Court Orders Apple to Publicly Eat Samsung's Crow

Court Orders Apple to Publicly Eat Samsung's Crow

image

Apple must publish a notice stating Samsung did not copy the iPad design.

The Apple-Samsung rivalry has become as contentious as Nintendo-Sega, Yankees-Red Sox, and even Apple-Microsoft. Apple's innovative iPad tablet computer was obviously the first to market, and Samsung helped the Cupertino company build some of the components. Then, Samsung designed and built its own tablet called the Galaxy Tab, which Apple decided to fight not by outperforming but through litigation. The legal battle between the two companies is being fought all over the world, and the latest skirmish is in the U.K. where Judge Colin Birss recently ruled that Samsung's tablet was not likely to be confused with the iPad because it was "not as cool." Today, in another ruling, Judge Birss ordered Apple to publish a statement making it clear Samsung did not copy the iPad design.

Yep, you heard that right, Apple must pay for what amounts to an an advertisement for a competitor in major publications in the U.K. such as Financial Times, the Daily Mail, Guardian Mobile magazine, and T3. A statement must also appear on Apple's website for at least six months.

"No company likes to refer to a rival on its website," said Richard Hacon, a lawyer for Apple.

Judge Birss' order comes in response to Apple's statements after the July 9th ruling which implied Samsung directly copied designs. Samsung argued the comments "caused real commercial harm" to their bottom line, and it goes against the ruling Birss made in favor of Samsung.

The legal fight between the two technology giants is far from over. There are patent infringement cases pending in ten countries, and Apple even plans to appeal the U.K. ruling soon.

The Apple-Samsung rivalry continues. After the dust settles, which technology superpower will reign supreme?

Microsoft.

Source: Bloomberg

Permalink

So Android over takes iOS for advertising and now this. Things are not looking good for Apple.

"No company likes to refer to a rival on its website," said Richard Hacon, a lawyer for Apple.

I was going to give this the 'most obvious statement of the week' award, then I realized something. They could always try spinning it to make the iPad seem better while fulfilling their part of the court ruling. Though I'm not sure that'd make the judge happy.

Greg Tito:
The Apple-Samsung rivalry continues. After the dust settles, which technology superpower will reign supreme?

Microsoft.

Check and mate.

Anyways, this is almost karmatic punishment. I approve.

Samsung did not copy Apple

Now THAT would be a good Chalkboard phrase for Bart
Pity they'll just keep reusing that same couch gag over and over again.

PffffttthahahahhHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAAA
I approve, Colin Birss. Well done.

Greg Tito:
The Apple-Samsung rivalry continues. After the dust settles, which technology superpower will reign supreme?

Microsoft.

Ha! Good one. Yes, it does seem that way.

Never going to use a tablet myself (I despise touch screens for the most part) but it annoys the apple fanboys, so all is good.

"Apple's innovative iPad tablet computer was obviously the first to market"

Wrong. HP and I belive Microsoft (though they may have been using the HP one) both had tablet computers on show and on market in 2003. And they were actual tablet computers, not gigantic, non-phone smartphones.

Granted out of the two sides of this case, Apple were first, but it wasn't innovation. I've taken shits with more innovation that Apple has ever had.

Ba zing on the punchline lol

Kapol:

"No company likes to refer to a rival on its website," said Richard Hacon, a lawyer for Apple.

I was going to give this the 'most obvious statement of the week' award, then I realized something. They could always try spinning it to make the iPad seem better while fulfilling their part of the court ruling. Though I'm not sure that'd make the judge happy.

difamation is punishable, so i dont think they can take creative license with their forced announcement. if theyre smart, theyll just drop this now and not prolongue it anymore.

ThePS1Fan:
So Android over takes iOS for advertising and now this. Things are not looking good for Apple.

This is the whole problem with propietary/closed systems.

My wife and daughter are trying to be drawn to the Fruity system with an iPod and Ipad but I'm using my Android claw to drag them away from the over priced and over hyped junk that it is. I have to give Apple props though for coming out with some innovative items but lately since they found all that loose cash in their sofa cushions they've been acting like a bloody bullies worldwide with all the frivolous lawsuits.

