Apple loses appeal to Samsung - forced to publish on website!!

[bigboss]

News here.

 

[bigboss]

Original story here:

http://www.whathifi.com/news/apple-ordered-to-publish-adverts-saying-samsung-didnt-copy-the-ipad

 

[bigboss]

Apple has published the verdict on its website, as per court order, but has used the opportunity to mock Samsung.

The link to the verdict is at the bottom of the homepage.

 

[AnotherJoe]

They may well end up on charges of contempt of court with this one.

 

[bigboss]

Why?
:?

 

[BenLaw]

How does quoting part of the ratio of the case amount to mocking Samsung?

 

[DandyCobalt]

So the only place where Apple has won has been in the good ol' US of A? funny, that?

I'm sure Samsung don't give a fig what Apple writes on its own website.

 

[bigboss]

How does quoting part of the ratio of the case amount to mocking Samsung?

As far as I'm aware, the verdict required Apple to publish on its website that Samsung did not infringe on its patents. Out or 191 pages of the verdict, Apple has selectively quoted passages mocking Samsung as "not cool".

 

[professorhat]

How does quoting part of the ratio of the case amount to mocking Samsung?

As far as I'm aware, the verdict required Apple to publish on its website that Samsung did not infringe on its patents. Out or 191 pages of the verdict, Apple has selectively quoted passages mocking Samsung as "not cool".

Thing is, those are not Apple's words. It's not even a selective quote as such as that's exactly what the judge said.

The whole thing just continues to demostrate the ridiculousness and serious waste of money these patent wars represent.

 

[BenLaw]

How does quoting part of the ratio of the case amount to mocking Samsung?

As far as I'm aware, the verdict required Apple to publish on its website that Samsung did not infringe on its patents. Out or 191 pages of the verdict, Apple has selectively quoted passages mocking Samsung as "not cool".

If you actually read it, they were required to provide the link and a short, set text, which is included. Unless you consider that the judge was mocking Samsung, then quoting the judgment is not mocking. Samsung (and you, clearly) may not like the basis for the decision but it's there in black and white.

Apple would probably argue that anyone coming on to their site is entitled to know why the decision was reached. To achieve that, they have quoted the proper part of the judgment. At worst, this seems to be truculence on their part, reminiscent (although nowhere near as creative or funny) of when Private Eye were ordered to publish an apology and, to make it stand out, that it should be in a box. They therefore enclosed every paragraph on the page in its own box

Btw you should be careful with the difference between paragraphs and pages, the high court judgment is 191 paragraphs long, not pages.

 

[RodhasGibson]

Couldn't agree with you more prof. Oh and well put Ben,that's how I see it also.

 

[bigboss]

Samsung (and you, clearly) may not like the basis for the decision but it's there in black and white.

Who said I don't like the basis of the decision? Personally, I hated Samsung tablets when I tried them at Currys. I don't even have a Samsung phone. I've got an iPad 2 myself, & bought an iPhone 4S for my wife last year (although looking to sell it now a she's bored!).

I'm merely stating my observations.

Just so that I'm clear; I don't blindly support or resist any OS or product. I've got an iOS tablet, iOS phone, Android tablet, Android phone, MacBook Pro and Windows 7 (soon to be Windows 8 Pro) laptops. I'll soon be buying a Windows 8 phone & sell my Android. My wife will soon sell her iPhone & buy an Android (& before anyone suggests, she doesn't like my HTC Sensation). Next year, I'll be upgrading my Sony Vaio to a touch screen Windows 8 ultrabook.

So you will find me praising or slating any platform!

 

[Paul.]

I thought this was pretty predictable? It was Apples only play.

 

[bigboss]

Thing is, those are not Apple's words. It's not even a selective quote as such as that's exactly what the judge said.

By selective quote, I meant Apple did not publish, for example, this quote from the verdict:

A product made to the Apple design and of similar length would be about twice as thick as any of the Galaxy Tabs. The product to the Apple design will look thinner as a result of the side curves but the same visual effect on the edges of the Galaxy Tabs makes them look even thinner. Resting on a table side by side the surface of a product made to the Apple design will be noticeably above these tablets. To an informed user, the Galaxy tabs do not merely look like a thin version of the Apple design, they look like a different, thinner design of product.

