UK court deems Apple's apology to Samsung as non-compliant, orders new version within 48 hours
7 replies, posted
[URL="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/nov/01/apple-samsung-statement"]Source[/URL]
[quote]
[img]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Media/Pix/pictures/2012/11/1/1351772476780/The-SamsungApple-UK-judgm-008.jpg[/img]
[I]
The Samsung/Apple UK judgment link on Apple's UK website
[/I]
The UK court of appeal has reprimanded Apple over the wording of the statement on its website acknowledging that Samsung did not infringe the iPad tablet's registered design, and ordered it to put an altered statement on its homepage – rather than tucked away in a linked page – until 14 December.
The acknowledgement put up last week, linked from the home page by a tiny link, was deemed to be "non-compliant" with the order that the court had made in October. The court has now ordered it to correct the statement – and the judges, Lord Justice Longmore, Lord Justice Kitchin and Sir Robin Jacob, indicated that they were not pleased with Apple's failure to put a simpler statement on the site.
At a hearing in the court in London on Thursday morning, the judge told Apple that it had to [B]change the wording[/B] of the statement within 48 hours, [B]carry it on its home page[/B], and use [B]at least 11-point font[/B].
[B]
Apple tried to argue that it would take at least 14 days to put a corrective statement on the site – a claim that one judge said he "cannot believe".[/B]
Darren Smyth of EIP Partners said: "The objection was that Apple had added to the statement that the court of appeal had ordered, so did not comply with the original order, and furthermore that the additions were not accurate.
"Apple must now within 48 hours publish a correction on their homepage with a link to the corrected statement in not less than 11-point font."
The tech giant was originally ordered by the court of appeal to correct the statement carried on its website relating to its tablet battle with Samsung, in which it was ordered to acknowledge that its rival did not copy the iPad's design.
Though Apple did do that, it also added in details from other court cases in the US relating to other non-design patents to suggest that other courts had found against Samsung.
The acknowledgement – which was depicted as an apology, though neither the court of appeal nor the original high court judgment described it as such – was intended to be a factual statement ordered by His Honour Judge Birss QC in the high court. Apple has also been told it must take out adverts with the same statements in the Financial Times, The Guardian, Daily Mail, T3 magazine and Mobile magazine. Those adverts are not thought to have appeared.
The ruling is the latest in a long-running battle between the South Korean and Californian electronics giants, in which Apple and Samsung have since 2010 been at loggerheads over patents and designs used in their respective smartphones and tablets, with lawsuits around the world.
In the UK one, Apple had claimed that Samsung infringed its European "registered design" for the iPad tablet with the Galaxy Tab; Samsung disagreed, and won a ruling from Birss in July.
He then ordered Apple to issue a corrective statement about Samsung's designs. Apple appealed, but lost that case in October. The same three judges sat on Thursday as in the October case.
While Apple's statement on its site did contain the elements it was instructed to contain according to the court of appeal and high court rulings, Apple added four paragraphs – including extracts from Birss's ruling in July where he called Apple's designs "cool", and contrasted them against Samsung's, which he said lacked the same qualities.
Bloomberg quoted Jacob as saying Apple's statement was "a plain breach of the order".
Bloomberg said that Michael Beloff, a lawyer representing Apple, defending the notice, told the court that the judges themselves had said that it "is not designed to punish, it is not designed to make us grovel" and that its only purpose was "to dispel commercial uncertainty".
Apple declined to comment on the new ruling.[/quote]
Their bullshit "apology":
[quote=Apple]On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited’s Galaxy Tablet Computer, 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 [url]www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html[/url].
In the ruling, the judge made several important points comparing the designs of the Apple and Samsung products:
"The extreme simplicity of the Apple design is striking. Overall it has undecorated flat surfaces with a plate of glass on the front all the way out to a very thin rim and a blank back. There is a crisp edge around the rim and a combination of curves, both at the corners and the sides. The design looks like an object the informed user would want to pick up and hold. It is an understated, smooth and simple product. It is a cool design."
"The informed user's overall impression of each of the Samsung Galaxy Tablets is the following. From the front they belong to the family which includes the Apple design; but the Samsung products are very thin, almost insubstantial members of that family with unusual details on the back. They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool."
That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 18 October 2012. A copy of the Court of Appeal’s judgment is available on the following link [url]www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html[/url]. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.
However, in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.[/quote]
nice try dickheads
I think its the last paragraph that is the main issue TBH. It even contradicts the one above that says the English court ruling has effect across Europe.
It wouldn't even take more than an hour to correct the statement they were ordered to do.
[QUOTE=Zet;38284104]It wouldn't even take more than an hour to correct the statement they were ordered to do.[/QUOTE]
But it takes fourteen days for their marketing team to come up with a way to spin this into something positive.
[QUOTE=V12US;38284494]But it takes fourteen days for their marketing team to come up with a way to spin this into something positive.[/QUOTE]
the new ipod phone touch five
now with eight times the normal apology as samsung
They're like the child who broke a window with a baseball. When told to say sorry they kind of look the other way and barely mumble out a ..sorry or whatever-grumble-"
