Apple posts its UK apology to Samsung
apple.com
apple.com
However, if they are going to display it only in UK, then they should have at least spelt "judgment" correctly. They use "/uk/legal-judgement/" (Over in UK there is only a single "e" not two).
Anyway, totally not an apology. It looks more like an accusation and a reassertion how bitter they feel about the verdict, by cherry picking quotes to suite them.
------
(Edit: In the interest of setting the point straight since this is the top comment and it seems to be getting wrongfully upvoted, Apple didn't legally have to "make an apology". They just had to make it clear that Samsung did not infringe Apples registered design [1]. However, I do think that in spite of quoting the judgment extract verbatim, they still fall short of this requirement, since they continue for 3 more paragraph drilling out other points that supported Apple).
[1] : http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html#para87
So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement,
other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet,
Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.Edit: Apparently apple were never ordered to make an 'apology'. They were ordered to make a 'publicity order'. They used the EXACT wording[1] as ordered by the court, as well as quotes from a judge in the matter.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html#para8...
Such allegations can cause real damage to a company's reputation, and a publicity order publicising the judgment of the court that the allegations were false is a measure to undo some of that harm.
1) The order from the court was for the UK site only. This makes sense - it was a UK ruling from a UK court which has no jurisdiction in any other countries.
There are separate cases in places like Germany. It make no sense for the UK courts to force Apple to make statements in other countries covering rulings made under laws that don't apply there and which may (and in some cases do) contradict rulings made under the laws of those countries.
2) There was no demand for an apology and I'm not sure why you think that there is. The court is very specific about what has to be said which is that Apple make it clear that the court ruled that Samsung did not copy the iPad. They also include wording which must be in there and details on the font size and that there must be a link to the actual ruling.
3) Judgements is a perfectly valid spelling here in the UK, they're used interchangeably. Check justice.gov.uk if you don't believe me - you get significant numbers of hits for both. EDIT: I bow to the greater knowledge of others here - both spellings are common but it seems that judgment is the one used for legal rulings.
Actual ruling here: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html
(Note that the appeals court changed 6 months to 1 month but upheld the link from the homepage).
Pedantically, it appears to be from a English & Welsh court, not UK.
It's simply describing the general location within which a court resides, not precisely demarcating its jurisdiction.
If it was a german court decision it would be misleading to say "it was a EU ruling from a EU court which has no jurisdiction in any other countries/supranational bodies.", since that implies the court could have power over the whole of the EU. Likewise "UK court" might imply juristiction over all of UK.
I would regularly get a red pen marker through my essays if I used the wrong version (so you quickly get things like this drilled into you). If it's written with the "e" version on justice.gov.uk then they are either using it wrong, or they are using the non legal version (ie "In my judgement this painting looks like a fake", compared to, "In the courts judgment, the painting was a held to be a forgery").
It might seem pedantic, but I guess that's the way law is. For instance, court and Court (when used legally) also mean and can refer to two different things.
On point 2) Do you think that Apple made it clear that the court ruled in favour of Samsung? One line was given to this, whereas 20+ was given to why Apple feel that this judgment was a mistake? I've updated my original comment anyway.
(I agree that they didn't have to include the link for other countries as per your first point).
I certainly think it's debatable whether it makes it clear but I suspect the issue is that the court was very precise in what it said had to be included, how it had to be presented and so on, so as long as Apple ticked all those boxes they can say they've complied.
My point on that was really that the requirement was for a simple informational message. The court made no mention that there should be an apology which would be a very different thing.
On the contrary. The court was very specific that this case actually has nothing to do with whether Samsung did or did not copy the iPad, and went to some lengths to explain why not.
"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." (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html at [3]).
Registered design law is not copyright law. You can infringe a registered design without having ever copied, seen, or even know of the design you're infringing on. Conversely, you can copy a design but alter it enough that it "produce[s] on the informed user a different overall impression" from the original and not infringe.
When your big advantage is that you and your products exude class where others don't, gloating about it like a little kid just feels very wrong.
Casual visitors to apple.com/uk are not going to read this.
