Apple Must Publish Notice That Samsung Didn’t Copy IPad In U.K.

[dejet]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...udge-says.html

I like google a lot, I do not hide this fact. However I think this might be a little much.... Still funny as hell

Apple Inc. (AAPL) was ordered by a judge to publish a notice on its U.K. website and in British newspapers alerting people to a ruling that Samsung Electronics Co. didn’t copy designs for the iPad.
The notice should outline the July 9 London court decision that Samsung’s Galaxy tablets don’t infringe Apple’s registered designs, Judge Colin Birss said yesterday. It should be posted on Apple’s U.K. home page for six months and published in several newspapers and magazines to correct any impression the South Korea-based company was copying Apple’s product, Birss said.
Enlarge image
Apple Inc. was ordered to put notices in U.K. newspapers and on its website stating that Samsung didn't copy the iPad. Photographer: Lex Van Lieshout/epa/Corbis

http://www.bloomberg.com/image/i_woNvFouePI.jpg
The order means Apple will have to publish “an advertisement” for Samsung, Richard Hacon, a lawyer for Cupertino, California-based Apple, told the court. “No company likes to refer to a rival on its website.”
Apple is fighting patent lawsuits around the globe against competitors including Google Inc., HTC Corp. (2498 ) and Samsung as it competes for dominance of the smartphone and tablet computer markets. The firms have accused each other of copying designs and technology in their mobile devices. Legal battles about the similarity of Samsung and Apple tablets are being fought in Germany, the Netherlands and the U.S.
Public Statements
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 yesterday 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.
Apple spokesman Alan Hely didn’t immediately respond to a phone call and e-mail requesting comment on the judge’s order.
“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,” Samsung said in a statement after the hearing.
“The war between these two companies seems to be escalating even further,” said Colin Fowler, an intellectual property lawyer at London-based Rouse. He said much of the publicity around the July 9 ruling focused on Birss’ comments about Samsung not being as cool.
“From a victory in court they were suddenly on the back foot,” Fowler said in a phone interview. “Getting this order fits in with the context of them trying to restore the balance.”
Comments made by Apple after that ruling unfairly implied that Samsung had copied designs, Samsung’s lawyer Kathryn Pickard said at the hearing. That “caused real commercial harm.”
As well as Apple’s website, the company must pay for notices in the Financial Times, the Daily Mail, Guardian Mobile magazine, and T3, according to a draft copy of the order provided by Samsung’s lawyers.
Apple’s lawyer said the company would appeal the July 9 decision and Judge Birss granted the company permission to take its case to the court of appeal.

[Mayareira]

The funniest part is the judge's decision. He basically said that Samsung did not copy Apple because Samsung's device doesn't look as cool as apple.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/20/te...-in-court.html

Ahahaha, so....

Technically, Samsung wins the case because their device is not as cool as iPad.

And IF Apple appeals the decision that'd mean....

"Hey, you are wrong. Samsung's device is just cool as ours."

Either way, this is basically the nicest way to lose a court.

[tisiphone]

I lol'd when I saw this article on the BBC's website. Totally an Android fan, and I sent the article to my Apple fanboy friends as well, they haven't replied to me yet

[Mayareira]

Again, I'd hardly say this is an embarrassing situation for Apple. Come on, man.

Judge: "Samsung wins the case because Galaxy doesn't look as cool as iPad."

[quannum]

wonder what kind of behavioural change this would bring about if it could set a precedent. lose a patent troll case? free advertisement on your site for the dude you sued.

[Valkrish]

I'm gonna agree with quannum, who doesn't want to get free advertisement on a major website, with an apology (in a sense)?

[dejet]

The bigger deal with this is that its only a year old model their next gen is already out.

I am as big of as they come as an android fanboy(look at the android topic lol) I really am not a fan of forcing apple to say they where wrong. Mostly because this does not fix the problem. Apple asked for the patents that they should of never got in the first place that is not their doing. That is the patent office messing up.

Moto has patents on wifi networks on cell phones. WTF? Apple has patents on a wedge again WTF?

Apple is a dick for going after everyone and their grandmother but its not their doing only. This judge needs to just overthrow the patents and prevent apple from going to court about the patents again. I think this was done recently with a "Apple V HTC" patent battle.

Samsung is doing fine, they do not need Apple to do PR for them. They need to start throwing patent lawsuits out of court "with prejudice".