bad decisions.
See http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html
Point 13 seems to be where the need for the statement on Apple's site & in the press solidifys.
Mr. Hely publicly made another statement saying Samsung copied Apple AFTER this case had been decided.
Quote: Mr. Hely
"It's no coincidence that Samsung's latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad. This kind of blatant copying is wrong and, as we've said many times before, we need to protect Apple's intellectual property."
It's common practice in these cases of infringement for the infringer to be required to publicly confirm they infringed. The converse is also true, as the judge goes on to rationalise why Samsung are correct - Apple should post the statement to confirm they didn't infringe.
Points14-30 Samsung wanted an injunction too, but the judge didn't think it was appropriate, 'gagging orders' rarely go well for courts.
Point 40
Apple's lawyer doesn't disagree that the court has the right to force a 'non-infringement' to advertise the decision.
Point 46 seems key to the need for the statement.
Overly simplified by me: The more loudly Apple said Samsung copied in public the more need for the statement to clarify. Hely's statement was after Apple had lost this case.
That is why I say Apple were 'basically slandering' - it has nothing to do with the remarks about the US case Apple added to the contested statement. Apple contradicted the court's outcome by continuing to tell the press Samsung copied before the statement was posted.
I have no idea if the $1bn will stand or fall on the basis of Velvin Hogan's behaviour, but according to point 23 of the November case (where the Apple additions to the statement were heard).
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1430.html
Quote:
For the US jury specifically rejected Apple's claim that the US design patent corresponding to the Community Design in issue here was infringed. The average reader would think that the UK decision was at odds with that in the US. Far from that being so, it was in accordance with it.
This design patent ultimately has failed everywhere Apple have used it in court.
Perhaps Apple have been holding back the 'really damning designs' or the patents that Samsung infringes because this 2004 "rectangular, biaxially symmetrical slab with four evenly, slightly rounded corners" is not an iPad or a Galaxy Tab.