5 ms·

To me, the core problem is that the UK court is compelling speech. Maybe that is okay in the UK, but I don't think a court would be able to get away with that

To me, the core problem is that the UK court is compelling speech. Maybe that is okay in the UK, but I don't think a court would be able to get away with that in the US. 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.

vidarh 14y ago
They are not compelling speech. They are compelling Apple to facilitate dissemination of a message that is very clearly labelled as not being Apple's opinion. 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.
- sigzero 14y ago
  They should have just made it brief and to the point. Done and over.
swang 14y ago
Of course those slimy judges can't get away with it in the US. Corporations in the US are people now. 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?
mikeash 14y ago
There are a bunch of examples of American courts ordering apologies in this paper: http://www.law.arizona.edu/faculty/FacultyPubs/Documents/white/White06-28.pdf http://www.law.arizona.edu/faculty/FacultyPubs/Documents/whi... (See page 8.)
vacri 14y ago
Really? Demanding an apology be published (in the spirit of an apology) is 'compelling speech' and therefore against 'our freedoms'? Do you also admonish American parents who tell their child to say they are sorry for an infraction?
onetwothreefour 14y ago
What a US court thinks is irrelevant in the UK, and has zero bearing on the Apple UK site. Thank $DIETY the USPTO is confined to where it is. 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.

vidarh 14y ago

They are not compelling speech. They are compelling Apple to facilitate dissemination of a message that is very clearly labelled as not being Apple's opinion. 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.

sigzero 14y ago
They should have just made it brief and to the point. Done and over.

swang 14y ago

Of course those slimy judges can't get away with it in the US. Corporations in the US are people now. 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?

mikeash 14y ago

There are a bunch of examples of American courts ordering apologies in this paper: http://www.law.arizona.edu/faculty/FacultyPubs/Documents/white/White06-28.pdf http://www.law.arizona.edu/faculty/FacultyPubs/Documents/whi... (See page 8.)

vacri 14y ago

Really? Demanding an apology be published (in the spirit of an apology) is 'compelling speech' and therefore against 'our freedoms'? Do you also admonish American parents who tell their child to say they are sorry for an infraction?

onetwothreefour 14y ago

What a US court thinks is irrelevant in the UK, and has zero bearing on the Apple UK site. Thank $DIETY the USPTO is confined to where it is. 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.