5 ms·
Again, why should a company be required to only give the UK court's view of the facts?
by michaelfeathers 14y ago
Again, why should a company be required to only give the UK court's view of the facts?
- vidarh 14y agoNobody is requiring that. They are free to publish pages upon pages of opposing views if they please. They are required to comply with a court order with a very clear intent: To rectify the false impression Apple had created that the Samsung Galaxy Tab infringed on UK law and might get banned from sale. All the court is requiring is that Apple is not diluting that message by including other paragraphs that are at best irrelevant and at most directly misleading.
- oneandoneis2 14y agoMaybe because it's required in response to their failed attempt to use the UK court's view of the facts to block a competitor's products from the market?
- danielweber 14y agoIf I'm required to put "the surgeon general has determined that smoking causes cancer" on the cigarettes I sell, then I'm required to put that message there. I am not following that law if I add "but the surgeon general is a stupid head" right after that. Or "but smoking is totally cool in Europe." I have plenty of other avenues in which I can try to persuade people that the surgeon general is a mean poopy head that they should ignore. It's insulting to pretend not to understand this, which is also how the judge feels.