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!

Apple Posts Non-Apology To Samsung

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the we're-sorry-we're-so-much-cooler-than-you dept.

Handhelds 413

We recently discussed news of a UK court ruling in which the judge decided Apple must publicly acknowledge that Samsung's Galaxy Tab did not infringe upon the iPad's design, both on the Apple website and in several publications. The acknowledgement has now been posted, and it's anything but apologetic. It states the court's ruling, helpfully referring to "Apple's registered design No. 000018607-0001," and quotes the judges words as an advertisement. The judge wrote, "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." They go on to mention German and U.S. cases which found in Apple's favor. Apple's statement concludes, "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."

cancel ×

413 comments

The court didn't ask for an apology... (4, Informative)

TWX (665546) | about a year ago | (#41777537)

..they required an acknowledgement of design differences. The danger for Apple is that such a public acknowledgement could spill over into other jurisdictions and affect suits there. Therefore, they've made it as highly specifically technical and narrow to their lawyers' interpretation of the judge's order as possible. Whether or not the court will agree is another matter, and if the court disagrees, how the judge feels about it could mean anything from tweaking the wording to being found in contempt.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777791)

Apple? Have contempt of anything? Never!

I'm sure Asshole had the utmost respect for the courts and judge, when doing that, and will pass out fluffy bunnies of happiness to foster the love and care they feel for the community who they certainly see as more than sheep, who's only purpose is to throw money at them.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about a year ago | (#41777799)

Yes well if Samsung asks the judge why in the hell he ordered Apple to give a prominent court endorsement about how much better and cooler the iPad is...

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777813)

No, they're been arseholes. You know it, I know it and the general public knows it.

It doesn't matter how many apologists try to justify it on Slashdot, the simple fact is that Apple chose to take a mean-spirited approach.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (5, Insightful)

TWX (665546) | about a year ago | (#41778051)

I made no opinion or statement on their assholishness. In fact, I find the entire idea that someone can patent a touchescreen with some processing capability in a housing with a battery to be stupid. We have prior art in the form of fictional TV shows definitely showing this stuff to us in the eighties (IE, Star Trek:TNG's "PADD") and we had a series of convertible tablet PCs in the late nineties and early naughties that had similar functionality with albeit heftier components. I don't look on the iPad as anything more than one of many incrementally evolutionary devices in a series of ever-improving handhelds.

If I were the judge, I would have found that Samsung did not infringe on Apple because of prior art, not because of any subjective view like what's considered cool.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778095)

Apple chose to take a mean-spirited approach.

How so? Apple stated all the reference details of the case, including a URL, and quoted the judges exact words. Are you saying the judge was mean-spirited in his assessment? Or do you take exception to Apple pointing out that that other courts around the world took a different view on the matter?

The judge is going to be pissed. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778129)

Try fucking with the judge and you and your solicitor are in DEEP SHIT.

Re:The judge is going to be pissed. (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778319)

Not to mention their libelous assertions that the US case found the Galaxy Tab had infringed when it was specifically specified by the jury that it didn't.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778099)

No, they're been arseholes. You know it, I know it and the general public knows it.

It doesn't matter how many apologists try to justify it on Slashdot, the simple fact is that Apple chose to take a mean-spirited approach.

All schadenfreude aside, requiring Apple to apologize is strange to put it mildly. Is this the new the norm in UK courts? The party who loses a civil lawsuit must publicly apologize to the other party? How will that work for the rest of us? Will we be required to stamp the apology to our foreheads? Will there be a standard text: "I poor misguided sap dared to sue <insert name of other party> so the judge ordered me to humiliate myself for six months by wearing this text stamped to my forehead to teach me a lesson about seeking redress through the courts." ??

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (4, Funny)

stevew (4845) | about a year ago | (#41778151)

Maybe it isn't such a bad idea? If individuals had to publicly humiliate themselves for bringing false and expensive lawsuits, maybe there would be fewer of them. But then - I've always thought we should bring back the racks!

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (0)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about a year ago | (#41778121)

I'm sorry, what? "Mean-spirited"? This is a public statement acknowledging non-infringement which they are being forced to make that we're talking about. You do realize the two companies have been locked in billion-dollar legal battles around the globe for the last few years and that the only reason Apple posted anything at all was because they were required to by the court. Of course they're going to post something like this. The court likely had the foresight to expect exactly this sort of thing, since it's used to dealing with groups who aren't exactly on friendly terms with one another. Lawsuits bring out the worst in everyone.

