UK court orders Apple to rewrite website statement saying Samsung didn't copy the iPad

1151618202124

Comments

  • Reply 341 of 477
    arlorarlor Posts: 532member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post


     


     


    Yeah, I'm mad at them about that...now that they've appointed Jonathan Sumption to the Supreme Court, he'll never finish his series on the Hundred Years War!  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Sumption



     


    Oh no! I hadn't heard that. He was taking an age to begin with, and now this?!

  • Reply 342 of 477


    Am I getting the facts correct ? 


     


    Apple has been asked to write the original 'apology' letter because they tried to sue over design patents but lost ? it that it ? the fact that they lost is the whole reason they were being asked to do this ? 

  • Reply 343 of 477
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Crowley View Post


    Why are you even talking about Lords?  This is a matter of law, not Lords.


     


    P.S. I'm a republican (means a different thing over here), btw.



     


    So they are Lord justices, not Lords, oh well I was never much for all these fancy titles.


     


    Time for Apple to hit up the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice to sort this mess out if that fails then off to Europe.

  • Reply 344 of 477

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


     


    What Apple should do then is make no statement at all and only provide a link to the ruling.


     


    That should shut those idiot judges up.


     


    They can leave it like that until the appeals process is exhausted, including to the EU.


     


    Cut through the confusing, dithering rulings of these obviously incompetent fools.


     


    So how do you get to be a Lord anyway?


     


    Isn't it through inbreeding rather than merit?



    I think that's exactly what the judge expected & required.  Just a simple statement as to the findings of the English court of appeal.  I believe the appeals process is exhausted - as far as the original case was concerned anyway.  Or do you mean apple should appeal against the notification decision?  If so, surely you can see that with the amount of press this is receiving all that will achieve is harming the apple reputation & perception more?


     


    Hmm, as for becoming a Lord.  Can't say I really know but recent examples seem to imply that if you get famous on tv that's good for starters.  Or are you referring to a Lord in a legal position?  Not that I have a clue on that either, it's something that doesn't interest me.


     


    You're entitled to your opinion on the judges or incompetent fools as you refer but that's all that can ever be, your opinion.  I'm sure one could easily point fingers at US judges & legal systems as having muppets in there.  Judge Koh Doesn't exactly appear to be the brightest spark that's ever climbed the legal ladder does she?

  • Reply 345 of 477
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,031member
    hill60 wrote: »
    You state "nothing more nothing less", care to point out the precise point at which the judgement and original appeal ruling states this?

    Reporting true statements of fact is not whining.

    The whining from Samsung and these Judges is enough to drown out Heathrow.

    There's no need. The judge proposed the wording of the statement. It's indented in the judgment. Where from that do you ever draw the conclusion that it is within Apples license to embellish it? Particularly when the very next paragraph in the judgment asks either counsel for written submissions if they do not like it?

    Use the mush between your ears, man. Apples hubris got the better of them.
  • Reply 346 of 477
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by incidntcoordntr View Post


    Am I getting the facts correct ? 


     


    Apple has been asked to write the original 'apology' letter because they tried to sue over design patents but lost ? it that it ? the fact that they lost is the whole reason they were being asked to do this ? 



     


    No Samsung sued Apple saying they weren't infringing their design patents, copying yes, infringing no so Apple reported this on their website as they were ordered to.


     


    Samsung went whining to the Judges who went nuts over this and are now sort of like this:-


     


     


    image


     


    ..except with a more British accent.

  • Reply 347 of 477

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


     


    So they are Lord justices, not Lords, oh well I was never much for all these fancy titles.


     


    Time for Apple to hit up the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice to sort this mess out if that fails then off to Europe.



    Blimey, just ended up on wiki looking at lords.  Seems you can be hereditary or given the title due to the Life Peerages act.  That's how Seb Coe became one.  Generally though it does look like a hereditary & inbred thing!

  • Reply 348 of 477
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member


    I think probably the majority of the British public that cares about such things would agree that the House Of Lords needs reform, but the right wing Conservative end of the current administration disagrees.


     


    Nevertheless the House is a long way away from being a general "hereditary & inbred thing".  As previously mentioned, only 12% of the current House have hereditary peerages, which is only going to reduce from now on.  The majority of the current House are appointed Lords from business, industry, finance, sport and the arts, where incest is hardly a mainstream issue.


     


    Outside of the House, there are other Lords in the judiciary branch and other areas of public service, but by and large they're just titles that goes with the job, so of no concern to anyone.  And there are some other hereditary titles that don't sit in the House or in public service, but no one much cares about them, they're just dusty old relics.


