Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

278 comments

A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (5, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | about 2 years ago | (#40689449)

I wouldn't mind seeing this happen to a few more patent trolls. Not only should the U.S. adopt a European style "loser pays" system for cases like this, but a "loser has to publicly admit he's an ass" policy wouldn't hurt either.

Why do they have to do it on their own website? (4, Funny)

Krishnoid (984597) | about 2 years ago | (#40689489)

This is the Internet age [bash.org] , after all.

And we can expect (4, Interesting)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | about 2 years ago | (#40689613)

We can expect that Apple will wriggle to avoid doing this in any meaningful way. What's the smallest size ad they can place? What's the smallest typeface? Do all elements need equal prominance?
They'd likely put a huge ad saying "Buy Apple iPad, the judge said it's cool" in a large font with the "Samsung did not copy" message in a tiny font in a corner of the ad (maybe even upside-down text). They'll go as far as they think they can while avoiding a contempt finding.

Re:And we can expect (5, Insightful)

Ynot_82 (1023749) | about 2 years ago | (#40689679)

I think the media coverage alone of this story will do all the work
Apple cannot control that
I think what Apple actually does to comply with this will be largely irrelevant when it's being talked about on the news.

Re:And we can expect (3, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | about 2 years ago | (#40690201)

But like the climategate thing, people aren't interested in hearing that the accusers were wrong in the end. The damage is done. This judge is probably attempting to undo the damage by forcing the damagers to make the statement. It is not enough that a judge makes the statement. It has to come from Apple -- the accuser, the damager. Even so, people won't be inclined to believe as that requires people to change their beliefs and there is a very long and significant list of things that people will change before they change their beliefs.

Re:And we can expect (4, Interesting)

Ynot_82 (1023749) | about 2 years ago | (#40690327)

This is all over the front pages of the major UK news outlets
People know about this, regardless of what Apple put on their website

Re:And we can expect (4, Insightful)

anagama (611277) | about 2 years ago | (#40689841)

It isn't just some newspaper ads:

Now, Birss says Apple must post a notice to its UK website that outlines the July 9 decision, and the notice must remain on the site for six months. ... Unsurprisingly, Apple's lawyer in the case, Richard Hacon, pushed back on the order by arguing that Apple would essentially be forced to advertise for Samsung. "No company likes to refer to a rival on its website," ...

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/07/judge-to-apple-tell-uk-consumers-samsung-didnt-infringe-on-ipad-design/ [arstechnica.com]

The Streisand effect was designed in California too, correct?

Re:And we can expect (2)

Gr8Apes (679165) | about 2 years ago | (#40689907)

Apple could spin this in interesting ways:

Buy the iPad, certified cooler and better than the lesser Samsung Galaxy Tablet by no less than his royal honor UK Judge Numbnuts himself. (note: the Galaxy, being obviously inferior as determined by UK law, is at best a poor wanna be copy of the wondrous iPad, so buy the best: iPad)

There - all done, admitted it wasn't a copy, and get some good PR to boot. I'm sure the UK judge won't approve.

Re:And we can expect (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689957)

Better still, should they choose to appeal, it might be construed as an admission that the Samsung IS as cool...

Re:And we can expect (4, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#40689983)

I'm sure at this very moment, there are dozens of staffers from ad agencies employed by Apple quaffing quad shot lattes and bouncing all manner of story arcs off of each other, the walls and the urinals at Starbucks.

This is an advertising executives dream job.

Re:And we can expect (1)

LoverOfJoy (820058) | about 2 years ago | (#40690127)

Often imitated, never duplicated!

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (-1, Flamebait)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40689625)

The Shame Roll
-----------------------
Apple
Microsoft
Google
GM
Toyota
Sony
Nintendo
Comcast
Verizon
(feel free to add more)

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689685)

Ok, now I'm curious, when did Nintendo troll anyone?

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40689761)

>>>Remind me again, what sort of trolling did Google do?

>>>Ok, now I'm curious, when did Nintendo troll anyone?