So, yeah, they're not being nice. But I'm fairly certain no one, including the court, expected them to be nice about it, nor do I recall hearing the judge telling them they needed to be nice in their public acknowledgement. While it's clearly not in the desired spirit, everything the notice says is factual, and it does comply with the ruling.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (5, Informative)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#41778309)

Actually, they do not actually acknowledge non-infringement at all. All they acknowledge is the court decision that Samsung did not infringe. This so-called apology is merely a recitation of the fact that the court had concluded the things that they did. They do not even hint at acknowledging that this decision was in any way, shape, or form, a genuine assessment of reality.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (5, Insightful)

bfandreas (603438) | about a year ago | (#41778175)

...and while Samsung and Apple duke it out in court, Asus has quietly perfected its Transformer line to a point where I say that tablets will in the near future replace desktop PCs.

The sole reason for a beefy PC for me is intensive gaming or intensive software development. I find myself more often not taking my laptop with me on business trips and only bring my Prime. Now they threaten to sell a similar machine with an i7, Win 8(which may or may not suck) and 3 slightly bigger screens. And even if I refuse to go down the Win8 route: the form factor of the Transformers is so perfect that neither Apple or Samsung have anything in store that even remotely interests me.

The sheer brilliance of having a second battery in the detachable keyboard alone is worth the price. Not needing a protective cover for the screen since the keyboard protects it is clever. Using the keyboard to offer a second data storage is commendable. Having fully featured USB/HDMI ports on the keyboard is useful. It's like carrying your docking station around with you.

Pity about the GPS, tho. And Android web browsers still suck. Responsiveness is at times sluggish. And it can become awfully warm(not hot). And it has the worst case of Bluetooth lag I have ever encountered. Try watching a movie with Bluetooth headphones and sound and movie will never be in synch. It also is mono. And it is not beefy enough to run the first Dungeon Keeper in Dosbox at a playable frame rate(I could possibly tweak it a bit, tho).

I forsee that Asus will be heavily copied.

Prevents JurisDICKtion Shopping (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778421)

The court clearly wanted Apple to point out the decision, so it would influence other courts around the world and prevent Apple from 'Jurisdiction shopping'. So for example many companies file claims in Texas because the courts there almost always find in favor of the US company regardless of the bogus nature of the patents claims, or the troll nature of the claimant.

So Judge just wants to make it clear that courts have examined these in details and found the claim to be baseless.

Apple on the other hand want to pretend they invented the rounder rectangular tablet form factor, and not just the first to successfully sell it, and many Judges do not know that Apple copied multi-touch, weren't the first to use a camera icon for a camera, even their whole iMac computer was a Parc copy.

So yeh, Apple are being dicks, trying to keep the patent trolling going, even after losing a decision. But the Texas $1 billion has to be overturned soon, the jurist gave the game away. Tim Cook really doesn't seem to be up to the role. Apple continues on incremental upgrades, but there's no visionary there, just a dick.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778461)

Who ever said that competitors need to be nice to each other? Its called competition, if you don't like the benefits that competition brings then maybe you should move to North Korea.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (-1, Troll)

Hillgiant (916436) | about a year ago | (#41777911)

IANAL but, having read a lot of coverage here on slashdot, it seems pretty clear to me that Apple's only path forward was to close up shop, fire everyone, and grant all of their IP & physical assets to Samsung. Anything else would be a tragic miscarriage of justice.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (-1, Flamebait)

ByOhTek (1181381) | about a year ago | (#41777941)

Hopefully they find contempt, and put a ban on iPad sales equal in length to the earlier ban on Samsung sales - assuming there was one, if not, then hopefully customer's response to Apple's Asshole response will be enough.

Oddly enough, I'm thinking it is a shame Jobs isn't still around, jackass as he was, he'd at least have come up with a more clever/snarky way of doing this.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (-1, Offtopic)

durrr (1316311) | about a year ago | (#41777993)

He's probably around somewhere still.
Reincarnated as a plankton most likely.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (2, Funny)

crazyjj (2598719) | about a year ago | (#41778259)

Reincarnated as a plankton most likely.

