Apple's Samsung statement reprimanded by court of appeal

[MightyJordan]

The UK court of appeal has reprimanded Apple over the wording of the statement on its website acknowledging that Samsung did not infringe the iPad tablet's registered design, and ordered it to put an altered statement on its homepage ? rather than tucked away in a linked page ? until 14 December.

The acknowledgement put up last week, linked from the home page by a tiny link, was deemed to be "non-compliant" with the order that the court had made in October. The court has now ordered it to correct the statement ? and the judges, Lord Justice Longmore, Lord Justice Kitchin and Sir Robin Jacob, indicated that they were not pleased with Apple's failure to put a simpler statement on the site.

At a hearing in the court in London on Thursday morning, the judge told Apple that it had to change the wording of the statement within 48 hours, carry it on its home page, and use at least 11-point font.

Apple tried to argue that it would take at least 14 days to put a corrective statement on the site ? a claim that one judge said he "cannot believe".

Darren Smyth of EIP Partners said: "The objection was that Apple had added to the statement that the court of appeal had ordered, so did not comply with the original order, and furthermore that the additions were not accurate.

"Apple must now within 48 hours publish a correction on their homepage with a link to the corrected statement in not less than 11-point font."

The tech giant was originally ordered by the court of appeal to correct the statement carried on its website relating to its tablet battle with Samsung, in which it was ordered to acknowledge that its rival did not copy the iPad's design.

Though Apple did do that, it also added in details from other court cases in the US relating to other non-design patents to suggest that other courts had found against Samsung.

The acknowledgement ? which was depicted as an apology, though neither the court of appeal nor the original high court judgment described it as such ? was intended to be a factual statement ordered by His Honour Judge Birss QC in the high court. Apple has also been told it must take out adverts with the same statements in the Financial Times, The Guardian, Daily Mail, T3 magazine and Mobile magazine. Those adverts are not thought to have appeared.

The ruling is the latest in a long-running battle between the South Korean and Californian electronics giants, in which Apple and Samsung have since 2010 been at loggerheads over patents and designs used in their respective smartphones and tablets, with lawsuits around the world.

In the UK one, Apple had claimed that Samsung infringed its European "registered design" for the iPad tablet with the Galaxy Tab; Samsung disagreed, and won a ruling from Birss in July.

He then ordered Apple to issue a corrective statement about Samsung's designs. Apple appealed, but lost that case in October. The same three judges sat on Thursday as in the October case.

While Apple's statement on its site did contain the elements it was instructed to contain according to the court of appeal and high court rulings, Apple added four paragraphs ? including extracts from Birss's ruling in July where he called Apple's designs "cool", and contrasted them against Samsung's, which he said lacked the same qualities.

Bloomberg quoted Jacob as saying Apple's statement was "a plain breach of the order".

Bloomberg said that Michael Beloff, a lawyer representing Apple, defending the notice, told the court that the judges themselves had said that it "is not designed to punish, it is not designed to make us grovel" and that its only purpose was "to dispel commercial uncertainty".

Apple declined to comment on the new ruling.

Source

[_neutrino Veteran]

i figured they were going to have to change it after i read it. I thought it sounded too much like an advertisement rather than an apology.

[Sandor]

Astoundingly arrogant. The original statement showed how Apple thought it was a big joke. Glad the judges are cracking down on their nonsense.

[HoochieMamma]

Fantastic (Y)

Well done UK.

[ahhell]

Good. I hope they hold Apple in contempt as well.

[HawkMan]

Astoundingly arrogant. The original statement showed how Apple thought it was a big joke. Glad the judges are cracking down on their nonsense.

Well in all fairness, the original statement just said the same thing the judges themselves did. :)

[Elliott]

I think the part about the German and American courts finding that Samsung infringed went too far, but the rest seems perfectly in line with the request by the judge. As Apple's lawyers stated: the purpose of the notice was to dispel commercial uncertainty; not to grovel.

[20legend]

LOL

that is all :D

[Neu B]

Apple has become real sleazy.

[Boz]

Apple has become real sleazy.

Has become? They've been sleazy for last 2 decades.

[neufuse Veteran]

14 days to update a webpage? no wonder apple has to take down their entire store to release new products </s>

[.Neo]

Well in all fairness, the original statement just said the same thing the judges themselves did. :)

Exactly. What else did they expect Apple to put online.

[FloatingFatMan]

Exactly. What else did they expect Apple to put online.

Exactly what they were told to do, and not all the extra stuff to make it look like they're being picked on. As soon as I read it, it was obvious they were going to get into trouble again.

Apple need to learn to do what they're told. Unlike the US legal system, ours isn't controlled by corporations.

[.Neo]

Unlike the US legal system, ours isn't controlled by corporations.