1. Made on the home page itself
2. In a 14pt font which (according to http://www.getallfix.com/2011/11/convert-empxpt-and-in-css/) should be some 19px high.
Open to interpretation, IMHO, though I would have assumed the judge meant the front pages.
They also revised the time it has to be there down from 6 months to 1 month.
>Mr Carr [for Samsung] realistically recognised that Apple had a genuine interest in keeping it uncluttered. He proposed that instead of requiring the notice to be on the web page itself, it would be sufficient if there were a link provided from that to the notice. There are some links already provided. All that need be added is a link entitled "Samsung/Apple UK judgment." I think that would be appropriate and proportionate.
Unfortunately, the class you mention tends to be overshadowed by this. Apple can't afford to be classy, if it gives up it's bullying ways for even a short period of time, it will find that Samsung responds not in kind, but will sense weakness and launch an even stronger offence.
What we have now is a case of mutually assured destruction, eventually both companies will be so wrapped up in legal dealings and spiteful actions that they will lose sight on what's really important: giving your customers cool and functional gadgets to play with, which as well as being bad for both of these companies is also bad for the industry and we, the consumers.
They were ordered to give an apology, and instead forwarded a conceited, weasley worded temper tantrum. There's nothing ruthless about that, it's something toddlers do every day.
So far I've found: http://www.androidcentral.com/samsung-seeking-block-sales-up... Article claims it was just mirroring of Apple court strategy.
I don't know if that's the same thing here: http://www.firstpost.com/tech/south-korea-court-bans-both-ap... But if so then it didn't turn out particularly good for either of the companies.
There was also a bit of government protectionism in South Korea http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125367616595333125.html?mod=... but I think you can't attribute this to Samsung offensive action.
Apple is certainly no angel but if you think Samsung is a company with no ethical concerns or that it isn't a ruthless competitor you haven't been looking very closely. [No very large company is completely free of ethical issues. I'm not aware of Samsung being over the line to the extent that I wouldn't work for them on that basis.]
But to be honest given what the judge actually said, he surely can't have expected anything else? Cherry picking was obviously going to be an option for Apple and he frankly gave them the cherry to end all cherries.
"Goldstein is not a crook?! Goldstein is not a thief?!"
"This intonation does not sound like a revocation at all."
"Your honour, I have read what has been written. The intonation has not been written here."
"Well, then at least apologize!"
"I apologize that Goldstein is a crook! I apologize that Goldstein is a thief!"
Sure they have pursued some questionable patent cases - but it is hard to deny they are one of the pre-eminent creators and makers in the world today - they have been truly innovative and brought massive change to multiple technology streams. They are about as far from being a hoarding patent troll as one could imagine yet that is how they seem to be portrayed in some parts of social media.
Even if you strongly disagree with their approach to suing competitors, I would have thought the real innovation and change Apple has brought to the scene would count for something and result in some more balanced coverage.
I think some of the specific patent cases Apple is pursuing against Samsung are a bit ridiculous (rounded corners), but I also think when you look at what Samsung has done as a whole, it is pretty clear they were ripping off Apple designs for a while (try and play spot the difference between a Apple 3GS and a Galaxy S1). Maybe Apple had to pursue the more silly specific patent cases because there was no way to patent the overall look-and-feel of a device (no lawyer here).
Anyway just my 2c
It ackowledges the judgement in the UK but also mentions conflicting judgements elsewhere in the world. Seems pretty balanced to me.
Apologies imply feelings, and corporations do not have feelings.
[BTW - the linked text kind of implies that they do have feelings; the article comes off as surly, resentful and not a little childish...]
[EDIT: Seems like they were never actually ordered to apologise, only to clarify that Samsung did not, in the judgment of the court, infringe on anything.]
It's not just that they're suing folks, it's that their actions seem to be deliberately designed to suppress the market and suppress competition. It doesn't feel genuine.
And while they do innovate, I don't think they do half as much they're given credit for. They didn't invent the smartphone, nor the mp3 player, yet most people likely think they did.