With his karma? He wishes! It'll be a while before he gets back into the food chain again. Right now, he's a herpes sore on Courtney Love.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (1)

TWX (665546) | about a year ago | (#41777999)

If he lived, he could literally post the judge's own words about the coolness of Apple versus the lack of coolness of Samsung. He could cite that the court demonstrated that his products are the coolest around. And a lot of people would buy into that.

Re:The court didn't ask for an apology... (2)

poetmatt (793785) | about a year ago | (#41778091)

They didn't make it narrow or specifically technical at all. At what point does "we concocted a giant story discussing the matter and other issues" as opposed to just stating "Samsung did not copy Apple" sound like an even remotely narrow interpretation? This isn't following the spirit or the letter of the law.

You want me to say they are not cool? OK (4, Funny)

the_B0fh (208483) | about a year ago | (#41777545)

Heh. Not sure if Samsung prefers to have this up or down :)

It was there non-apologetic... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777551)

First post.

Re:It was there non-apologetic... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777907)

Hey This post is just like every Apple product ever made. Not even close to first, but billed as such by the company and all the fanboners.

Re:It was there non-apologetic... (2)

Lord Lemur (993283) | about a year ago | (#41778137)

No, he was proactively copied in look and feel of his first post by TWX. TWX then just made is post less cool, so that it would be differentiated. Look at all those extra words.. is that an adverb?! It's a mockery of the simplicity of AC's post.

Mmmmm....contempt.... (4, Insightful)

raydobbs (99133) | about a year ago | (#41777559)

...like what they'd do to NORMAL people when we spit in the face of the judge with our restitution... likely to happen? Nope. Sad, really. They really really deserve it.

Re:Mmmmm....contempt.... (4, Insightful)

Viewsonic (584922) | about a year ago | (#41777631)

Depends on the judge. I think it is safe to say that if a judge went out of his way to have Apple post something like this publicly, and they spat in his face, there is going to be hell to pay. This doesn't seem like your run of the mill judge, and Apple should have known this from the verdict decision.

It wasn't (4, Interesting)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | about a year ago | (#41777703)

It was three Appeal judges. This sort of thing really is a mistake where they are concerned, and I imagine they will be contacting one another about it on their Blackberries. If Apple now goes to the UK Supreme Court, they will not be very popular.

Re:Mmmmm....contempt.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777693)

Huh? The court determined that Samsung isn't as cool as Apple. Why should they be upset?

I have switched my vote... (0, Offtopic)

alphatel (1450715) | about a year ago | (#41777565)

To "Don't care" about Ahole vs Shitsung

Re:I have switched my vote... (2)

ByOhTek (1181381) | about a year ago | (#41777803)

All I can think is, if they both lose, everyone wins.

So I guess I care a bit.

Just Apple.. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777571)

..being Apple. This is just what they do best: spin everything for good PR, forgetting the technical part.

Re:Just Apple.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778009)

To the nice mod who modded this troll, did you really expect Apple to follow the spirit of what the judge requested?

Re:Just Apple.. (5, Informative)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#41778385)

Apple didn't even follow the letter of what the judge told them to do (and it was not a request, it was a court order) The judge told them to acknowledge that Samsung did not infringe. Rather than do that, all they did was acknowledge that *court* had determined that Samsung did not infringe. This is a mere recitation of historically verifiable facts, and not an acknowledgement that Samsung did not infringe, which is what the judge told Apple to do.

Unsurprisingly (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777577)

Apple, keeping it classy /s

Contempt of Court (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777585)

I really hope the UK has the equivalent of 'contempt of court' and throws the book at those arrogant jerks at Apple.

I further hope the blowback from their attempted patent-armageddon against the rest of the smartphone industry costs them manyfold what they've attempted to extort from others. I only wish I'd never introduced my wife to Apple, and helped her climb the Linux learning curve instead. I hate the idea of giving those would-be monopolists a single penny.

Re:Contempt of Court (5, Interesting)

LizardKing (5245) | about a year ago | (#41778007)

Yes, the UK does have the principle of "contempt of court", and I'd say this is pretty much an example of it as it goes against the spirit and arguably the wording of the court judgement. I just wonder how the court would decide which Apple employees are going to prison for this (and yes, contempt of court invariably means jail time even if it's only overnight).