If only the rest of the world could be as enlightened as the British. All we can do is strive I guess, and hope one day we'll gain a fraction of what your people have. ;)

Anyway, from what I've been seeing the past few months it's obvious the company is a mess. Apple really needs to sort itself out.

[DavidM]

Exactly what they were told to do, and not all the extra stuff to make it look like they're being picked on. As soon as I read it, it was obvious they were going to get into trouble again.

Apple need to learn to do what they're told. Unlike the US legal system, ours isn't controlled by corporations.

Oh, how I wish, they would get the corporations the **** OUT of our government. We've got more guns than you can point a rifle at, but I'm more afraid of our government will have me arrested for violating a EULA or jailbreaking a device I ACTUALLY paid money for...

[Ryoken]

If I was Apple, I'd just refuse.

They have more than enough cash on hand to pay any fines.. and the UK Market isn't that big to begin with.

Even if they are in the wrong, you don't make a company carry an advertisement, which is what it basically is, for another company.

[thealexweb]

If I was Apple, I'd just refuse.

They have more than enough cash on hand to pay any fines.. and the UK Market isn't that big to begin with.

Even if they are in the wrong, you don't make a company carry an advertisement, which is what it basically is, for another company.

It is an advert yes, for Apple's tech, it's a link hidden at the bottom of a page, the link won't be seen or clicked and if someone does click it they are met with two lines of apology and the rest is just rhetoric.

[FloatingFatMan]

If I was Apple, I'd just refuse.

They have more than enough cash on hand to pay any fines.. and the UK Market isn't that big to begin with.

Even if they are in the wrong, you don't make a company carry an advertisement, which is what it basically is, for another company.

Failing to comply with a court order is not a matter of "losing the UK market". The consequences of being in contempt of court are not the sort of thing Apple management really want to contemplate, seeing as that can include jail time.

Maybe it's wrong to force one company to advertise another, but it was equally wrong for one company to accuse another of copying when they didn't. What's worse? A little ad or a billion dollars fine? Maybe the UK court should have fine their asses as much as that kangaroo court that Ko presided over, fined Samsung.

[nekrosoft13]

Apple has become real sleazy.

nothing new, typical apple

[DavidM]

If I was Apple, I'd just refuse.

They have more than enough cash on hand to pay any fines.. and the UK Market isn't that big to begin with.

Even if they are in the wrong, you don't make a company carry an advertisement, which is what it basically is, for another company.

So, if you have enough money, it's ok to break the law and/or ignore a legal ruling? That seems like a great way to run a company....

[Noir Angel]

Good, I'm glad the courts have shown their teeth. The incredible smug arrogance of Apple comes across just as badly there as it does in every other part of their business. Every time I read an article about Apple and patents I use my Galaxy S with a smile :laugh:

[ILikeTobacco]

14 days to update a webpage? no wonder apple has to take down their entire store to release new products </s>

14 days is a fairly normal turn around rate for the agile cycle. One of the major rules of agile development is that you don't rush to push out changes. If you do, mistakes happen. On Neowin, we always make fun of the programmer who makes a simple mistake. Not following the procedures put in place leads to those seemingly simple mistakes.

[techbeck]

Yea, Apple. When they are dishing it out, they expect others to take it. But when someone comes down on them, they act like babies. Ev0en when they win, it isnt good enough and they go back and ask for more money after the verdict/award is given.

They should of done what they were told in the first place. This just shows what winers they are and makes them look even worse.

If I was Apple, I'd just refuse.

They have more than enough cash on hand to pay any fines.. and the UK Market isn't that big to begin with.

Even if they are in the wrong, you don't make a company carry an advertisement, which is what it basically is, for another company.

So what, you think Apple is above the law and shouldnt be held accountable?

Whether it is a big or small market, Apple needs to abide by the same laws as everyone else. If the courts would of let this go, then it would send a message to others that they can ignore the law a well. And Apple always wines about the law and how others are stealing their ideas...but when it comes down to obeying the laws themselves, its a diff story.

ANd it is NOT an advert. It is a statement saying they were wrong for suing Samsung. Its not like Apple has to post links on their site to Samsung products.

[stereopixels]

14 days is a fairly normal turn around rate for the agile cycle. One of the major rules of agile development is that you don't rush to push out changes. If you do, mistakes happen. On Neowin, we always make fun of the programmer who makes a simple mistake. Not following the procedures put in place leads to those seemingly simple mistakes.

Why are we discussing agile cycle and development time? It's a plain HTML page that doesn't even use their corporate template with a few paragraphs of text on a centre-aligned page. It could be updated in ten minutes and the copy could be written and signed off within one business day. This is Apple throwing themselves around like a stroppy toddler because for once they're not getting their own way.

[Growled Member]

Glad to see this happen. Apple acted incredibly arrogant in this case.