Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Must Publicly Post That Samsung Did Not Copy iPad

Posted by Soulskill on from the wearing-a-sign-in-public dept.

microcars writes "A judge in the U.K. has ordered Apple to post a notice on its website and in British newspapers alerting people to a ruling that Samsung Electronics Co. didn't copy designs for the iPad. This is the same Judge who ruled earlier that Samsung's Galaxy Tab was not as cool as Apple's iPad."

25 of 278 comments (clear)

  1. A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wouldn't mind seeing this happen to a few more patent trolls. Not only should the U.S. adopt a European style "loser pays" system for cases like this, but a "loser has to publicly admit he's an ass" policy wouldn't hurt either.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Insightful

      hey protect their own innovations to an extent they deem reasonable

      I'm pretty sure they didn't "innovate" a rectangle with rounded corners.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    2. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by ewanm89 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So which lawsuit did Google initiate? Plenty where suits have been bought against Google. I don't know of any where Google was the initiator.

    3. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by oakgrove · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They protect their own innovations to an extent they deem reasonable.

      What innovations? Apple is an imitator, marketer, and polisher of other people's products. Did they invent the cellphone? Did they invent tablets? Did they invent mp3 players, touch screens, gridded icons, rounded corners or anything else of substance? Have they ever actually created a new product category? The best people can say is that Samsung imitated an imitator. At best.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    4. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes. Apple innovated the shit out of that rounded rectangle.
      /sarcasm

    5. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The reason Apple have to do this is because they tried to trash Samsung's name publicly. Apple is not being punished here, merely made to undo the wrong that they did.

      We have restorative justice, meaning the goal is always to put things back the way they were before the matter under consideration happened. Monetary damages are awarded based on lost income, and in cases like this where one party has damaged the other's reputation steps must be taken to restore it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by oakgrove · · Score: 5, Informative

      Have you even looked at the patent in question? Here it is in all its rounded corner glory. They patented rounded freaking corners. If you want to get specific, 4 rounded corners on a rectangle. Like the world has never seen that before.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    7. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by OWJones · · Score: 4, Insightful

      By "in the middle of" you mean "not yet in control of and had no power over," right?

    8. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by Nyder · · Score: 4, Interesting

      hey protect their own innovations to an extent they deem reasonable

      I'm pretty sure they didn't "innovate" a rectangle with rounded corners.

      Hell no, Chiclets http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiclets are rectangular and have rounded corners, and have been around since 1906.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    9. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not sure I can call an exceptionally wealthy company going after Nokia who's knocking on death's door a defensive move especially when they could have always filed the antitrust suit against MS which would have made more sense given it's MS that is benefiting much more by going after Android hardware companies. But that would mean going after someone who is equally as strong and it's much easier to try and bankrupt Nokia and kill of a WP manufacturer. Just as MS should go after Google but they pick on the weaker guys.

      And quite frankly allowing HTC continue the whole problem of patent lawsuits rather than actively trying to fix it doesn't help anyone but themselves (and HTC) and they could have kept those patents and went after Apple but they didn't. They're trying to have their cake and eat it too imo to keep their image clean, imo so yes I'll admit there isn't *that* much at the moment but I think that's going to change.

    10. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by dyingtolive · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That was a very lengthy way to type "I'm incapible of performing research on products before buying them."

      Did you also buy a coupe expecting to be able to fit your kids in the backseat?

      "Well... I mean... it's a car! It SHOULD have a backseat, right? Someone should do something to protect me from this! DERP!"

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    11. Re:A patent troll public shaming. Interesting by steveha · · Score: 4, Informative

      How does "loser pays" work when a little guy goes after a big company like Apple, Google, or Microsoft with a legitimate complaint

      You are saying that $BIG_COMPANY can afford to hire $BIG_LAW_FIRM_A (or else has its own lawyers that are effectively its own big law firm). $LITTLE_GUY has no chance.

      But under "loser pays", $BIG_LAW_FIRM_B can take the case; since you stipulated that it is a legitimate complaint, odds are good that $BIG_LAW_FIRM_B will be paid by the loser ($BIG_COMPANY). $BIG_LAW_FIRM_B is not guaranteed to be paid but the odds are good, since they are as big as $BIG_LAW_FIRM_A and the complaint is legitimate. Contrast to the current situation in America, where $LITTLE_GUY cannot afford to pay any big law firm, so if any big law firm agrees to take his case, they are doing it knowing they won't get paid very much.