Contempt of court. (0)

EasyTarget (43516) | about a year ago | (#41777587)

Judges really hate this sort of thing. Hopefully we'll get to read a transcript of what happens when Apple, and their counsel, are required to re-appear before the court..

Re:Contempt of court. (2)

synapse7 (1075571) | about a year ago | (#41777747)

What was expected? This is the company that complains when they win.

Bitter hipsters... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777591)

Poor losers who think they're above any rulings that don't agree with their own narrative. Typical asshole behavior, but their fans will eat it right up.

Re:Bitter hipsters... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777699)

Kind of like Android fans when Google/Samsung does something that is obviously wrong...your point is?

Re:Bitter hipsters... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777995)

Disregard both of my posts here, I am an M$ addict that likes to suck Sweaty B's and Bill Gates' cocks. Perfect payment for astroturfing for M$ here on $lashdot. [slashdot.org]

Joe Wilcox

Sounds like contempt of court (2, Interesting)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about a year ago | (#41777595)

Judges generally don't like it at all when people try to skirt around their rulings by barely acknowledging the letter while flagrantly disregarding the spirit.

Apple is just begging for a contempt citation here.

Re:Sounds like contempt of court (2)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#41778067)

They can afford it. Just another cost of doing business. It's already built into the price of their products.

Re:Sounds like contempt of court (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778241)

They can afford jail?

Re:Sounds like contempt of court (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#41778447)

Oh please.. Nobody's going to jail, and it shouldn't even be an option. If they want to effectively punish them, it would be much better to revoke a patent/copyright, or two. Save the damn prisons for dangerous people.

Re:Sounds like contempt of court (1)

aaarrrgggh (9205) | about a year ago | (#41778331)

Law is all about specificity.

If the ad does not fit (1)

Zeroblitzt (871307) | about a year ago | (#41777633)

Apple will just throw more money at it.

Good... (0)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | about a year ago | (#41777755)

The UK can use the resulting trickle-down money from our legal system. English commercial courts are increasingly used as international courts because it's recognised that English judges are pretty corruption-proof; no-one has ever made that claim about courts in California or Texas, say. Well, perhaps they have, but then did anyone take it very seriously?

Re:Good... (0, Flamebait)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about a year ago | (#41777859)

You've never sat in an English court, have you? I have, and can tell you from personal experience that English judges are FAR from incorruptible.

Don't Care (1, Insightful)

ZombieBraintrust (1685608) | about a year ago | (#41777637)

Court ordered apologies are stupid. Good for Apple to show contempt for them. Doesn't make their patent good. Their patents are still stupid.

Re:Don't Care (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778249)

Actually they are a very good idea. Otherwise companies (Apple) could use lawsuits against other companies (Samsung) to effectively commit libel/slander without repercussion. Allowing companies (Apple) to use/abuse the law in that fashion would be a massive oversight.

Placement of the ad (1)

samazon (2601193) | about a year ago | (#41777641)

I was under the impression that the statement had to be on the front page of the web site? I don't even see a link to it on their UK home page.

Re:Placement of the ad (5, Funny)

Lemming Mark (849014) | about a year ago | (#41777793)

I thought that too - but it's in small writing, in the link bar at the bottom of the UK home page.

Apparently if you go there, you also find the stairs are missing and the announcement is in a locked cubicle with a sign on the door saying "beware of the OS X Leopard".

Re:Placement of the ad (1)

CodeheadUK (2717911) | about a year ago | (#41777873)

Nice reference, thank you for brightening my afternoon. My fellow office dwellers are now all staring at me.

Re:Placement of the ad (2, Insightful)

EasyTarget (43516) | about a year ago | (#41777925)

"beware of the OS X Leopard".

Class!
- and come to think of it; Apple fanbois resemble Vogons in so many ways.

Re:Placement of the ad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777969)

It's there... HOWEVER it's not in a size equal to 12pt Arial and thus in breach of the ruling...

Re:Placement of the ad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778055)

The appeals court tweaked the original ruling slightly, saying that a link to a page with the acknowledgement would be sufficient.

Re:Placement of the ad (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#41778315)

Then you're not looking very hard. It's just to the left of the Union Jack.

