Slashdot Mirror
Apple Hides Samsung Apology So It Can't Be Seen Without Scrolling
An anonymous reader writes "Apple today posted its second Samsung apology to its UK website, complying with requests by the UK Court of Appeal to say its original apology was inaccurate and link to a new statement. As users on Hacker News and Reddit point out, however, Apple modified its website recently to ensure the message is never displayed without visitors having to scroll down to the bottom first."
The lawyers are probably going to get put in front of the bar for their shite advice to these pricks too.
Banned product, I reckon. And some few billion in compensatory damages to Samsung. It seems the only thing they won't weasel out like a spoilt four-year-old is being slammed down hard financially.
Obviously the courts care since they are the ones that mandated Apple provide this info on their site.
When you've been slapped down for contempt of court, your next action really shouldn't be this kind of open contempt. I wonder how Apple's UK employees feel about this disrespect to their courts?
Apple managers are apparently unaware that sneaky behavior is likely to get a big story on Slashdot.
I wonder exactly how much patience the judges have for this kind of nonsense.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Probably very little, given how quickly they reacted to Apple ignoring the spirit of the law last week. Frankly, I'm stunned that Apple seriously expected that any kind of special treatment of the message posting wasn't doing to get picked up given the level of tech press interest in the UK - the story has even been on the front page of the BBC news site. I'm guessing we'll have wait a few days to find out whether they are going to get another chance to do the right thing by the spirit of the law, or we're just going to go straight to contempt of court and see some more serious punitive action - like having to put the message in place of that nice picture of the iPad Mini.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Well, if 48 hours was an unreasonable amount of time to make this change, perhaps Apple should have complied with the original order which gave them 14 days. Instead of, you know, being giant cocks about it.
you have to adjust the code and actually test it, which can't be done in a few days
Huh what? It takes more than a few days to test a change like adding some text to the bottom of a web page? Granted that there are multiple browsers and configurations to test, but even manually that's not more than a few hours' work... and if Apple's web site is managed by competent engineers they should have automated tests for that anyway. This sort of change should take minutes, not days, much less weeks.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
THIS, this right here, is why I can't understand why MSFT is blowing billions jumping into the shark tank that is ARM powered mobile devices. Frankly Apple is the ONLY one making reliable money, the rest are caught in a race to the bottom, HTC has had some bad quarters, so has Samsung, the rest are looking ready to lose their shirts. the chips are changing too fast, they have too much stock, and frankly nobody looks at anything but the price...except for Apple.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, even in a downturn Apple will make out like bandits because they are NOT a tech company that makes fashionable devices, they are a fashion company that happens to work in tech. This is actually a GOOD thing for Apple fans, just look at lines around the block and people paying crazy markup for Air Jordans. Fashion seems immune when it comes to downturns for the most part, and even when article after article bitches about their memory prices...they keep right on buying.
So any company trying to jump into that blood soaked shark tank is frankly more than a little insane, and anybody that thinks they'll make iMoney with Android or WinRT are frankly delusional. Mark my words you'll see dual core 7 inch tablets for $50, the prices will drop so low it'll practically be throwaway devices. The only one that will be making consistent profits will be Apple, and this is coming from someone who doesn't even own an iPod.
It isn't necessarily about making money, IMO. It is about creating an ecosystem that allows their existing product to continue to thrive. As more and more people embrace mobile, and as the tablet and the laptop continue to converge, it seems apparent that Microsoft can't just keep on delivering new releases of Windows and Office. Eventually, as Google Apps continue to improve and make headway, as Google releases the Chromebook and such alternatives take root, there is going to be fewer and fewer things that are keeping people in the Microsoft world.
Even if Microsoft's mobile venture doesn't win them huge sums of money, inroads in market share means that the Windows experience is out there as a viable alternative moving forward. Delivering an ecosystem where Windows applications can run on both the desktop and the mobile device means that development for the Windows platform can continue. If enterprises are forced to support Android and/or iOS anyway then there is no reason to build anything that takes advantage of Microsoft unique features. If Microsoft can put forth a unified ecosystem where enterprises can be convinced to target the Windows platform, that is a huge win for the long term viability of Microsoft.
UK and Samsung at Tanagra. Their arms closed.
Ordering the apology be put on their web page was done so that customers would see the apology, it is therefore apparent that the court wanted the apology to be plainly visible. Public apologies are ordered by the courts all the time and screwing around with them even while remaining within the strict letter of the order is blatant contempt of court and is generally treated severely by the courts. Add to that, apple seem to have removed the redirect from the US site to the UK one it becomes more obvious that apples intention here is to go against the spirit of the order by ensuring as few people see it as possible. Apple are playing chicken with the courts, somehow I don't think the courts will swerve first.
Apple's more recent success was in creating and filling a market that hadn't previously been properly established and expanded. Full credit to it for its imagination and high standards with regards to usability. Its success has also been to exploit the lackluster performance of Microsoft, which seemed to have become complacent in its market dominance. However Apple plays dirty, and it is worse than Microsoft in its lock-down and lock-in attitude to its systems. That is its weakness, and Google has had some success with Android because of this. Microsoft is the dark horse this time I think because if it can produce a software development platform that straddles the x86 architecture and also ARM, it can kick Apple's arse. Sadly, Linux once again is left a bit in the cold, except in its Android incarnation. I wish the hardware on smartphones and tablets was more open.
Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
So tell me, which jobs would be shed?
Which people are Apple employing unnecessarily, that they could currently shed to gain 10% additional profits, and have decided against shedding, but would shed to regain 10% of their profits?
If those jobs were surplus to the efficient and effective operations of the business, a corporation would already have shed them.
Sorry, I don't trust you at all.
For Apple to post a statement that purports to be from Apple stating that Samsung did not copy would be ridiculous, because it's already won judgments in other jurisdictions that say Samsung did copy.
Apple spread the suggestion that Samsung had infringed on their IP. A court found that Samsung did not infringe. The court has ruled that Apple make it clear that Samsung did not infringe, to correct the damage caused by their initial list.
You may call that juvenile. I consider it to be a reasonable request. Other jurisdictions are utterly irrelevant and the ruling didn't even demand that Apple state that Samsung didn't copy, merely draw attention to the lack of infringement and link to the case.
Let the people know their judges are looking to deceive them.
Please. Tell me how the judges are trying to deceive people. Quote the specific sentence or sentences in the transcript from the court. Because I've read it and the only attempts at deception that I can see come from Apple.