      So, you have brought up one of the major reasons why "loser pays" is better: the defense can automatically scale if needed to match the offense.

      The other major reason why "loser pays" is better: filing lawsuits without merit now actually costs money. Maybe $BIG_COMPANY doesn't even file the lawsuit against $LITTLE_GUY in the first place, which is an even better situation for $LITTLE_GUY than having a big law firm handling his defense.

      There, that's two ways that "loser pays" helps in the situation you describe.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  2. YES! by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of my biggest issues with corporate culture is the ending to so many disputes where the misbehaving corporation "admits no fault" for the situation.

    They should always have to post a "we did wrong" letter after they get shown the door.

    1. Re:YES! by Genda · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I find it particularly egregious when a corporation has committed a truly heinous act, like dumping toxic waste resulting in some number of deaths and injuries, and to keep face, they agree to settle out quickly (so the remaining survivors can get expensive medical care) on the agreement that they "Admit to no wrong doing", and nobody can talk about the atrocity they committed.

      Perhaps there will be a time when people place the value of human dignity above the value of personal wealth. Sadly, I'm not holding my breath.

  3. Why do they have to do it on their own website? by Krishnoid · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is the Internet age, after all.

  4. Way cooler by Ant2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I could see how Apple could turn this around to their benefit.

    "Samsung did not copy design from the iPad for the Galaxy Tab. The iPad is WAY cooler! Even the judge thinks so."

  5. And we can expect by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We can expect that Apple will wriggle to avoid doing this in any meaningful way. What's the smallest size ad they can place? What's the smallest typeface? Do all elements need equal prominance?
    They'd likely put a huge ad saying "Buy Apple iPad, the judge said it's cool" in a large font with the "Samsung did not copy" message in a tiny font in a corner of the ad (maybe even upside-down text). They'll go as far as they think they can while avoiding a contempt finding.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:And we can expect by Ynot_82 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the media coverage alone of this story will do all the work
      Apple cannot control that
      I think what Apple actually does to comply with this will be largely irrelevant when it's being talked about on the news.

    2. Re:And we can expect by anagama · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It isn't just some newspaper ads:

      Now, Birss says Apple must post a notice to its UK website that outlines the July 9 decision, and the notice must remain on the site for six months. ... Unsurprisingly, Apple's lawyer in the case, Richard Hacon, pushed back on the order by arguing that Apple would essentially be forced to advertise for Samsung. "No company likes to refer to a rival on its website," ...

      http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/07/judge-to-apple-tell-uk-consumers-samsung-didnt-infringe-on-ipad-design/

      The Streisand effect was designed in California too, correct?

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    3. Re:And we can expect by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm sure at this very moment, there are dozens of staffers from ad agencies employed by Apple quaffing quad shot lattes and bouncing all manner of story arcs off of each other, the walls and the urinals at Starbucks.

      This is an advertising executives dream job.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:And we can expect by Ynot_82 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is all over the front pages of the major UK news outlets
      People know about this, regardless of what Apple put on their website

  6. The punch line by OhHellWithIt · · Score: 5, Informative

    The punch line is in TFA (emphasis added):

    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 today 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.

    It looks like they have to run the ads, but they can still say Samsung copied them.

    --
    "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
  7. Apple's conduct is reprehensible by execthis · · Score: 4

    Samsung said in their statement: "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."

    Apple is like the #1 enemy in the tech industry. I remember that ad from years ago with all those drone-like people in front of the screen obeying their overlord. Well, can't people see that that's exactly what Apple and its users are like now?

  8. Publicly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    It will be posted publicly.
    In a public cellar.
    With no stairs.
    In the dark.
    In the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'.

  9. Sorry, in order to see this confession... by tlambert · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...you must install iTunes and the following optional QuickTime components: X, Y, Z, Q, ...

    Sorry, it looks like your platform is not supported. Please try again with the latest version of Mac OS X or Windows.