Grade School (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777643)

Well nice to know that Apple is still behaving like a spoiled child. It isn't enough to dominate the market, it is important to be unrepentant bully.

Re:Grade School (0, Flamebait)

Dr.Syshalt (702491) | about a year ago | (#41778189)

Yes, and that's why some consumers are attracted by their image, just the same way as some women are attracted to their abusers. The same idea - Apple look like they're tough guys, rebels, "think different" and so on.

Re:Grade School (2)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#41778377)

It isn't enough to dominate the market, it is important to be unrepentant bully.

That's how they dominate the market. The market, and society in general rewards bullies.

Contempt? (5, Insightful)

abigsmurf (919188) | about a year ago | (#41777659)

Apple using extremely selective quotes from the judge to spend the whole 'apology' badmouthing Samsung is questionable enough but the section at the bottom is basically saying "but ignore this judge, These two courts are more important and found them guilty". That's going to piss the judge off, judges never like their authority being undermined.

The judgment wasn't cast iron law, it doesn't matter if you follow it to the letter if the judge clearly believes you're not following the spirit of a judgement. The judge clearly would not have wanted Apple to give the impression that the judge endorsed Apple's products.

Re:Contempt? (3, Insightful)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#41777789)

So, using the judge's own words is now contempt?

You might want to think that through a little further.

Re:Contempt? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777839)

So, using the judge's own words is now contempt?

You might want to think that through a little further.

You don't get to quote someone and rearrange the words into different patterns to change the message.

Re:Contempt? (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#41778171)

That didn't happen.

Re:Contempt? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778281)

They didn't "rearrange" any words. They quoted paragraph 190 of the ruling *verbatim*.

Re:Contempt? (1)

Dupple (1016592) | about a year ago | (#41778407)

In what way were the words rearranged?

What the judge said

182.
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.

190.
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. The overall impression produced is different.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html [bailii.org]

What apple said

"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."

http://www.apple.com/uk/legal-judgement/ [apple.com]

Re:Contempt? (5, Insightful)

abigsmurf (919188) | about a year ago | (#41777915)

Yes.

The reason Apple were made to do this apology in the first place was because they put out PR material that misled consumers over the court proceedings. To then, in the apology use selective quotes that distort the nature of the ruling again... You can be sure the judge won't look kindly at it.

A judges ruling is not a cast iron contract where following it to the letter is all that matter, the "spirit" of the ruling is key and Apple are willfully going against it.

Re:Contempt? (0)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#41778219)

So, you're saying YOU can determine the spirit of the ruling better than the lawyers that were in the courtroom?

Or is there the chance that he said those things, but felt he to rule the other way, and will give Apple leeway to show his words?

Re:Contempt? (2)

abigsmurf (919188) | about a year ago | (#41778397)

I'm saying the Judge gets to determine what the spirit of the ruling is, the same judge that drew up the ruling and the same judge they are deliberately trying to undermine and question.

Re:Contempt? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778225)

The judge seemed pretty specific on what he wanted. 'i am sorry' in 14 point font on the front page. Anything more or less is not what he wanted. He only came short of writing it himself.

That was basically a 2 page rant against the judge. I dont think the judge will react nicely to that.

Re:Contempt? (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#41778353)

Not on the front page.
Not saying 'i'm sorry'
But, yes, in 14 point font.

Not a rant against the judge. Using his own words to (re?)denigrate Samsung's designs.

Re:Contempt? (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | about a year ago | (#41778179)

Apple using extremely selective quotes from the judge to spend the whole 'apology' badmouthing Samsung is questionable enough but the section at the bottom is basically saying "but ignore this judge, These two courts are more important and found them guilty". That's going to piss the judge off, judges never like their authority being undermined. The judgment wasn't cast iron law, it doesn't matter if you follow it to the letter if the judge clearly believes you're not following the spirit of a judgement. The judge clearly would not have wanted Apple to give the impression that the judge endorsed Apple's products.

It will be interesting to see what happens next. Apple no doubt ran this buy their very good legal team and decided the risk was worth it. Apple laid out facts along with the required notice and did not specifically continue to accuse Samsung of copying their design so they 8may* be safe but then again judges have a lot of power and latitude to use when you piss them off.

No shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777667)

"I order you to apologize!"

"I'm really sorry." /sarcasm

"He didn't sound sincere, your honor."

