UK court upholds judgement: Samsung tablet does not infringe on Apple’s iPad designs because it’s ‘not as cool’; Apple forced to run ads saying Samsung did not copy iPad

“Apple has lost its appeal against a ruling that cleared rival Samsung of copying its registered designs for tablet computers, in a decision which could end the two firms’ legal dispute on the subject across Europe,” Stephen Eisenhammer reports for Reuters.

“Britain’s Court of Appeal on Thursday upheld the country’s High Court judgment that, despite some similarities, Samsung’s Galaxy tablet did not infringe Apple’s designs, in part because its products were ‘not as cool,'” Eisenhammer reports. “The U.S. company has been instructed to run advertisements saying Samsung did not copy its registered tablet designs, both on its website and in selected newspapers.”

Eisenhammer reports, “Apple can appeal to the Supreme Court.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Samsung didn’t copy iPad – and iPhone before that? Seriously? They knocked it off lock, stock and barrel!

Apple needs to immediately appeal this to the UK Supreme Court, here’s hoping they, at least, have working brains and eyeballs.

Apple’s products came first, then Samsung’s:

Samsung Galaxy and Galaxy Tab Trade Dress Infringement

By the way, here’s what Google’s Android looked like before and after Apple’s iPhone:

Google Android before and after Apple iPhone


    1. F right off!! Don’t punish the rest of us for a couple of doddery old ***** that were probably bought off by samesung and have zero real world knowledge.

      Apple need to either appeal this and / or get better lawyers in the UK & Europe.

  1. 1. Dead link!
    2. The UK does have a Supreme Court, which no longer sits as part of the House of Lords.
    3. The full original judgement gives Apple lots of positive copy to turn the loss into a win: broadly the message is “no-one could mistake this pos for an iPad”! But given that they are in court elsewhere arguing that point, they may well prefer to keep on litigating in the UK, if they manage to get a hearing at the Supreme Court – which, broadly, only considers significant points of law, not adjudications of fact.
    4. IANAL

  2. Show a series of iPads and Samsung Galaxy Tabs from the first ones to the latest ones.

    Throw in the quote from Samsung’s glorious leader that said to copy Apple.

    Then, in a thick Cockney accent, say “Apples and pears says Gawdon Bennet! We did not copy Samsung. OK?”

  3. I believe Apple is having problems with the recent decision reversal in California too. From what I have read in several articles, Apple will probably not appeal in Great Britain. So it’s not going well in court anywhere for Apple. Not doing the stock price any favors either. Apple is also being sued for infringing on patents of other companies too. Let’s hope they don’t lose those cases too. I believe that there will be reforms coming regarding patents and patent protection. I doubt that any company out there is completely innocent of using someone else’s ideas. Including Apple. I would like to see less time and money spent suing and more time and money spent in research and development. It’s getting old. It’s counterproductive. It’s much more damaging to companies like Apple and Samsung who make things as opposed to a company like Google who sells ads. It’s just making lawyers rich. It does not make products better or increase shareholder value. I’m getting tired of it. Enough is enough.

    1. I think you had better do some more reading.

      Fifty-years from now, when the rest of the world realizes the US was dead serious about American IP, will begin deferring to the US Patent Office as the supreme authority.

      The regs are only going to get tighter, not looser, and Apple will be seen as the model in practice.

      It matters not what those countries adjudicate because the Market is where the real power lies.

      Death by a thousand cuts is how Samsung will finish the decade. Apple withholding future contracts will ensure a level playing field; meaning Samsung won’t have Apple money to spend and their products will stand or fail, on their own merit.

  4. The only thing getting old is the low character of the Koreans and those who think a design can just be reproduced to within millimeters immediately after release and there should be no action. You don’t give up fighting… Ever. Or you will never succeed in anything. People like the Korean copy slaves would run all over you. Why would anyone come up with a design if everyone else makes the money due to you for your ingenuity and creativeness, something the Asians have never shown!

  5. I don’t care about Samsung products , its does not make me to buy it or take interest in Samsung ,so far i know Apple iPad came out as new born in the 1st Gen then goes on 2nd Gen then Newest ipad 3 then its will bcome ipad mini ,from that so far Apple has been doing it in recent years , Samsung is really Jealous and lots o time dragging Apple to Court. Samsung has long history of Mental Problems of Slavishly Copier , Samsung has picky of new case trying to win , always find another one case and drag apple to courts from all that Samsung problems has come up to my face with Headlines saying about Court things Patent , infringing, etc.. what samsung could name it to drag Apple to court. this making me tired of hearing Samsung Mental Problems. They should fly over over to Cuckoo’s Nest .

  6. Lack of ability to produce a product as COOL shouldn’t alleviate Samsung from it’s legal obligation to not blatantly make a product nearly identical to someone else’s products. Some of the patents in existence today may be ridiculous, but let’s not pretend as though intellectual property protections aren’t necessary.

  7. Many people have missed the point about the case. The court stated as follows:

    3. Because this case (and parallel cases in other countries) has generated much publicity, it will avoid confusion to say what this case is about and not about. It is not about whether Samsung copied Apple‟s iPad. Infringement of a registered design does not involve any question of whether there was copying: the issue is simply whether the accused design is too close to the registered design according to the tests laid down in the law. Whether or not Apple could have sued in England and Wales for copying is utterly irrelevant to this case. If they could, they did not. Likewise there is no issue about infringement of any patent for an invention.

    4. So this case is all about, and only about, Apple‟s registered design and the Samsung products. The registered design is not the same as the design of the iPad. It is quite a lot different. For instance the iPad is a lot thinner, and has noticeably different curves on its sides. There may be other differences – even though I own one, I have not made a detailed comparison. Whether the iPad would fall within the scope of protection of the registered design is completely irrelevant. We are not deciding that one way or the other. This case must be decided as if the iPad never existed.

  8. You all know the designer of the iPhone and iPad is an English man, Jonathan Ives. The Queen of England knighted him for his exquisite work. Maybe somebody ought to tell the judge, and ask him if he has ever been knighted for his rulings. Maybe the Queen needs a new title to bequeath. Judge Blockhead has a ring to it.

    Meanwhile, Great Brittain has a population of only 62 million, a mere fraction of the populations of China, India, the U.S, and etc. where Apple products are in short supply. Maybe the back orders for iPads and iPhones in Great Brittain should take on a new life. You know, a two to three year wait, even as the availability in Holland, France, and the rest of Europe improves by the old English allotment.

    If England is not going to protect the creativity of their own inventors, then they should not get to enjoy the results of using great design. I don’t think this judge is “cool enough” to understand the long term effects of his rulings.

Reader Feedback

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