The same UK judge [Colin Birss] that offered a backhanded compliment in the form of a rare win for Samsung over Apple — by declaring that the South Korean company didn’t infringe on Apple’s iPad design with its Galaxy 10.1 because the latter wasn’t ‘cool enough’ to be confused with the former — saw his unusual penalty for Apple losing the case slapped with a challenge,” Electronista reports. “The case will now be heard in a UK court of appeals.”
“Should the original ruling survive the appeal, Apple might be forced to pay for advertising in several UK newspapers as well as on its own website advising the public that Samsung’s tablet does not infringe on Apple’s designs,” Electronista reports. “Thus far Apple’s appeal covers grounds relating to the original claims of Samsung copying the design, but Apple would be within its rights to challenge the “penalty” Judge Birss imposed as unnecessarily punitive and an example of judicial overreach.”
Electronista reports, “UK courts have gained a reputation for being very reticent to find a company guilty of infringement. In such cases, violators are likely to be found guilty in only 15 percent of cases heard.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Interestingly, in light of the UK courts’ reticence to protect intellectual property from slavish copiers, we’ve heard whispers that Samsung is prepping to expand their UK operations into new product lines and markets and, just this morning, we received a clandestine screenshot of some prototypes from an internal Samsung “product development” presentation:
UK Judge forces Apple to publish notice that Samsung didn’t copy iPad – July 18, 2012