Re:No shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778111)

The Court: "I order you to acknowledge the ruling!"
Apple: "The court said they didn't infringe. Here's a direct quote from the ruling including the rationale the court used to find them non-infringing."
Samsung: "Doh!"

Samsung, sue based insult! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41777749)

If this is meant to be apology, sue Apple for the insult it is! UK have notorious insult laws: http://reformsection5.org.uk/

Called it (4, Funny)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#41777763)

About a week ago.

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3194259&cid=41692165 [slashdot.org]

Apple will definitely go down this road.

The judge gave clear language on how to display the apology, but not on what the apology should entail.

Something like:

"We apologize for implying that any Samsung product was as sleek or as easy to use as the (link to ipad page)Apple iPad.(\link)"

Re:Called it (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#41778125)

I award you one Internets.

Re:Called it (0)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#41778187)

Cool, so did I [slashdot.org] .

Re:Called it (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#41778265)

So, you hate the player AND the game.

Shame on you. Don't hate the game.

cool (1)

dotnose (1424451) | about a year ago | (#41777775)

Apple.. you just wait until my patent on coolness gets approved

Apology Streisand Explosion (2)

ciderbrew (1860166) | about a year ago | (#41777861)

It reads like a child saying sorry :) this has got to reach the news along with the follow case.
I think Microsoft would have written a 10,000 word apology which read like a EULA. Every bit unread after the first title.

Re:Apology Streisand Explosion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778181)

It reads like a child saying sorry :) this has got to reach the news along with the follow case.
  I think Microsoft would have written a 10,000 word apology which read like a EULA. Every bit unread after the first title.

Hehehe... that would have been elegant and funny. Court ordered apologies in civil lawsuits are just plain dumb.

Re:Apology Streisand Explosion (1)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about a year ago | (#41778313)

A Streisand Effect is exactly the point. With an apology like this, it's sure to draw attention, but that means that they'll have more people on the Apple website just a few clicks away from buying an iPad, and all of them will be reading about how a judge stated in his official ruling that the "informed user" will appreciate the iPad, or how courts around the world have been ruling that Samsung's less popular device is a copycat product.

True or not, that all plays right into Apple's hand. It's an extremely well-done piece of copywriting masquerading as a legal document.

Re:Apology Streisand Explosion (0)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#41778465)

The words "sorry" or "apologize" are not anywhere in the text that Apple posted. It was merely a recitation of the fact that the court had concluded the things that it did.

nerd rage is the funniest rage (-1, Offtopic)

Thud457 (234763) | about a year ago | (#41777933)

Does it bother anyone else other than me that "Artist" Barbara Selber apparently doesn't understand even the fundamentals of Pacman [slashdot.org] ? Those ghosts should be blue if Pacman is eating them! WTF?!!

And how long is /. going to do these google doodle ripoffs? Is this part of the new Dice regime?!!

FUCK APPLE... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778011)

...i will NEVER buy a single thing from Apple, EVER.

Trying to be clever. (4, Insightful)

AdmV0rl0n (98366) | about a year ago | (#41778085)

My rough take on this, and one Apple should probably absorb globally, is that legal cases are what they are. If you are going to cry publicly that others are not following the 'law' - you don't really gain much from then being a jackass in cases where its been found you are wrong. Why now should Samsung behave in result of a ruling? If all make mockey of the process, then where does it lead.

No, Apple need to be pulled back in court and to be hammered. Double hammered. And then hammered some more. Seems a deliberate and stupid attempt to deviate from the nature and spirit of the ruling laid down on them. This isn't marketing. This is a legal case. Trying to unleash the marketing idiots on it is a mistake, and is erroneous.

Jobs in his younger days - pretty much stated that he stole everything, every idea, every good design and so on - as far as he could. Thats why he went to Xerox Parc and was so taken with a GUI - the same as Paul Allen - 'one day every computer will use that' - Its sad that in the end - he failed to understand that anyone imitating their work is in a way paying a form of homage to them - and their early spirit. And later it seems legalese and not innovation has become the guiding light. Somewhere - someone got lost.

Where would Apple be if Xerox (parc) had walked up to early Apple and crushed them in a court case. Where would the innovation be. Its too simplistic really - but you get the point.