Did you ever notice how nasty Apple has become since Jobs died? From what was reportd about him, he was an egotistical tyrant in the boardroom but atleast he kept the legal team on a tighter leash than they are on now.

ThePS1Fan:
So Android over takes iOS for advertising and now this. Things are not looking good for Apple.

Apple pretty much asked for it by trying to remove virtually any and all competitors from the playing field; not exactly my idea of a free market.

The bitter pill Apple has to swallow now was cooked up by Apple and their lawyers themselves, and it looks like it will become a regular part of their diet if they don't get real anytime soon.

Jaeger_CDN:
Did you ever notice how nasty Apple has become since Jobs died? From what was reportd about him, he was an egotistical tyrant in the boardroom but atleast he kept the legal team on a tighter leash than they are on now.

Yup. Now Apple's on a mission to ban anything Android, instead of making a product worth a damn. And as far as I'm concerned the only real innovation Apple can be associated with in the last 10 years is by being way too popular for their own good and forcing other companies to do real innovating while Apple sits on a throne of money supplied by mediocre products that sell because they look nice.

WickedFire:
"Apple's innovative iPad tablet computer was obviously the first to market"

Wrong. HP and I belive Microsoft (though they may have been using the HP one) both had tablet computers on show and on market in 2003. And they were actual tablet computers, not gigantic, non-phone smartphones.

Granted out of the two sides of this case, Apple were first, but it wasn't innovation. I've taken shits with more innovation that Apple has ever had.

If a bit crude, you're right on the money from my perspective. Apple don't invent new products, they take a new product that a rival has just launched that shows potential that it's not meeting, produce their own, admittedly high quality if overpriced, version then go "SHINEY SHINEY! look at the shiney! You want the shiney! Yes you do! Go buy the shiney!"... and then people do. Which allows people to realise that the original idea had potential and opens the door for companies to produce more reasonably priced alternatives. Apple are acceptable inovators, good engineers, but marketing gods.

A money grubbing company's attempt to get cash off a competitor failed so hard that they have a court order to advertise for the competition? My faith in justice has been restored. lol XD Now if the courts would just put Charles Carreon in his place over his infantile tiff with The Oatmeal....

ThePS1Fan:

Jaeger_CDN:
Did you ever notice how nasty Apple has become since Jobs died? From what was reportd about him, he was an egotistical tyrant in the boardroom but atleast he kept the legal team on a tighter leash than they are on now.

Yup. Now Apple's on a mission to ban anything Android, instead of making a product worth a damn. And as far as I'm concerned the only real innovation Apple can be associated with in the last 10 years is by being way too popular for their own good and forcing other companies to do real innovating while Apple sits on a throne of money supplied by mediocre products that sell because they look nice.

I could have sworn the first court cases took place when Jobs was still alive. Tbh Jobs wasn't much of a saint either (understatement), and why do people say that Apple innovated, cos all I saw was a really really good marketing team targeting pseudo-nerd hipster types and marketing people.

I can now say that I'm proud to be British.

Well I enjoy this ruling.

This effectively shuts down any cases in any other country where apple claims that the Galaxy Tab is a copy of the iPad.

all the defense has to do is bring up apples own website and say "right here it says on their own website that the galaxy tab is in no way similar to the iPad."

FelixG:
Well I enjoy this ruling.

This effectively shuts down any cases in any other country where apple claims that the Galaxy Tab is a copy of the iPad.

all the defense has to do is bring up apples own website and say "right here it says on their own website that the galaxy tab is in no way similar to the iPad."

All Apple has to do is create a Euro version that is completely seperate from their main .com site and it may not impact other judgements.

Jaeger_CDN:

FelixG:
Well I enjoy this ruling.

This effectively shuts down any cases in any other country where apple claims that the Galaxy Tab is a copy of the iPad.

all the defense has to do is bring up apples own website and say "right here it says on their own website that the galaxy tab is in no way similar to the iPad."