The whole thing just continues to demostrate the ridiculousness and serious waste of money these patent wars represent.

Agreed.

 

[ID.]

So the only place where Apple has won has been in the good ol' US of A? funny, that?

I'm sure Samsung don't give a fig what Apple writes on its own website.

I don't think Samsung is doing too well on their patent infringement counterclaim anywhere either. Looks like the lawyers are the winners again :read:

 

[BenLaw]

Thing is, those are not Apple's words. It's not even a selective quote as such as that's exactly what the judge said.

By selective quote, I meant Apple did not publish, for example, this quote from the verdict:

A product made to the Apple design and of similar length would be about twice as thick as any of the Galaxy Tabs. The product to the Apple design will look thinner as a result of the side curves but the same visual effect on the edges of the Galaxy Tabs makes them look even thinner. Resting on a table side by side the surface of a product made to the Apple design will be noticeably above these tablets. To an informed user, the Galaxy tabs do not merely look like a thin version of the Apple design, they look like a different, thinner design of product.

It wouldn't make sense to quote just that part. The conclusions to the judgment are at paragraphs 183 to 190. However, what you quote from paragraph 186 is (along with para 187) the judge listing the differences, to compare them with the similarities he set out at para 184. His conclusion as to the significance of that comparison is at para 190, the part apple quoted. If you asked a lawyer to choose the most relevant part of the judgment it is para 190, not what you quoted. They could have quoted your part as well (and para 184 and 187 to make sense) but certainly not instead of. Your argument indicates a loss of objectivity, for whatever reason.

Btw, I also do not think that you had para 186 in mind when you said apple were selectively quoting as I don't believe you'd looked at the judgment before posting. Had you done, you'd have known this was nothing like a 191 page judgment.

 

[BenLaw]

So the only place where Apple has won has been in the good ol' US of A? funny, that?

I'm sure Samsung don't give a fig what Apple writes on its own website.

And in Germany. To an extent in South Korea. Possibly Australia too.

 

[bigboss]

Btw, I also do not think that you had para 186 in mind when you said apple were selectively quoting as I don't believe you'd looked at the judgment before posting. Had you done, you'd have known this was nothing like a 191 page judgment.

Not wanting to argue with a lawyer / barrister & discuss the nuances between a page & a paragraph (can't see how that is significant here)!

How did I come to the figure 191 if I hadn't read before posting?

This argument is going way out of the thread, so I can't be bothered to discuss this anymore, unless the relevance is back.

 

[BenLaw]

Samsung (and you, clearly) may not like the basis for the decision but it's there in black and white.

Who said I don't like the basis of the decision? Personally, I hated Samsung tablets when I tried them at Currys. I don't even have a Samsung phone. I've got an iPad 2 myself, & bought an iPhone 4S for my wife last year (although looking to sell it now a she's bored!).

I'm merely stating my observations.

Not really getting to the heart of my argument there. The link you posted was interesting. Your commentary that this was 'mocking Samsung' makes no sense and that is what I responded to. Perhaps you'd like to justify why it was mocking.

Just so that I'm clear; I don't blindly support or resist any OS or product. I've got an iOS tablet, iOS phone, Android tablet, Android phone, MacBook Pro and Windows 7 (soon to be Windows 8 Pro) laptops. I'll soon be buying a Windows 8 phone & sell my Android. My wife will soon sell her iPhone & buy an Android (& before anyone suggests, she doesn't like my HTC Sensation). Next year, I'll be upgrading my Sony Vaio to a touch screen Windows 8 ultrabook.

So you will find me praising or slating any platform!

Not really sure of the relevance of this. I'm just getting tired of the same small group of people constantly posting anti-apple threads and posts, it's nearly as tiresome as cable threads. If it is relevant, both our computers are windows, we've got a kindle, will probably be getting a nexus 7, blah, blah, blah.

 

[bigboss]

The link you posted was interesting. Your commentary that this was 'mocking Samsung' makes no sense and that is what I responded to. Perhaps you'd like to justify why it was mocking.