FUCK APPLE (-1, Troll)

Dunge (922521) | about a year ago | (#41778119)

...i will NEVER buy a single thing from Apple, EVER.

Re:FUCK APPLE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778275)

Me neither. sick of their antics and their BS patent trolling and whatnot. Overpriced crap. CRAPPLE!

This clearly goes against the ruling (5, Insightful)

Myrv (305480) | about a year ago | (#41778127)

The judges ruling clearly states:

As a result of his second judgment, Judge Birss ordered that:

        Within seven days of the date of this Order [18th July 2012] [Apple] shall at its own expense (a) post in a font size no smaller than Arial 11pt the notice specified in Schedule 1 to this order on the homepage of its UK website ... as specified in Schedule 1 to this Order, together with a hyperlink to the Judgment of HHJ Birss QC dated 9th July 2012, said notice and hyperlink to remain displayed on [Apple's] websites for a period of six months from the date of this order or until further order of the Court (b) publish in a font size no smaller than Arial 14pt the notice specified in Schedule 1 to this Order on a page earlier than page 6 in the Financial Times, the Daily Mail, The Guardian, Mobile Magazine and T3 magazine.

And

The material part of the notice specified in Schedule 1 reads:

        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 [link given]

The judge specifically spelled out what Apple was suppose to post. Apple didn't follow these instruction by attaching all the other cruft to the ad therefore they haven't fulfilled the court order.

Get off the bandwagon (3, Insightful)

StripedCow (776465) | about a year ago | (#41778209)

And this, Apple fanboys, is how Apple will treat you if you ever (consciously or unconsciously) cross Apple's road. Or if Apple decides to cross your road.
With contempt.

Draw rounded rectangle on your iPad? Forbidden. Make a successful iOS app? Apple will copy it, and reject your app from the app store.

It doesn't matter how many iDevices you own, Apple will bite you in the end. And it will make everybody believe that you were the bad guy.

So please, for your own sake and for ours, get off the bandwagon while you still can.

My favorite non-apology (4, Funny)

willoughby (1367773) | about a year ago | (#41778221)

In the Tracy Kidder book, "The Soul of a New Machine", he documents a year or so with the engineering team designing a new computer. Time pressure... long hours... high tension... and finally one of the engineers called one of the others an asshole.

The project manager called the fellow into the office & explained that we all need to be able to work with each other... yadda yadda.... and you must apologize to him.

The fellow left the office, approached the other engineer and said, "I'm sorry you're an asshole".

fuckSeFr (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778231)

the resigna7ion

Maybe the Judges _wanted_ just this (3, Interesting)

redelm (54142) | about a year ago | (#41778287)

Sure, this looks like mockery to us unrobed and unwigged. But look at it from the Judges PoV: they know that one or both litigants will hate them. Part of the job. What judges dislike is being overturned on appeal -- especially if they've "gone too far" (rather than missing facts).

Apple has just seriously impaired any appeal: They've spent alot of money to voluntarily quote the ruling -- they must agree with it, or at least that [foundational] part. Apple can plead compliance with the order, but not with respect to the material chosen. That was entirely their own choosing.

The law grinds fine, and it is not unusual to have things work out completely the opposite of knee-jerk first appearances. Life, too. I expect the UK justices will close ranks and not reward bad behaviour.

Contempt of Court (1)

jvkjvk (102057) | about a year ago | (#41778301)

So, who should the judge jail, Apple's CEO?

Re:Contempt of Court (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about a year ago | (#41778393)

why not?

the rich feel extra pain when put in prison.

justice works better that way, too.

It's very... hidden. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#41778411)

I went on their site to see where they posted it... took a good 5 minutes to find the tiny link in the footer. (Next to the privacy policy and use of cookies links that nobody ever cares about.)

And then they don't even THEME the page with their excuse! Like they don't want it to have their logos or css endorsing that it's even still their site.
I think the judge was just looking for 4 words along the lines of "Samsung did not infringe." rather than 6 paragraphs of a technical explanation on what that judge said and where he was wrong. It's like asking your dad if you can have something you know your mother would never let you have, and claiming she already said it was okay.

Maybe I'm childish, too... (1)

OldSport (2677879) | about a year ago | (#41778449)

...but something about the "fuck you, everyone" wording of that message made me never want to buy another Apple product, ever.

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...