[Everything Goes]

Apple have lost their appeal against an earlier ruling over claims that Samsung had copied them in the british court.

The judge had ordered Apple to run ads saying Samsung had not infringed its rights. Judge Birss said one notice should remain on Apple's website for at least half a year while other adverts should be placed in various magazines and newspapers to "correct the damaging impression" that Samsung was a copycat.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19989750

[-ajm-]

I thought this was already announced a while ago?

[CoolboyA]

Originally Posted by -ajm-

I thought this was already announced a while ago?

Apple took it to appeal though, as they always do. However now it's been firmly put in place that Apple are in the wrong.

[swordman]

still have to run the ads saying sorry

[Rich_L]

These apology ads should be good, although I suspect Apple will appeal over those too.

[platelet]

We're sorry that we said Samsungs tablet was too like ours, it's now been legally established that ours is way cooler.

[swordman]

Dont think there is scope for further appeals

[Voynich]

An apology? The evangelicals will be livid. One was ranting online that Apple should refuse to allow the British to buy their products. Maybe it can be worded that Samsung devices just aren't 'cool' enough to be confused with Apple! That's what the judge originally said after all.

[paulbrock]

well going to be hard to spin the notice:

http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/2012_08_01_archive.html

Judge Birss did, however, order Apple to display the following notice on the home page of its UK website in a font size no smaller than Arial 14 with a hyperlink to Judge Birss's judgment of 9 July for a period of 6 months from the date of the Order:
"On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronics (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet computers, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple's registered design 000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High Court is available via the following link [insert hyperlink]."
Apple was also ordered to insert an advertisement containing the same notice in The Financial Times, The Daily Mail; The Guardian; Mobile Magazine and T3 magazine.

edit:that's a lot of words to put on a minimalist design home page

[swordman]

Expect flag burning protests outside British embassy

[grumpyoldbat]

It won't make any difference though. Apple got awarded a whole new load of patents the other day. Expect more suits soon!

[Roush]

Originally Posted by paulbrock

well going to be hard to spin the notice:

http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/2012_08_01_archive.html

edit:that's a lot of words to put on a minimalist design home page

They don't need to put all of that on their home page. They only have to have a 'Samsung/Apple UK judgment' link on the home page.

Also, they only have to have it there for one month, rather than the 6 months that Judge Birss originally ordered.

Still not good news for them though, and given that they've asked for publicity orders in some cases (that are yet to come to judgement) they can't really cry foul about it.

[paulbrock]

Originally Posted by Roush

They don't need to put all of that on their home page. They only have to have a 'Samsung/Apple UK judgment' link on the home page.

Spoilsport

[My name's Scott]

Find it hilarious that Apple tried to take out these rival products now they have to advertise their existence on their website for 30 days.

[swordman]

good old British legal system

[omnidirectional]

Good to see common sense prevail with Apple losing again. These patent/infringement case failures must be getting quite costly now and generating ill-feeling towards the company. I'd just like the recent US verdict to be overturned now, i'm less confident about that though.

[-ajm-]

Can we have a level playing field now? And some inovation?

[flagpole]

from time to time i like to post this image:
http://nigelcoldwell.co.uk/test/padd.jpg

[niceguy1966]

Originally Posted by omnidirectional

Good to see common sense prevail with Apple losing again. These patent/infringement case failures must be getting quite costly now and generating ill-feeling towards the company. I'd just like the recent US verdict to be overturned now, i'm less confident about that though.

Hmmm, $1B Vs. An Advert. I think Apple are still ahead in this silly game.

I'm so pleased companies weren't allowed to patent "look and feel" 100 years ago.

Can you imagine if every manufacturers' keyboard had to have the keys in a different order to avoid a lawsuit! Or if the first person to use a triangle for "play" and a square for "stop" had exclusive rights.

Sometimes the world is better when everyone does things the same way.

[paulbrock]

Originally Posted by flagpole

from time to time i like to post this image:
http://nigelcoldwell.co.uk/test/padd.jpg

There's regularly times when using my Nexus 7 that it makes me feel like I should be on the Enterprise....

Now if only I had a voice-activated drinks dispenser!

[Roush]

Originally Posted by niceguy1966

I'm so pleased companies weren't allowed to patent "look and feel" 100 years ago.

They were.

The first US design patent was granted in 1842.

I can't find an exact date they became available in the UK, but they were definitely permitted under The Designs and Patents Act 1907.

Just to point out as well, the QWERTY keyboard layout was patented in 1878. That hasn't stopped it becoming the 'standard' keyboard layout for the English alphabet.

[niceguy1966]

Originally Posted by Roush

They were.

The first US design patent was granted in 1842.

I can't find an exact date they became available in the UK, but they were definitely permitted under The Designs and Patents Act 1907.

I'm sure it was something that actually had a design, not a square with rounded corners.

[Stiggles]

Originally Posted by Roush

They were.

The first US design patent was granted in 1842.

I can't find an exact date they became available in the UK, but they were definitely permitted under The Designs and Patents Act 1907.

Most companies however use common sense. Apple on the other hand wants to be the sole people to make touch-screen phones and tablets as well as stifling innovation. an absolute disgrace of a company. I'm glad they lost this. They are beginning to look even more foolish than they already were. The apology is going to be a huge embarrassment for them and make your average joe look differently on apple.

I'm pretty sure they will lose the appeal in the states as well soon.

[kidspud]

Originally Posted by Stiggles

Most companies however use common sense. Apple on the other hand wants to be the sole people to make touch-screen phones and tablets as well as stifling innovation. an absolute disgrace of a company. I'm glad they lost this. They are beginning to look even more foolish than they already were. The apology is going to be a huge embarrassment for them and make your average joe look differently on apple.

I'm pretty sure they will lose the appeal in the states as well soon.

I expect the average joe does not even know what the court case (or the appeal) is about.

[paulbrock]

Probably not, but as the 3rd most shared story on the BBC right now, plenty of average joes will get at least a hint that Apple done bad.