This was just a generalized roll of shame for corporations I refuse to give money to. Google supports CISPA passage and records info. Most recently they required I give them my "real name" on yahoo, else I cannot post comments.

Nintendo had a history in the 80s/90s of monopolistic behavior. They seem to be better in the 2000s, so maybe I'll remove them from the list.

Toyota refused to replace customer engines that died in less than 25,000 miles. That forced the customer to spend $5000 to $8000 for engine replacement that, under warranty, should have been free. (The customers had dealer records showing they had required oil changes, but still were refused.)

 

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0, Flamebait)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#40690083)

You might feel more fulfilled if you unplugged yourself from the Internet, sold your car, tossed your cellphone, put on a couple of free range burlap sacks and just sat in your local National Forest watching it rain whilst nibbling on some roots.

You'd have less angst, it would be cheaper (a recurring theme for you) and we would not be subject to your endless stream of Awful Experiences by the ignoble and inhumane hand of commerce.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (2)

Dahamma (304068) | about 2 years ago | (#40689823)

Generally Nintendo seems to be the patent troll-killer these days... but they did sue Nyko in a design look-and-feel patent that sounds pretty similar to Apple's issues with Samsung...

http://gizmodo.com/5016278/nintendo-suing-nyko-over-wireless-nunchuk [gizmodo.com]

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | about 2 years ago | (#40689927)

They were really ratty back in the days of the NES to anyone who wanted to produce 3rd-party games for their system without paying them insane licensing fees.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40690089)

You mean like any console these days or any distribution network like Steam or an App stores? Nintendo did have a hard ass approach and even when you could publish on the NES you were only allowed to do something like 5 games a year which lead to Konami creating Ultra to give themselves 10 games a year.

That said, their approach is probably what saved console gaming. It's easy to look back on that now and say that sucks but the NES certainly wasn't lacking 3rd party games and given that consoles pretty much dead before the NES the whole free-for-all wasn't working terribly well

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689689)

Remind me again, what sort of trolling did Google do?

Note, GOOGLE. NOT Motorola Mobility from before Google announced they would buy them. And NOT Motorola Mobility now, as Google is not in charge of them yet. JUST what GOOGLE did.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1, Informative)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40690169)

Google wants to keep their image clean amongst open source. But that doesn't mean they aren't using other people to sue over patents or giving them patents to do their dirty work.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2011/09/googles-already-using-their-motorola-patents-sue-apple/42196/ [theatlanticwire.com]

They're also helping HTC go up against Nokia and filing an antitrust complaint against Nokia in the EU.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304821304577438740232322350.html [wsj.com]

I'd fully expect to see them start doing more now that they have Motorola. I suspect they didn't have any patents worth having in the mobile area but now they do and they're doing to use them.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689717)

Google. I see. For not playing the game, I guess??

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (5, Insightful)

ewanm89 (1052822) | about 2 years ago | (#40689719)

So which lawsuit did Google initiate? Plenty where suits have been bought against Google. I don't know of any where Google was the initiator.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (-1, Troll)

aristotle-dude (626586) | about 2 years ago | (#40689797)

So which lawsuit did Google initiate? Plenty where suits have been bought against Google. I don't know of any where Google was the initiator.

By proxy via Motorola which they were still in the middle of buying.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (4, Insightful)

OWJones (11633) | about 2 years ago | (#40690279)

By "in the middle of" you mean "not yet in control of and had no power over," right?

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690315)

That's exactly what that troll means. NEWSFLASH GP: Google has not initiated any patent lawsuits. Period. Motorola did their own thing and no amount of smearing from the peanut gallery is going to change that.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (2)

ewanm89 (1052822) | about 2 years ago | (#40690479)

Motorola files against apple in October 2010 [wikipedia.org] Google first reached out to start discussing terms in July 2011 [wikipedia.org] and while there are no sources cited for that second one, it does sound about right. There is no evidence Google had anything to do with initiating any lawsuit.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1)

RaceProUK (1137575) | about 2 years ago | (#40690389)

The Shame Roll <snip> Sony <snip>

Just because it doesn't say Sony on the case, doesn't mean it has nothing to do with Sony. It wouldn't surprise me if an least one of your electronic devices contains at least one Sony component.