At least with Apple they are trying to protect (justifiably or not) genuine, recent innovation, and they are being open about it. MS is suing more Android makers than Apple over alleged Linux patent violations in Android that it will not disclose (thus prevent Linus from fixing the supposed infringements), but probably relate to some ancient, legacy FAT file-system standard. This is just as dirty as the worst of MS misbehaviour in the 90s and shows they have not changed at all.
I think this is the key. Samsung are the target because they're making a huge success of their phones and threatening (even in the US) Apple's position as the perceived 'gold standard' for smartphones. That perception has already faded away in other parts of the world.
Perhaps they are only suing Samsung because only Samsung's designs are close enough to be covered by their design patents. That doesn't mean (to me) anything other than that the patent system is broken. I don't think that proceeding with these lawsuits is the right thing to do. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
I agree MS's android tax is just dirty, btw.
Me and a group at my school are currently developing a mobile communication app for elderly for a interaction design-course, and we are in close cooperation with two local elderly homes for testing and feedback. During the initial phase we didn't settle on whether we should develop for iOS or Android but focused primarily on how the interaction should work. But after a while the local leader/our contact insisted that we develop for the iPad since the elderly at both homes had been to a iPad-workshop.
2 weeks later she tells us that she's bought two iPads for us that we could use for testing. When we get there, with our low-fi PowerPoint-prototype, it turns out that she's bought two Galaxy Tab's!
That doesn't mean anything except that they made a damn good product and had A TON of marketing.
But then why aren't people on HN down on Samsung in the same way?
I agree it is now an all-out war and neither side is going to come away clean, but in the most trivial sense 'They started it!'
I think Apple's problem is, at least in part, one of standards - we hold them up to very high standards, both technology-wise, and also at an ethical level, Apple give out the message that they are "the good guys".
When someone you love turns out to be not quite as perfect as you imagined, the love can turn to hate or anger very quickly.
Apple have tried their best to seek inspiration from the above. That is why people are hard on Apple.
One do not see the design crowd being angry at Apple. Those that work with design, tend to agree that apple is innovative in the area of design and user interaction. In the area of design, apple is correct to be attributed for being innovative and thus little hate.
But technology wise, apple has brought forth close to nothing in innovation, and has brought forth a bunch of obvious patent instead. Added, they lock down devices so to almost taunt those that want to innovate. Thus, As an technology developer on the market, Apple is a horrible company. The only positive thing Apple has given to technology developers has been the marketing power, which has opened up monetization for areas like smartphones and other handheld devices.
Yeah. Suing everybody around, blocking customers from buying products they want and http://www.5min.com/Video/Apples-Incredible-Great-Best-Gorge...
I wonder why less and less people likes them.
Either way the whole thing's ridiculous in the extreme. A flat panel with a screen isn't a novel design whoever made it, the magic is getting all the bits small and low-power and high resolution and bright and powerful enough for it to work.
-EDIT- The actual text as specified by the judge forms the first part of the page, the rest is Apple giving it a little PR spin and casting doubt on the whole thing.
Using the 1 billion US judgement as an example of how ou've been wronged is a bit of a stretch though, that thing's leakier than a colander.
As someone who has been a guest in the UK for nearly a decade, to me this reads like someone, as the British say, taking the piss.
Sorry, can't help but take the piss about someone taking the piss over someone else taking the piss about Apple taking the piss.
"The following notice shall be posted and displayed upon the Defendant's Websites currently at..."
Doesn't specifically say homepage. The text is 14px, which arguably isn't 14pt at anything other than 72 dpi.
[Edit: sorry, that's the initial judgement. This, I believe, is the order regarding the apology: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html]
Apple has added its own extra paragraphs though, which do change the tone.
However, they added that the move need not "clutter" Apple's homepage as it would only have to add a link entitled "Samsung/Apple judgement" for a one-month period.
>Mr Carr [for Samsung] realistically recognised that Apple had a genuine interest in keeping it uncluttered. He proposed that instead of requiring the notice to be on the web page itself, it would be sufficient if there were a link provided from that to the notice. There are some links already provided. All that need be added is a link entitled "Samsung/Apple UK judgment." I think that would be appropriate and proportionate.
Did anyone seriously expect Apple to be contrite?