Oh my sides!
What's that noise? Could it be the grinding of teeth emanating from One Infinite Loop...
Apple has lost an appeal over a UK ruling that said Samsung fondleslabs don't copy iPad's design and the fruity firm better put out an ad that says so. Cupertino immediately appealed when it not only lost the case but was ordered to take out advertisements and post on its website's front page that Samsung didn't copy the …
Samsung: You're apologising wrong. Do it again.
Apple: Pretty please, sorry.
Samsung: On one leg.
Apple (standing on one leg): Pretty please, sorry.
Samsung: Your'e only saying that because you have to. Say it like you mean it.
Apple: Oh, we really mean it now. We won't do it again - honest. Pretty pretty please.
Samsung: Now give me your dinner money.
Actually, there are people who can distinguish between the products that Apple makes and the company.
I'm OK with the products, but what they are doing in court is beyond stupid so I seriously hope they get their fingers so burned they decide to go back to the normal and profitable business of making interesting kit.
All this fucking money wasted on lawyers when one by one, apple's hell-bent bent for suppression falls like a house of cards. They could and should have seen their move would back fire. Theyncould have donated those hundreds of millions in attorney fees and court-ordered advisories of Samsung's innocence/non-guilt on orphanages, charities, battered women's shelters, political refugees, and ALL KINDS OF OTHER STUFF? so goddamned wasteful of big money when so many people starve and die .
Sigh...... What i almost wound not do for just $250,000 after taxes....
They could have doubled the pay of Foxconn workers.
The sad thing is that Apple have quality products that fanboys love. They do not need to mess about in the courts. (I am a dyed in the wool penguinista. Even if Apple ban every competing gadget I will still not buy Apple.)
They really should have spent it on better wages for their testing team to avoid issues like the maps and scratching...
Some people like apple some dont, Apple trying to say samsung devices == apple device is wrong, they are different, I buy samsung Android devices, I DON"T buy apple iOS devices...
We can't get Assange because of due process and the fact we honour international law and do things properly. We could follow the US and just storm the place, or we could just invade the home country, make the ambassadorial team useless and claim it back. But as we don't, he is still there. That is the point of sanctuary.
That however has nothing whatsoever to do with our courts, the logic is sound. Apple sell a symbol and then tried to claim that wasn't part of the deal. Epic fail. Glad to see reasoned argument, shame the US is very quickly becoming the only place reason is an alien concept.
"....he fruity firm will still have to publish the notice in font no smaller than Arial 14pt in the Financial Times, the Daily Mail, The Guardian, Moble Magazine and T3 magazine." They should be forced to have it on posters inside and outside every Apple store in the UK, and have every Apple "genius" and greeter be forced to repeat the statement that Samsung did not copy the iPad as the first thing they say to every customer that walks into the store. Not that it will change the minds of the fanbois, but it would actually get me to walk into their stores if I could have hte fun of watching one of their "geniuses" have to repeat it.
I remember an incident years back where the Sun newspaper sacked (or probably got their distributors to sack) one of their lorry drivers and I think it was all linked to some union dispute. Think he took them to a tribunal and, I assume, won because the Sun then ran a story about how he'd told lies at the tribunal. He complained to the press complaints council who found in his favour and required the Sun to publish an apology ... which they did and directly underneath republished their orignal story under the headline "but the Sun says he's a lying trucker" - so another complaint to the PCC, another requirement to print an apology. Can't remember if it went round the block again!
So, Apple could publish the ruling saying "A Judge has asked us to say this .... but we think different(tm)"
No, they have told them what they have to say. It is as follows:
"On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet Computers, 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].
"That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on .. A copy of the Court of Appeal's judgment is available on the following link . There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe."
Isn't Arial a Microsoft font?
Top font historians, or a trivial consultation with Wikipedia, would reveal that, no, Arial was created by Monotype, originally for an IBM printer (the 3800, a laser printer IBM introduced in 1983). Microsoft didn't introduce Arial in Windows for about another ten years.
The judge has pretty much handed Apple the opportunity to run a "Samsung officially ruled as not as cool as Apple" advert in the form of an "apology". The judge actually made that assertion about "coolness", so running such an "apology" would not be grounds for contempt of court if done right.
As an earlier poster says, I think Apple (UK) will see this as more of an opportunity than a problem. They might even pay to put their "apology" on some posters.
I searched the Apple Website for "Where is your apology to Samsung?"
Sadly all I got was "No results were found. Please try a different search."
I suspect a Vanessa Perroncel type apology "We understand that Samsung are Upset that we Accused them of Copying us and that they might find this defamatory (in any case IT WAS A LIE!)
Still, apparently Apple nave now discovered in an alarming piece of innovation, that people's thumbs are long enough to vover a 4" screeen - who would have thought!