Also if you buy a modern Lotus, the engine will be from Toyota.

Basically, it's a lot harder to avoid some companies than you think.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689659)

Apple is no patent troll. They protect their own innovations to an extent they deem reasonable. Patent trolls just litigate the shit out of anyone over any patent, but typically do not contribute to innovation themselves neither do they necessarily own many patents themselves.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (5, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | about 2 years ago | (#40689697)

hey protect their own innovations to an extent they deem reasonable

I'm pretty sure they didn't "innovate" a rectangle with rounded corners.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689769)

hey protect their own innovations to an extent they deem reasonable

I'm pretty sure they didn't "innovate" a rectangle with rounded corners.

Where's the rounded rectangle phone YOU invented, huh bub? To say that it was easy suggests that it could have been done 10 years prior. Was it? Nope. Clearly Apple put a lot of time and money (two things they need to protect) into that product.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689863)

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1)

sosume (680416) | about 2 years ago | (#40690259)

where are mod points when needed!

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689943)

Here's an idea: Follow the links in the summary. Or even to the previous /. article, where the judge cites over FIFTY cases of prior art in the last twenty+ years.

Or you could keep spouting off random crap that you feel strongly about. Who cares if it's factual.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689969)

Where's the rounded rectangle phone YOU invented, huh bub? To say that it was easy suggests that it could have been done 10 years prior.

The patented design had been show previously in sci-fi classics such as Star Trek (all of them) and 2001:A Space Odyssey as well as others.

Considering your rather pathetic argument I take it that you have not been paying attention or you are trolling for a response like this.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#40690137)

Now you really need to stop harping on the 'rounded rectangle' meme. It was a design patent - As we've endlessly argued here, Samsung copied much more than the corners of the iPad. You can argue that Samsung's design was sufficiently different from Apple's as to keep customers from getting confused but at best Samsung really pushed the envelope there.

But the design patent comprised the entire device, it wasn't about edge cases.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (5, Informative)

oakgrove (845019) | about 2 years ago | (#40690271)

Have you even looked at the patent in question? Here it is [google.com] in all its rounded corner glory. They patented rounded freaking corners. If you want to get specific, 4 rounded corners on a rectangle. Like the world has never seen that before.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (2)

Dragonslicer (991472) | about 2 years ago | (#40690469)

Well, technically that design also requires a round thing (I can't tell if it's a headphone jack or a light) on the right edge near the top-right corner.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690235)

Maybe obvious to you, but I know lots of people who think other tablets must be having very similar functionality as iPad because, they have same size, shape, touchscreen and outward appearance. Try telling them that they are not related to each other and are independently developed and see how many of them believe you.

I don't own iPad, instead own Android tablet that I bought with the same expectations that it would work as good as iPad. Unfortunately, the specific Android tablet (Toshiba Thrive) does not support Cisco VPN Anyconnect app (supported on iPad) and hence I can't use for my office use. It is now just a game machine for my kids. Yes, I feel like ripped off due to similarity between the two products outward appearance.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690449)

Yes, I feel like ripped off due to similarity between the two products outward appearance.

Why didn't you save some typing and just state simply "I AM A COMPLETE FUCKING IDIOT"?

That would have been much more to the point and concise.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689731)

Steve? Is that you? I thought you were dead!

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689739)

"They protect their own innovations". Exactly. Not square icons, which ironically was copied from Samsung itself.

And stop hiding behind some made up definition of troll. Apple is a troll, and nothing more. Now go and fuck youself.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (5, Insightful)

oakgrove (845019) | about 2 years ago | (#40689773)

They protect their own innovations to an extent they deem reasonable.

