Print 90 comment(s) - last by TakinYourPoint.. on Nov 5 at 11:25 AM

UK judges to Apple: "Not good enough!"

Last week, Apple posted a notice on its UK website which indicated that Samsung didn't copy the iPad when it designed the Galaxy Tab family of tablets. Of course, Apple didn't do this out of the kindness of its heart -- it was ordered to do so by a UK court.
In keeping with Apple’s typical demeanor towards its competitors, the notice posted on its website was rather flippant and pointed to how the Samsung tablets weren’t deemed to be as “cool” as the iPad. Apple also pointed out in its notice that it had won judgments against Samsung in both German and U.S. courts.
It appears, however, that UK judges weren't amused by Apple's play on words, and called the Cupertino, California-based company's statements "incorrect" and "untrue".
According to Bloomberg News, the U.K. Court of Appeal in London has ordered Apple to remove the notice from its website within 24 hours to correct the inaccuracies. It also has to post a new, revised version within 48 hours.
“I’m at a loss that a company such as Apple would do this,” said a puzzled Judge Robin Jacob. “That is a plain breach of the order.”
One of Samsung's lawyers, Henry Carr, piled on by starting that Apple's original notice left the “impression that the U.K. court is out of step with other courts” by mentioning the judgments in Apple's favor by German and U.S. courts.

Source: Bloomberg

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Hmm...
By messele on 11/1/2012 5:41:14 PM , Rating: 0
There is nothing in the content that contravenes the Judge's original instruction. It was a simple instruction as you say and there was nothing about it that precludes what Apple has done here, hence the need for the Judges to get upset and actually specify their intended order.

Should intent have been understood by Apple? You could argue that it should have been but when the Judge's instruction was basically reduced to a box-ticking exercise it becomes an issue of technicality and in that sense the court should have been specific in their request but they obviously didn't feel the need as they can always go back and ask for specifics to be changed as they have been here.

In any case I thought the content was supposed to be approved before publication? If that is the case then, again, the it's the court fuck-up as Apple would have complied with that order if it was specifically requested.

RE: Hmm...
By simsony on 11/1/2012 8:07:43 PM , Rating: 2
Apple was clearly told that they are to make clear to the public that Samsung did not infringe on their design. This is partly because Apple chose to court the media, and publicize the case.

Normally judgements are not punitive, the benefit of the doubt is given especially to large corporations, who have experienced lawyers and normally respect and comply with judgements. It is different during the case, when all tricks are played. Microsoft for example complied with all judgements as expected.

In this case, everybody knew what was expected of Apple. So no one saw the need to double check. The very fact that Apple is referring to the German court, on the UK website, as part of the UK courts order, is something every lawyer knows is contempt of court. So let's not pretend that Apple has just threaded the fine line of the law, they have well and truly crossed it, and broken the law.

If a rapist was asked to apologise, but said it is allowed in some other country, would you find that acceptable?

This is not the first time Apple thinks it is above the law, and it won't be the last.

My worry is what next? What exactly as a corporation does Apple think they get to do? Will they bankroll politicians to legislate Apple products every where? Does the desire of a profit justify anything?

Their profitability and brand imagery is creating a kind of halo, which people like to be associated with, to find their own personal worth and identity.

Tony is a good example of that, an attack on Apple is an attack on him. Apple seems to define him, his identity - the time he spends on it is quite surprising.

Profitability does not automatically translate to greatness, they need to show far more qualities, an iota of morality would be a good start. Like respecting the law of the land.

"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki