I think is okay to have Apple announce the court's judgement, but they should not be required to lead customers to believe that they agree with it.
I think is okay to have Apple announce the court's judgement, but they should not be required to lead customers to believe that they agree with it.
It is pretty clear that this is not a problem under US law either: All kinds of legal requirements exist to add specific notices to various products, for example.
> but it should not be required to lead customers to believe that they agree with it.
There is nothing in the proposed wording that implies Apples agreement. In fact, the very purpose is to announce the verdict of a court case where Apple very obviously argued for the opposite result.
The proposed wording starts "On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled". There's no implication that Apple agrees anywhere.
Should cigarette companies be allowed to write their own diatribe under the "Surgeon General's Warning" label? Cigarette companies definitely don't agree that smoking causes cancer, so why not post a rant about how <Country X> has not yet declared smoking dangerous so the UK is wrong?
If Apple doesn't want to comply with laws, they shouldn't operate in those countries.
That said, it was obvious they'd get chewed out for this from when they posted it (if you know anything about UK law). It's okay to be smug and they would have probably gotten away with everything except the very last paragraph.
The last paragraph was completely unnecessary, and now they're facing the consequences of their hubris.
http://www.law.arizona.edu/faculty/FacultyPubs/Documents/whi...
(See page 8.)
Do you also admonish American parents who tell their child to say they are sorry for an infraction?