If you could bother yourself with checking google news, there are more than 100 news articles with a similar headline as this.

Not really sure of the relevance of this. I'm just getting tired of the same small group of people constantly posting anti-apple threads and posts, it's nearly as tiresome as cable threads. If it is relevant, both our computers are windows, we've got a kindle, will probably be getting a nexus 7, blah, blah, blah.

Depends how you want to look at it. If you're wearing "Apple fanboy" glasses, you'll find this thread as "anti-apple". Just take those glasses off & read my initial posts again.

 

[BenLaw]

The link you posted was interesting. Your commentary that this was 'mocking Samsung' makes no sense and that is what I responded to. Perhaps you'd like to justify why it was mocking.

If you could bother yourself with checking google news, there are more than 100 news articles with a similar headline as this.

Really not sure why anything I posted means I ought to have googled. This is rather the point: you are blithely regurgitating nonsense that is written, rather than actually thinking about it. You wouldn't do that about an av receiver.

Not really sure of the relevance of this. I'm just getting tired of the same small group of people constantly posting anti-apple threads and posts, it's nearly as tiresome as cable threads. If it is relevant, both our computers are windows, we've got a kindle, will probably be getting a nexus 7, blah, blah, blah.

Depends how you want to look at it. If you're wearing "Apple fanboy" glasses, you'll find this thread as "anti-apple". Just take those glasses off & read my initial posts again.

How odd. In what way have I got apple fanboy glasses on? I've responded to you either (i) drawing a false conclusion or (ii) repeating someone else's false conclusion without any thought. I've not given a personal opinion about apple. And if your ownership of devices using several different platforms is a passport to your neutrality, why do you not afford me the same privilege?

 

[BenLaw]

Btw, I also do not think that you had para 186 in mind when you said apple were selectively quoting as I don't believe you'd looked at the judgment before posting. Had you done, you'd have known this was nothing like a 191 page judgment.

How did I come to the figure 191 if I hadn't read before posting?

Again, not responding to the heart of my argument, but I would guess one of those 100 articles you speak of fed you the misinformation about the number of pages.

 

[bigboss]

Btw, I also do not think that you had para 186 in mind when you said apple were selectively quoting as I don't believe you'd looked at the judgment before posting. Had you done, you'd have known this was nothing like a 191 page judgment.

How did I come to the figure 191 if I hadn't read before posting?

Again, not responding to the heart of my argument, but I would guess one of those 100 articles you speak of fed you the misinformation about the number of pages.

I would suggest you keep your guesses to yourself if you don't believe me.

 

[bigboss]

Really not sure why anything I posted means I ought to have googled. This is rather the point: you are blithely regurgitating nonsense that is written, rather than actually thinking about it. You wouldn't do that about an av receiver.

You're only proving yourself to be an Apple fanboy if you're not seeing the funny side of the articles.

How odd. In what way have I got apple fanboy glasses on?

By considering this thread as anti-Apple.

 

[BenLaw]

Really not sure why anything I posted means I ought to have googled. This is rather the point: you are blithely regurgitating nonsense that is written, rather than actually thinking about it. You wouldn't do that about an av receiver.

You're only proving yourself to be an Apple fanboy if you're not seeing the funny side of the articles.

Cheap antagonism is beneath you BB :shame: But I have no intention of reading the articles to see whether they have a funny side or not, I know full well they're (i) writing about apple (ii) as provocatively as possible, just to get as many hits as possible. Plenty of people will keep falling for it, and apple are delighted that you do.

How odd. In what way have I got apple fanboy glasses on?

By considering this thread as anti-Apple.

[/quote]

I didn't say the thread was anti-apple. The news of the ruling was interesting, I read it. Your later link to the apple homepage was interesting, I read it. Your conclusion (or repetition of someone else's conclusion) that apple were 'mocking' Samsung was clearly a negative conclusion (ie anti-apple) and clearly erroneous. It was the fact that it was erroneous that I was picking up on.

Btw if my possession of various different computers etc doesn't mean I'm neutral then neither can yours. The only conclusion that can be drawn from you frequently posting anti-apple threads and posts is that you're an apple hater, or whatever phrase you kids use as the opposite of a fanboy.