Sir Robin Jacob: "If courts around Europe simply say they do not agree with each other and give inconsistent decisions, Europe will be the poorer,"
I couldn't agree less. Forced agreement does not good jurisprudence make. This lawsuit is a case in point.
Apple lawyeristas: "slab-fondlers would ignore trademarks"
Scraping the barrel and basically shitting on oneself, is that it now, Apple?
Europe will be poorer in a strict economic sense: inconsistent rulings are a barrier to trade.
Your argument against blindly following precedent has some merit, but the bias should be toward precedent, because of the cost of inconsistency; and then Europe needs a court of final resort which can quickly resolve the discrepancy (and those rulings would have to be binding). That would mean greater integration; and while the Euro crisis will likely drag the EU countries into greater financial integration, it's also raised Euroskepticism.
So if you let Community courts produce inconsistent rulings, you either have an impediment to trade (eg, certain consumer devices legal in some parts of the common market but not others), or you have an uphill battle to rework the national and international court systems to reconcile conflicting rulings.
Of course economics need not trump everything - but this is a sense in which Jacob's statement is literally true (at least if understood as hypothetical).
Oh, yes, indeed! I pass my local library daily, and if I've found an interesting article online, I whip out my Samsung 8.9 Tab, (always with me) use the free application "Camscanner(HD)" , photo. it, then let the software process it, correct for things like keystone effect, frame it, enhance it, then format into a PDF, and print. It's practically the same as the original.
Dunno if Apple has the same, if they have, you may have to pay $$$ for it, I guess!
See this TED talk:
Those who care about design, will buy the design. Those who don't, don't - and will not have been your customer in the first place. The talk above is about the fact that the fashion industry has NO copyright protection, only trademark protection - for a reason.
The bar chart near the end of her talk is the message. However Apple belongs at the very smallest end of that chart. So what gives? what have they set out to do? It is far more than "Android is an Apple ripoff" because the fruitcake's lawyers have always been buzzing round the trash. I think it is more like the wish for total control over a selected market.
"I think it is more like the wish for total control over a selected market."
Or it could be that Apple have a very different design philosophy to most of their competitors.
Apple released their first iPhone (which didn't even support MMS or copy and paste) and – suddenly – every competitor was jumping on the finger-friendly-multitouch-screen-with-no-stylus bandwagon. All of them. Seriously, it was embarrassing to watch. The first iPad also caused a similar scramble, with a flurry of announcements of utterly shite "me-too" knock-off products. (Remember, this is the period when this lawsuit was initially launched. We're talking about the first -gen devices that ran Android v1.x and v2.x, which really were blatant iOS knock-offs.)
There's no point claiming the ingredients are all that matter when the correct proportions clearly make such a huge difference.
People keep claiming Apple's devices are "obvious", but if this was truly the case, Apple shouldn't have been the first to market with usable devices combining the relevant technologies. Many devices seem "obvious" in hindsight. This is not a defence.
Good design is a holistic process. The whole package is what matters, not just bits of it. Any company (or lawyer) arguing otherwise is harming the industry, not helping it. And this has been Apple's approach since at least the late 1990s, so why this still seems such a shock to so many escapes me. Apple have never tried to hide any of this.
And Steve Jobs made no secret that Apple had patented the iPad to the hilt. He literally said just that during his spiel at the first iPad's launch. Steve Jobs didn't f*ck about making idle threats and really knew how to hold a grudge.
"There's no point claiming the ingredients are all that matter when the correct proportions clearly make such a huge difference."
"Good design is a holistic process. The whole package is what matters, not just bits of it."
So you write off the competition as shite because they don't look EXACTLY the same, and then claim that Apple have a point? This, I just don't get. If a design copyright is so general that it block all similar products that's plainly stupid, but you are pointing out that anyone who uses 90% if the same DNA will look and operate in a discernably different way. Case Dismissed as anyone can tell the difference.
I'm typing now on a device that has 90% DNA in common with an iPAD. It has a slim profile, a screen that covers most of the real-estate, rounded corners and has a processor and operating system with SW that can be used to browse the web, play games or email.
The only thing is, it's a laptop. Remove the keyboard and use a touchscreen for input and the results are OBVIOUS and therefore reflected in the prior art.
This post has been deleted by its author
It can still go to the Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice. If it does, it could be some time before we see the apology, and by that time, peoples obsolete iPad3s and Galaxy Tabs will be gathering dust at the bottom of a cupboard while they enjoy their iPad21 or Galaxy Tab XIX
Apple is told to say , "very sorry Samsung", fine, nice warm feeling.
Will it make a difference to Apple sales No!
Samsung, rub it in now beat that company showing middle age, Apple, with real innovation, like the Note but with more value & apps, before the W8 tablet blight .
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021