All Apple has to do is create a Euro version that is completely seperate from their main .com site and it may not impact other judgements.

even if they change the address any lawyer worth his salt could find it and point at it.

Good God, y'all. Is there a way for judges to get promoted to a higher court in the UK? Because this guy needs to be the head of the highest bench they've got. Hell, convince him to run for a spot on the World Court or whatever.

This is pleasing to read since I just saw this today:
http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/07/14/1239250/apple-tells-retailers-to-stop-selling-certain-samsung-devices
Apple needs to die. Now.

My bets on Samsung being superior to apple in the end
Besides now Steve Jobs is gone who is to say they won't run into trouble like they did the last time

Soon, Apple will star sueing apple trees for copyright.

Good for the judge, and good for Samsung. I can't speak for the tablets (I own an iPad but haven't used a Samsung/Android tab for any extended amount of time) but when it comes to smartphones, Samsung have been rolling out better products than Apple for a while now. I hop from device to device a few times per year, I've owned the iPhone 2, 3, 4 and 4S, along with the Samsung Galaxy S2, Galaxy Note & Galaxy S3, and the Samsung devices have been consistently superior to their Apple equivalents - with the exception of Siri vs S-Voice, the former is quite impressive and occasionally useful, while the latter is frankly crap. If the same can be said for the tablets, it's no wonder Apple is feeling a little woried.

And here we find a weak point in capitalism. The supposed strong point of capitalism is that it forces companies to compete for the better product as the better product would get the better sales (usually). It's sad to see how far companies will go to make sure theirs is the leader in sales.

At least it's not as bad as Thomas Edison I s'pose...

What annoys me most about Apple is how they are acting like they invented tablet computers, despite the fact that Microsoft unveiled one years before they did. I'm sure you've all seen the photo.

Oh, win. Glad to see Apple getting its shit slapped once in a while.

With that said, I'm still pessimistic about the state of the industry overall. One lawsuit isn't the problem.

All they need to do is make a statement on a single page of their website or in their policy page at the bottom that nobody really reads. They could also make a side by side comparison with the product to a newer [Apple] product. This really wont have an impact marketing wise. The real effect will be the fact that is can be a precedent for companies to force (oppose to just allowing) their competitors to advertise their products.

Glad to hear there are still some sane people giving out judgements.

My expert prediction:

Within the next three years, Apple finally implodes from its continual past, present, and future stupidity. Microsoft will buy them out, look at the Apple tech, laugh at it, and then throw it all into a giant incinerator. Finally, people will rejoice on how the stupidly expensive hipster devices are gone, and people will be thankful that they just have reasonably priced proper tech to buy from Microsoft and other PC companies that actually maintain a competitive market while being jerks to each other 1000% less of the time.

I recall hearing something recently about how apple was close to being declared a "vexatious litigant" down here. From what I understand (which isn't a whole lot, really), this would put a rather serious crimp in apple's "sue everyone until we get our way" style of market competition.

Samsung of course, just being honest here their products are cheaper and of better quality. The reason apple is suing is because of the Massive competition Samsung is putting up in this fight. Most people I know go Galaxy instead of Iphone because they see it as having more and better functions whilst strangely costing Less.

I still don't have one, a phone is a phone when it calls meaning my 60$ Nokia is good enough but even so Apple... just is Apple. A company that enjoys thinking it is the first at everything.. despite not having been first since 1980 or something. They tie you down with thousands of rules and force you to upgrade to keep the hipster status you love.

Even the IPod wasn't first it was just an MP3 with more doodles and blinkers.

Apple is just one barbecued elephant away from being the Thomas Edison of electronic gadgets/

Kapol:

"No company likes to refer to a rival on its website," said Richard Hacon, a lawyer for Apple.

I was going to give this the 'most obvious statement of the week' award, then I realized something. They could always try spinning it to make the iPad seem better while fulfilling their part of the court ruling. Though I'm not sure that'd make the judge happy.

Considering that this is their penalty for playing fast and loose with the ruling, playing fast and loose with the penalty... doesn't seem very wise.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here