What innovations? Apple is an imitator, marketer, and polisher of other people's products. Did they invent the cellphone? Did they invent tablets? Did they invent mp3 players, touch screens, gridded icons, rounded corners or anything else of substance? Have they ever actually created a new product category? The best people can say is that Samsung imitated an imitator. At best.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0)

aristotle-dude (626586) | about 2 years ago | (#40689935)

They protect their own innovations to an extent they deem reasonable.

What innovations? Apple is an imitator, marketer, and polisher of other people's products. Did they invent the cellphone? Did they invent tablets? Did they invent mp3 players, touch screens, gridded icons, rounded corners or anything else of substance? Have they ever actually created a new product category? The best people can say is that Samsung imitated an imitator. At best.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MessagePad [wikipedia.org]
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Round_Rects_Are_Everywhere.txt [folklore.org]

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689999)

The second link was pretty funny. However your first link has a link to Psion [wikipedia.org] in it. Psion is generally accepted as the actual inventor of the PDA.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | about 2 years ago | (#40690003)

Not only that, Apple copied the Diamond RIO MP3 Player, Napster, Unix, Xerox, the color scheme and elegance of a piano in all of their graphic designs...

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690229)

Yeah, it was a huge invention. They invented a rectangular screen with rounded corners and a black frame. If it walks like a patent troll and talks like a patent troll, then Matz says it is a patent troll.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (4, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 2 years ago | (#40689987)

The reason Apple have to do this is because they tried to trash Samsung's name publicly. Apple is not being punished here, merely made to undo the wrong that they did.

We have restorative justice, meaning the goal is always to put things back the way they were before the matter under consideration happened. Monetary damages are awarded based on lost income, and in cases like this where one party has damaged the other's reputation steps must be taken to restore it.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0)

jellomizer (103300) | about 2 years ago | (#40690103)

Yes when the big guy looses, we jump for joy. However the European style "loser pays" for the little guy, who had a valid patent, but lost due to the big guy having more money to win. Then to add insult to injury he has to pay more.

That isn't justice, that is censoring the little guy.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (3, Insightful)

sootman (158191) | about 2 years ago | (#40690155)

How does "loser pays" work when a little guy goes after a big company like Apple, Google, or Microsoft with a legitimate complaint but gets defeated because the big company was able to spend 100,000x more on their lawyers?

Is it really shaming? (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#40690247)

I don't see how it's that bad. The article says

He declined today to grant Samsung’s bid for an injunction blocking Apple from making public statements that the Galaxy infringed its design rights.

So they can still say the Galaxy infringed on their design. They only have to put it on their website for the UK only and they'll probably turn it around and say something along the lines of court confirming their product is cooler which is hardly detrimental to their image.

So I'm failing to see how they've been shamed.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690307)

This isn't a patent case. It's a design copyright case. Also, trolling is suing based on patents that were typically purchased from another inventing party and for which there is no intention of actually use the patents to create a product. While you may disagree on the merits of Apple's cases and deem them frivolous, they are by and large all based on patents filed and obtained by Apple and which are in use in current products. Thus, they are not trolling as it's most commonly defined.

Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690481)

Do you feel better now after indulging us in your insipid pedantry? Now that you're done, let me spell it out for you...APPLE IS A TROLL. End of fucking story. They pretend to invent shit that they didn't. They imitate, polish, and litigate. Period. They are patent super trolls.

Unconstitutional (0)

JSBiff (87824) | about 2 years ago | (#40690319)

In the US, so far as I know, court's can only order such punishments as they have been granted power to do through legislation by congress or a state legislature.

Congress and state legislatures are limited by the Constitution. The First Amendment of which guarantees free speech by prohibiting Congress from passing any laws which abridge the freedom of speech.

Therefor, Congress cannot pass a law granting the courts the power to compel speech, because compelling speech is equally an abridgement of free speech just as much as censoring free speech.

Also, just because a court find someone guilty, doesn't mean they are. How many people convicted for murder or rape have later been exhonerated? What if they had been compelled to make an admission of guilt by the court? Someone should always have the right to maintain their innocence.

