Apple seeks UK appeal on order to publish notice that Samsung didn’t copy iPad

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:

Samsung. Slavish Copiers.

Related article:
UK Judge forces Apple to publish notice that Samsung didn’t copy iPad – July 18, 2012

24 Comments

  1. Apple should post pictures of theirs and Samsung’s products side by side along with the mandated message that Samsung didn’t copy. Apple would not be violating a court order, and the public could decide the truth for themselves.

  2. This could be fun for Apple. I’d put a picture of the two right next to one another, including one of those iPad 2000 prototype pics, and then just write, “Nope. Samsung didn’t copy iPad. They were totally original.”

  3. A nice picture of a Samsung before the iPhone, then an Apple iPhone, then a Samsung after the iPhone, then the quote from the judge, as the main headline, with his name in big bold type.

    1. Colin Birss is clearly a disgruntled Windoze user who’s taking the opportunity to get back at Apple for forcing him to realize that his platform of choice is shit and always has been. Ignorance is (was?) bliss in the English court system.

  4. Sorry guys. Posting Samsung pics would only result in free advertisement for Samsung. Appeal needs to win and that judge should have to have “idiot” tattooed on his forehead for making the ruling in the first place. : D

  5. “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.”

    Electronista should try to keep up. The order calls for Apple to notify the public that the UK court says Samsung didn’t copy their iPad. They are free to also state that they disagree.

  6. It’s a very strange judgement, especially the reference to Samsung’s products not being “as cool” – I’m pretty sure the court of appeal won’t like that (I’m a lawyer in the UK)

  7. Apple needs to start killing Samsung’s most profitable product lines. Not hard to do. Look at their sources. Find the key items that can’t be replaced quickly. Buy them out and shut them down or slow down deliveries to Samsung. Start to crush Samsung’s profit line and stop buying their products as soon as possible.

    Time to Man Up Apple and slap them down! Show Samsung what can be done with BILLIONS of cash in the banks. Could even shut down their tablet line that way.

  8. I edited the Design section for Samsung in Wikipedia:

    “Design

    In the early 1990s, the firm began emphasizing the importance of design in its products. Located in the company’s high-rise headquarters in Gangnam (south of Seoul) the corporate design center includes more than 900 full-time designers. In the beginning, there were only two designers in the whole company, whose number rose to 510 in 2005.
    The company overhauls its design over a two-year cycle. For the first year, it scrutinizes all the design trends of the world, followed by product strategies. It then steals new design plans during the second year.”

    lol.

        1. It went away. But I fixed it.

          The company overhauls its design over a two-year cycle. For the first year, it scrutinizes all the designs of Apple, Inc. The following year, it releases products that ape Apple’s designs but that are made of cheaper materials – essentially, counterfeit Apple products.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.