6 ms·
"A judge said we must apology because we are cooler and so Samsung didn't copy because they aren't cool. But other judges said that we are cooler and Samsung st
by duiker101 14y ago
"A judge said we must apology because we are cooler and so Samsung didn't copy because they aren't cool. But other judges said that we are cooler and Samsung still copied us! So we must be right!" Sincerely: a 6 year old.
- shanelja 14y agoI couldn't agree more, Apples response here is childish and to be quite frank doesn't do much in the way of apologizing to Samsung. I for one hope that they get found in contempt of court for this, I doubt very much it's what the presiding judge had in mind.
- mtrimpe 14y agoI hope I will be forgiven a me-too comment for once; but this is a really, really childish response. 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.
- bruceboughton 14y agoThe people who will read this statement will have already made up their minds. Casual visitors to apple.com/uk are not going to read this.
- amvp 14y agoDidn't the order require the statement to be: 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. Instead this is a link to the statement (in a div with the class sosume - little gag there) in a 11px font size... not to mention the fact that the additional paragraphs after the statement itself somewhat go against the spirit of the order.
- Nursie 14y agoIt says websites, it does then go on to give URL's, but these are the top level URLs for various EU countries, so I guess they could argue it is on their website. Open to interpretation, IMHO, though I would have assumed the judge meant the front pages.
- jdswain 14y agoThe sosumi div is used worldwide, and is the name of the div for legal links on Apples home page, it's not new for this notice. A good historical reference, but nothing to do with this legal judgement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sosumi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sosumi
- Tyrannosaurs 14y agoThe appeal court revised it slightly - it basically just has to be linked from the home page which it is (by which them mean the Apple UK home page, not the US one - it's a UK ruling). It's down in the bottom navigation with the privacy policy, terms and so on. They also revised the time it has to be there down from 6 months to 1 month.
- coob 14y agoThe statement itself is 14px
- rb12345 14y agoApparently only the print version needs to be 14pt; the web version can be 11pt Arial. At 96 DPI, 11pt Arial is slightly larger than the 14px used on the site. Good luck reading it on retina displays, too, although it's possible that the iPad and friends rescale it.
- stordoff 14y agoIt was modified in the appeal: >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.
- pervycreeper 14y agoOne would think that a company with $.12 trillion in the bank could afford to be classy once in a while.
- shanelja 14y agoApple tends to be fairly ruthless in their dealings with other companies and act without remorse (like many other companies, Samsung of course included) and it's become the only way to survive in the horrific world of IP law suits. 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.
- bruceboughton 14y agoThis is a rather pessimistic view. Companies have always been ruthless towards each other and life seems to continue on regardless.
- lutze 14y agoYou can be ruthless AND classy, they're not mutually exclusive. 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.
- scotty79 14y agoSo far Samsung only fights with Apple with whole slew of superior products. Well... also Samsung marketing makes fun of Apple marketing if that counts as a fight.
- v0cab 14y ago
- Tyrannosaurs 14y agoPersonally I'd have gone for dry as dust legalese, made the first two paragraphs legal gibberish under the guise of background and by the time you got to the actual meat of the statement no-one would have been reading. 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.
- praptak 14y ago"The defendant will now revoke the false accusations." "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!"