It's easy to look at this and say, "well, this is a corporation and a patent troll to boot", but if they can do it to a patent troll, why couldn't they do it to you?

YES! (5, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#40689455)

One of my biggest issues with corporate culture is the ending to so many disputes where the misbehaving corporation "admits no fault" for the situation.

They should always have to post a "we did wrong" letter after they get shown the door.

Re:YES! (5, Insightful)

Genda (560240) | about 2 years ago | (#40689597)

I find it particularly egregious when a corporation has committed a truly heinous act, like dumping toxic waste resulting in some number of deaths and injuries, and to keep face, they agree to settle out quickly (so the remaining survivors can get expensive medical care) on the agreement that they "Admit to no wrong doing", and nobody can talk about the atrocity they committed.

Perhaps there will be a time when people place the value of human dignity above the value of personal wealth. Sadly, I'm not holding my breath.

Re:YES! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690045)

I dunno. I see what you're getting at, but I'm not sure how you'd manage to work a forced "embarrassment" clause into any out-of-court settlement for civil cases.

Keep in mind, it's not uncommon for companies to settle out of court when they're sued, even when they've done nothing wrong. This just happened at my workplace a couple months ago.

Things as they are, it's far better to pay someone $80k now, even if you're 95% sure they'd lose their shitty case, rather than risk a $500k payout because people are jackasses and do weird things.

It's extortion, but it works. I wouldn't want to add unjust embarrassment to an already unfair shakedown.

Re:YES! (1)

Genda (560240) | about 2 years ago | (#40690345)

How about this, if your company's legal department is a profit center, publicly naming your corporation a parasite on the back side of society.

Re:YES! (1)

million_monkeys (2480792) | about 2 years ago | (#40689695)

One of my biggest issues with corporate culture is the ending to so many disputes where the misbehaving corporation "admits no fault" for the situation.

They should always have to post a "we did wrong" letter after they get shown the door.

Maybe selling ad space to publish "we did wrong" letters can be the new business model for newspapers? They can make it into a racket and charge exorbitant fees for 'our bad' space. Since the companies have been order to post the ad by the courts, they'll have to pay the fees. If they charge enough, they won't even need subscribers.

Re:YES! (1)

WrecklessSandwich (1000139) | about 2 years ago | (#40689807)

Well, newspapers already do charge exorbitant fees to post ads, so that would be no big deal for them.

Re:YES! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689945)

Except of course that Apple doesn't have to post a "we did wrong" letter. They simply have to alert the public to the ruling, not admit that they were wrong or that they agree with the ruling. I imagine something like this:

"We would like to inform you that the European Court has ruled that Samsung did not copy the iPad. While we disagree with this ruling, and are terribly saddened by this miscarriage of justice, we are happy that the judge found the iPad to be way cooler...."

Re:YES! (0)

StripedCow (776465) | about 2 years ago | (#40690411)

One of my other big problems with corporate culture is that corporations always try to seek the limits of the law, and then claim to behave ethically correctly because their actions are technically "allowed". If we, individuals, would live our lives in such a calculated indecent way, then surely we would all be living in a miserable world.

If it's Apple, it'll be in the most obscure place. (1)

sethstorm (512897) | about 2 years ago | (#40689457)

You'll find the notice right before the equivalent of the Obituary section or a couple pages from the back of the first section.

Re:If it's Apple, it'll be in the most obscure pla (3, Informative)

OldSport (2677879) | about 2 years ago | (#40689827)

Maybe not. Citibank screwed something up in Japan -- not sure what, some violation of information disclosure laws -- and it was on the main page for three months -- you had to click a little box acknowledging you'd read it before you could access your account. Hopefully this will be something similar.

Love this guy (0)

hackula (2596247) | about 2 years ago | (#40689535)

This judge is in it purely for the lulz.

Way cooler (5, Funny)

Ant2 (252143) | about 2 years ago | (#40689537)

I could see how Apple could turn this around to their benefit.