     


    But none of this is relevant to Apple or British law, and is just more xenophobia to fuel the Apple apologist engine.

  • Reply 349 of 477

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by whatever71 View Post


    Blimey, just ended up on wiki looking at lords.  Seems you can be hereditary or given the title due to the Life Peerages act.  That's how Seb Coe became one.  Generally though it does look like a hereditary & inbred thing!



     


    They should cure their economic problems the way James I did—make up some new title (in his case, baronet) and sell a bunch of them.

  • Reply 350 of 477

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


     


    You state "nothing more nothing less", care to point out the precise point at which the judgement and original appeal ruling states this?


     


    Reporting true statements of fact is not whining.


     


    The whining from Samsung and these Judges is enough to drown out Heathrow.





    You should learn by now when to withdraw.

    But OK:



    http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html



    Paragraph 4.



    ... The following notice shall be posted and displayed upon the Defendant's Websites currently at ...



    ... The defendant shall arrange for the following notice to be published in The Financial Times; the Daily Mail; The Guardian; Mobile Magazine; and T3 magazine:...

     

  • Reply 351 of 477
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by incidntcoordntr View Post


    Am I getting the facts correct ? 


     


    Apple has been asked to write the original 'apology' letter because they tried to sue over design patents but lost ? it that it ? the fact that they lost is the whole reason they were being asked to do this ? 



    Nope. Apple didn't sue Samsung in the UK. Samsung sued Apple and Apple countersued. But during the trial Samsung got pissy about Apple's comments about Samsung copying them. So Judge Biriss ordered the notice be published. 


     


    What is interesting is that the appeals court judges said that they would not have allowed the order to force Apple to post the notice to stand, except that when Biriss made his original ruling he made a comment about Samsung not be cool. This comment generated a lot of press. Because of that comment and the attention it received the appeals court said they felt they had to let the order stand, otherwise the wouldn't have (one assumes because it was a retarded ruling to begin with).


     


    Then after Apple follows exactly what was ordered, Samsung whined to the appeals court and convinced them Apple was giving them the finger and disrespecting them. The judges were convinced but couldn't even say this in court. Instead they made up reasons. They said Apple made untrue and incorrect statements, which is not true at all. They know their decision is so weak that they have actually taken to publicly making their own false statements to support their decision.


     


    Nice court system over there.

  • Reply 352 of 477
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post




    Your point being?

    Apple got the order to put this EXACT quote (and link) on its webpages - nothing more nothing less:



    “On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronics (UK) Limited’s Galaxy Tablet computers, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple's registered design 000181607-0001.

    A copy of the full judgment of the High Court is available via the following link [insert hyperlink].”



    How hard it is to follow this?

    If they did EXACTLY that without WHINING about German and US courts everything would have been fine.

    But Apple being Apple ...





     



     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Nathillien View Post




    You should learn by now when to withdraw.

    But OK:



    http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html



    Paragraph 4.



    ... The following notice shall be posted and displayed upon the Defendant's Websites currently at ...



    ... The defendant shall arrange for the following notice to be published in The Financial Times; the Daily Mail; The Guardian; Mobile Magazine; and T3 magazine:...

     



     


     


    In other words you completely made up the part about the ruling saying nothing more and nothing less. They were instructed what the notice had to included. These instructions said nothing about that having to be the entirety of the posting. One can assume the judge meant nothing more, but that would be an assumption.

  • Reply 353 of 477
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member


    You haven't even got the judge's name right there, let alone that final summation of what's happened.  Can you provide evidence that a judge called Apple's statement untrue and/or incorrect, and the context of why they said that?

  • Reply 354 of 477

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    Nope. Apple didn't sue Samsung in the UK. Samsung sued Apple and Apple countersued. But during the trial Samsung got pissy about Apple's comments about Samsung copying them. So Judge Biriss ordered the notice be published. 


     


    What is interesting is that the appeals court judges said that they would not have allowed the order to force Apple to post the notice to stand, except that when Biriss made his original ruling he made a comment about Samsung not be cool. This comment generated a lot of press. Because of that comment and the attention it received the appeals court said they felt they had to let the order stand, otherwise the wouldn't have (one assumes because it was a retarded ruling to begin with).


     


    Then after Apple follows exactly what was ordered, Samsung whined to the appeals court and convinced them Apple was giving them the finger and disrespecting them. The judges were convinced but couldn't even say this in court. Instead they made up reasons. They said Apple made untrue and incorrect statements, which is not true at all. They know their decision is so weak that they have actually taken to publicly making their own false statements to support their decision.


     


    Nice court system over there.



