Apple loses appeal of UK ruling in patent case against Samsung
Apple on Thursday lost an appeal of a previous UK ruling that said Samsung did not copy the look and feel of the iPad.
When the High Court in London originally handed down the ruling, Judge Colin Birss said consumers were unlikely to mistake the iPad with Samsung's Galaxy Tab as the Korean company's product wasn't as "cool," reports the BBC.
"(Samsung's tablets) do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design," the judge said in his July ruling. "They are not as cool."
Judge Birss ordered Apple to run advertisements on its UK website as well as in British magazines and newspapers, declaring Samsung did not copy the iPad. The Web notice was to remain active at least six months, while other ads would be taken out in various print publications as a consolation for the "damaging impression" Samsung suffered a result of the suit. An Apple attorney argued that mentioning Samsung on its site would be in effect a free advertisement for its rival.
Thursday's appeal loss comes just hours after California Judge Lucy Koh denied Apple's request to keep financial documents sealed as part of ongoing post-trial motions for the landmark Apple v. Samsung jury trial.
When the High Court in London originally handed down the ruling, Judge Colin Birss said consumers were unlikely to mistake the iPad with Samsung's Galaxy Tab as the Korean company's product wasn't as "cool," reports the BBC.
"(Samsung's tablets) do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design," the judge said in his July ruling. "They are not as cool."
Judge Birss ordered Apple to run advertisements on its UK website as well as in British magazines and newspapers, declaring Samsung did not copy the iPad. The Web notice was to remain active at least six months, while other ads would be taken out in various print publications as a consolation for the "damaging impression" Samsung suffered a result of the suit. An Apple attorney argued that mentioning Samsung on its site would be in effect a free advertisement for its rival.
Thursday's appeal loss comes just hours after California Judge Lucy Koh denied Apple's request to keep financial documents sealed as part of ongoing post-trial motions for the landmark Apple v. Samsung jury trial.
Comments
And so the trend is set for most markets outside the US, I suspect.
ITT: People calling for Apple to pull out of the UK.
In a patent war only one group can ever win - the lawyers.
I can't imagine Apple ever complying with that ridiculous order. Who do they think they are in the UK?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanVerb
I can't imagine Apple ever complying with that ridiculous order. Who do they think they are in the UK?!
Apple don't have a choice, they lost the appeal. If Apple want to continue to operate in the UK and avoid financial penalties they must adhere to the law.
I am interested to see how they are going to word this.
Who are they? Well for a start they are only Apples biggest customer outside of the states, not to mention one of the few markets where the iPhone has a larger share than Android handsets etc.
But you're right, they're only a small Island that has no effect on anyone or anything.....
Taken from BBC:
One of the judges - who noted he owned an iPad himself - explained why Apple had lost the appeal in his ruling.
"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," wrote Sir Robin Jacob.
"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."
"So this case is all about, and only about, Apple's registered design and the Samsung products."
Don't agree with the advertising ruling in this case, but had the same ruling gone in Apples favour most people here would be celebrating it.
Chinese, Korean, German, English courts are all wrong and only the American court that found the American company Apple right against the non-American company Samsung would hold the Truth?
Come on. It scares me that people might be so closed-minded.
I'm in the UK and think the advertising ruling is disgustingly wrong. I think Apple should ignore that ruling and pay whatever fine is thrown at them for doing so. The sooner Apple don't have to rely on Samsung for anything the better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
ITT: People calling for Apple to pull out of the UK.
Haha
Quote:
Originally Posted by aderutter
I'm in the UK and think the advertising ruling is disgustingly wrong. I think Apple should ignore that ruling and pay whatever fine is thrown at them for doing so. The sooner Apple don't have to rely on Samsung for anything the better.
That 'fine' could be being suspended from operating in the UK.
On another forum someone said that in the England, if you cannot prove your case and lose, you have to pay for wasting everybody's time (well, that is just putting it succinctly). In this respect, since Apple lost, they have to say Samsung didn't copy.
I thought that was a ludicrous judgement, but I guess that is in accordance with English law. I just don't agree with it.
I'm not saying that it applies to this case, but the English judiciary used to have a reputation for being rather out of touch with modern technology...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VgwxKW0J6I
(BBC 'Not the Nine O'Clock News' clip, circa 1980)
From Wiki on Judge Colin Birss...
"In 2012 he ruled on Temple Island v New English Teas, a case where a photograph of a Routemaster London bus crossing Westminster Bridge was found sufficiently similar to another photograph of the subject to constitute copyright infringement."
There must be at least a million images of a "Routemaster London bus crossing Westminster Bridge"... it's one of those cliché images of London many tourists, and stock photographers, love to take.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanVerb
I can't imagine Apple ever complying with that ridiculous order. Who do they think they are in the UK?!
Keep in mind the Galaxy Tab was the one (and only really) area Apple lost in the US case as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeJay2012
I am going to stop buying UK technology... if I can find any.
So, that'll include anything with an ARM chip in it then? Good luck with that.
Note in upcoming UK Apple Advertisement:
*Judge Birss declared Samsung did not copy the iPad, that the Samsung's Galaxy Tab "... are not as cool."
It is not our fault if your Parents buy you the wrong tablet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stike vomit
So, that'll include anything with an ARM chip in it then? Good luck with that.
ARM is HQ'd in Cambridge. ARM chips are made throughout the world. Apple is one of its co-founders. Yes I think I can still buy iPhones.
I am not serious BTW. Just a brief burst of outrage.
The UK ruling against infringement may be based on UK law. I get it. However the forced advertising of an apology or potential UK expulsion is the invention of a UK judge who likes controversy. Wiki him.
It will seen as outrageous by many, and will be defended by Samsung fans and many in the UK.
Let me just say, as a British Apple fan myself, there's no difference in outrage here between British Apple users and American ones. I thought this judgement was utterly outrageous and moronic when I first read it, and I can't believe that Apple has lost the appeal. It seems to be a totally indefensible judgement, and I hope Apple can find some way out of it. Also, I don't see how any judge can use the word “cool” in an objective judgement and be taken seriously.
But it's AT LEAST as stupid to blame every member of the UK population for the idiotic decision of one moronic judge who's an embarrassment to our legal system. We're as annoyed about this as you are.
All this boils bown to is the usual conclusion: “The law is an ass.”