"Samsung did not copy design from the iPad for the Galaxy Tab. The iPad is WAY cooler! Even the judge thinks so."

Re:Way cooler (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689759)

If I was that judge, I wouldn't stand for such slander... =P

Re:Way cooler (1)

need4mospd (1146215) | about 2 years ago | (#40689787)

Samsung: "The judge also thinks his Buick LeSabre is cool."

He's British (3, Informative)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | about 2 years ago | (#40690215)

I doubt he's ever heard of it. In the UK, no, and I really mean no, US car has the slightest cool factor whatsoever. The coolest judgemobile ever was Scott's bicycle at the Scott enquiry (into illegal arms sales to Iraq).

I may be way off (1)

goldcd (587052) | about 2 years ago | (#40690061)

but I always read the "cooler" as positively dripping in sarcasm.

Re:Way cooler (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690441)

In their "I'm a Mac" campaign they dissed MS but never by name, did they? It was always against the technically generic-named "PC".
Does this ruling give them permission to name names in their ads?

"I'm an iPad."
"And I'm a Samsung. Hey iPad, I'm not trying to copy you, you know. I'm going for my own look here."
"I know, Samsung."
"It's just that people might think I'm trying to be like you."
"Don't worry Samsung. Nobody's going to think you're at all like me."
(Text) "iPad. The others don't even come close."

And what about the same case in other countries? (1)

Chas (5144) | about 2 years ago | (#40689557)

I wonder what this'll do for other cases where Apple is bending Samsung over for the same exact thing.

Re:And what about the same case in other countries (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689639)

It could lead in all sorts of directions.

Imagine mandatory adverts that say "When you buy this Android phone, you're helping to support Microsoft"

Or

"Using Android severely increases the risk of your phone being infected with a virus"

Re:And what about the same case in other countries (1)

ashvagan (885082) | about 2 years ago | (#40689677)

Apart from publicity/shame, nothing much. UK laws don't apply there any way, even though they should adopt a very similar approach to these mindless cases.

Re:And what about the same case in other countries (2)

Chas (5144) | about 2 years ago | (#40690111)

Yes, but if you have public documentation of "No this product doesn't infringe on ours" on their website...

YuO Fail IT!? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689605)

recru1tm3nt, but

Advertisement (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689607)

"As required by Judge Colin Birss, we are required to inform you that the Galaxy Tab is not as cool as the iPad. Needless to say, we agree with Judge Birss."

The punch line (5, Informative)

OhHellWithIt (756826) | about 2 years ago | (#40689619)

The punch line is in TFA (emphasis added):

Birss said in his July 9 ruling that Samsung’s tablets were unlikely to be confused with the iPad because they are “not as cool.” He declined today to grant Samsung’s bid for an injunction blocking Apple from making public statements that the Galaxy infringed its design rights.

“They are entitled to their opinion,” he said.

It looks like they have to run the ads, but they can still say Samsung copied them.

Judges just won't stay bought these days. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689641)

What's the world coming to.

Idea? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689645)

How about a system something like this:

If you file a frivolous patent case against a competitor and lose, you must advertise for the said product on your website for X time period, give a public statement/apology AND you must also pay the defendant's legal expenses.

Maybe something like that would deter more patent trolling?

Simple solution (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about 2 years ago | (#40689651)

Put the notice in 2pt font.
At the bottom of the page.
White text on white background.
dotted font.
wingdings.

Re:Simple solution (2)

nosferatu1001 (264446) | about 2 years ago | (#40689821)

...and watch the judge fine them for contempt of court.

Re:Simple solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690113)

Or put it front page on Myspace. Either way, same visibility.

Apple's conduct is reprehensible (4)

execthis (537150) | about 2 years ago | (#40689671)

Samsung said in their statement: "Should Apple continue to make excessive legal claims based on such generic designs, innovation in the industry could be harmed and consumer choice unduly limited."