    Tulkas, are you being serious here?  Can you take off your blinkers just for a few minutes & think about this?  Which bit of a statement on the apple site along the lines of.. and samsung willfully copied our far more popular ipad.. isn't giving the finger to samsung & the judges?  I'll even say please take of your blinkers if that helps.  I doubt that samsung had to convince anyone; the apple site & press coverage it got would have done that perfectly well.  The lack of common sense you're showing is astounding.

  • Reply 355 of 477
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


     


     


     


    In other words you completely made up the part about the ruling saying nothing more and nothing less. They were instructed what the notice had to included. These instructions said nothing about that having to be the entirety of the posting. One can assume the judge meant nothing more, but that would be an assumption.



    The ruling doesn't say anything more and it doesn't say anything less.  He is logically correct.  You are reading it wrong.

  • Reply 356 of 477

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    Nope. Apple didn't sue Samsung in the UK. Samsung sued Apple and Apple countersued. But during the trial Samsung got pissy about Apple's comments about Samsung copying them. So Judge Biriss ordered the notice be published. 


     


    What is interesting is that the appeals court judges said that they would not have allowed the order to force Apple to post the notice to stand, except that when Biriss made his original ruling he made a comment about Samsung not be cool. This comment generated a lot of press. Because of that comment and the attention it received the appeals court said they felt they had to let the order stand, otherwise the wouldn't have (one assumes because it was a retarded ruling to begin with).


     


    Then after Apple follows exactly what was ordered, Samsung whined to the appeals court and convinced them Apple was giving them the finger and disrespecting them. The judges were convinced but couldn't even say this in court. Instead they made up reasons. They said Apple made untrue and incorrect statements, which is not true at all. They know their decision is so weak that they have actually taken to publicly making their own false statements to support their decision.


     


    Nice court system over there.


     



    &@hill60. 


    thanks, 


    understand a little better now. what a joke - because of the press created by themselves, the court is ordering a publicity campaign paid for by apple to counter this. 

  • Reply 357 of 477

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    Nope. Apple didn't sue Samsung in the UK. Samsung sued Apple and Apple countersued. But during the trial Samsung got pissy about Apple's comments about Samsung copying them. So Judge Biriss ordered the notice be published. 


     


    What is interesting is that the appeals court judges said that they would not have allowed the order to force Apple to post the notice to stand, except that when Biriss made his original ruling he made a comment about Samsung not be cool. This comment generated a lot of press. Because of that comment and the attention it received the appeals court said they felt they had to let the order stand, otherwise the wouldn't have (one assumes because it was a retarded ruling to begin with).


     


    Then after Apple follows exactly what was ordered, Samsung whined to the appeals court and convinced them Apple was giving them the finger and disrespecting them. The judges were convinced but couldn't even say this in court. Instead they made up reasons. They said Apple made untrue and incorrect statements, which is not true at all. They know their decision is so weak that they have actually taken to publicly making their own false statements to support their decision.


     


    Nice court system over there.


     



    &@hill60. 


    thanks, 


    understand a little better now. what a joke - because of the press created by themselves, the court is ordering a publicity campaign paid for by apple to counter this. 

  • Reply 358 of 477

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


     


    So they are Lord justices, not Lords, oh well I was never much for all these fancy titles.


     


    Time for Apple to hit up the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice to sort this mess out if that fails then off to Europe.



    Do you chew tobacco? 

  • Reply 359 of 477

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    In other words you completely made up the part about the ruling saying nothing more and nothing less. They were instructed what the notice had to included. These instructions said nothing about that having to be the entirety of the posting. One can assume the judge meant nothing more, but that would be an assumption.



     


    image LOL. Feels like talking to a brick wall.

  • Reply 360 of 477
    reefoidreefoid Posts: 158member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


     


     


     


    In other words you completely made up the part about the ruling saying nothing more and nothing less. They were instructed what the notice had to included. These instructions said nothing about that having to be the entirety of the posting. One can assume the judge meant nothing more, but that would be an assumption.



     


    Judge's comment:


     


    Quote:


    Subject to anything that may be submitted by either side I would propose the following:


     


    On 9


    th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet Computers, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple's registered design No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High court is available on the following link [link given].


    That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on ….. A copy of the Court of Appeal's judgment is available on the following link […]. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.




     


     


    Which part of:


     


    "Subject to anything that may be submitted by either side I would propose the following:"


     


    do you not understand?


     


    If Apple wanted to add more to the statement, they should have submitted a request to the judge.  They didn't. Therefore they got slapped down.


     


    The fact that Apple have printed a statement in today's papers in full compliance with the court goes to show they knew exactly what needed to be done.  They tried to push it as far as they could.

Sign In or Register to comment.