Apple is like the #1 enemy in the tech industry. I remember that ad from years ago with all those drone-like people in front of the screen obeying their overlord. Well, can't people see that that's exactly what Apple and its users are like now?

Re:Apple's conduct is reprehensible (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690059)

Well, can't people see that that's exactly what Apple and its users are like now?

They can't. Don't underestimate the power of a cult to make people blind to something others can see.

Other examples: both US political parties. They each do a ton of nasty shit, but people can't see the nasty shit THEIR party does, only the nasty shit the OTHER party does.

It's about the same.

Re:Apple's conduct is reprehensible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690425)

I'm with you on the political parties bullshit, but even as a fan of many of the things Apple makes, I thought this was a stupid suit from the start. But we will need to see a lot more of them before we get any real reform, I think.

That is awesome but... (1)

just another AC (2679463) | about 2 years ago | (#40689693)

It would have been better if the judge could have

1. specified it to be the FRONT page (or default page) associated with the iPad.
2. made Apple disclose the many instances where their products have been "copies" (some would say refinements) of other existing products just to ram home the point of them being hypocritical asses

But they did! (-1, Troll)

methano (519830) | about 2 years ago | (#40689699)

Everybody is gloating cause Apple, the patent troll, got its comeuppance. But, everybody knows, at the same time, that Samsung did, in fact, copy the iPad

Re:But they did! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689865)

Samsung copied the PADD, not the iPad. (See: LCARS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCARS )

Re:But they did! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689919)

Indeed. Whilst obviously not a forgery there's no question that they have copied Apple.

A shame really 'cos Samsung make some great products in their own right and even more really good components for other manufacturers but I have no respect for the company and won't ever be buying anything sold under the Samsung brand.
(And as someone who is British I feel entitled to say that the judge is being an arse and Apple should just go over his head. They may still lose but at least the verdict would be delivered with less ego.)

Re:But they did! (1)

terjeber (856226) | about 2 years ago | (#40690343)

You need to get off the meds, or get on them if you are off. Samsung didn't copy Apple at all. The design pre-dates the iPad with about a decade. Only someone with their heads up Steve Jobs' ass would consider it copying the iPad.

Re:But they did! (1)

cyber-vandal (148830) | about 2 years ago | (#40690053)

Yes they made a rectangle without a shiny back and wrote Samsung on it just like the iPad. Then they installed Android, that well known Apple OS. Then they put an SD card slot in it just like Apple did. Oh wait.

Re:But they did! (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40690181)

>>>Samsung did, in fact, copy the iPad

Provide proof please

Re:But they did! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690433)

http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-apple-injunction-20120626,0,3449414.story

If the UK adopts a California approach (1)

david.emery (127135) | about 2 years ago | (#40689721)

Samsung devices will be required to contain a warning: "This device contains technology that Her Majesty's Courts have determined is not as cool as an iPad."

And Apple will post a precise statement, "In the United Kingdom, the Court has determined that Samsung Galaxy Tab does not copy the iPad. In other jurisdictions (list), an opposing judgement has been rendered."

Publicly (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40689763)

It will be posted publicly.
In a public cellar.
With no stairs.
In the dark.
In the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'.

Oh the Spin that could be done! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40690133)

Oh the spin. Sure they will place that Samsung didn't copy them. I can just see the spin. It would go something like this.

Hear ye, Hear ye. We told you our products are the best. Sure Samsung may have tried to copy us, but we are still better. Look at the stats that say if you have an Apple product you get laid more often because your cool and women know if you have high priced equipment then your the man for her. And women you know you want a no muss no fuss electronic device like your iDildo to that is quality made and will do what you want for as long as you want. So what if we have to say Samsung may look like us we all know they are not us because the law says it "We are the cool company with the cool devices" and Samsung is like the little brother or sister trying to be cool when we all know they never will.

Apple's style... (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | about 2 years ago | (#40690233)

Judge: "Apologize to that lady you called fat!"
Apple: "I'm sorry you're fat."
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...