News - Judge dismayed by Apple’s begrudging apology to Samsung

[bobfoc]

As a retired attorney, I laugh at this as totally asinine, arrogant behavior on the part of this Judge. Apple complied word-for-word with his order as to what was to be published. Then freedom of speech applies. The Judge has NO business prohibiting Apple from directly quoting from the Judge's comments in explaining his decision! Nor has he the authority to prohibit Apple from telling its customers and shareholders what other courts in other countries have ruled. Another Little Lord Fauntleroy in the court system!

Are you secretly Judge Lucy Koh?

[dcwt2010]

As a retired attorney, I laugh at this as totally asinine, arrogant behavior on the part of this Judge. Apple complied word-for-word with his order as to what was to be published. Then freedom of speech applies. The Judge has NO business prohibiting Apple from directly quoting from the Judge's comments in explaining his decision! Nor has he the authority to prohibit Apple from telling its customers and shareholders what other courts in other countries have ruled. Another Little Lord Fauntleroy in the court system!

The whole point of the court order is to clear up the confusion. By adding all the other paragraphs they're effectively nullifying what the court order says which is to clear up the fact that Samsung did not copy the iPad. This was put succinctly in the first paragraph on Apple's statement, so why add more?

If you're a retired Attorney then I'm sure you can tell us how you'd have won this court case, right?

[davesom555]

As a retired attorney, I laugh at this as totally asinine, arrogant behavior on the part of this Judge. Apple complied word-for-word with his order as to what was to be published. Then freedom of speech applies. The Judge has NO business prohibiting Apple from directly quoting from the Judge's comments in explaining his decision! Nor has he the authority to prohibit Apple from telling its customers and shareholders what other courts in other countries have ruled. Another Little Lord Fauntleroy in the court system!

Did you read what they posted? I felt that there was an underlying hint of cynicism and perhaps even mockery of the court's decision. In this respect I think that the judge made the right decision to reprimand them. The company seems to be acting as if they were a 7 year old who's been told to stand in the corner.

[aidanjt]

Are you secretly Judge Lucy Koh?

Reads more like a PR bot doing damage control.

The added backhanders hardly makes amends for Apple's vicious spurious global assault on Samsung's reputation. That was the whole point of the order, and it was abundantly clear that's what the Judge expected from them. They didn't even need to make a formal apology either (but they should have), just state Samsung didn't copy the iPad and link to the judgement. The rest of that fluff just goes and completely undoes any trivial effect the prior statement made towards clearing Samsung's name.

Unfortunately ethical standards have little place in the corporate hierarchy, and apparently legal departments in particular.

[ajones]

Maybe the delay is Apple filing the paperwork against HM Courts because they have a letter from the US Patent Office that says they're right....

I just can't stop the image of Apple with their lower lip wobbling about!

[mark22]

I just can't stop the image of Apple with their lower lip wobbling about!

Haha, now me too.

[dangel]

Did you read what they posted? I felt that there was an underlying hint of cynicism and perhaps even mockery of the court's decision. In this respect I think that the judge made the right decision to reprimand them. The company seems to be acting as if they were a 7 year old who's been told to stand in the corner.

Put it this way - I wouldn't hire him as my representation - that's terrible advice. All Apple had to do was post a simple paragraph - it wasn't particularly damning to them and it wouldn't of caused much harm (or get noticed for the most part) - instead they've deliberately taken the pee out of the court and now they're left with a more prominent notice and heap of bad press showing how childish they were.

Interesting to note he registered just to post that comment though..

[Biscuit]

As a retired attorney, I laugh at this as totally asinine, arrogant behavior on the part of this Judge. Apple complied word-for-word with his order as to what was to be published. Then freedom of speech applies. The Judge has NO business prohibiting Apple from directly quoting from the Judge's comments in explaining his decision! Nor has he the authority to prohibit Apple from telling its customers and shareholders what other courts in other countries have ruled. Another Little Lord Fauntleroy in the court system!

American or British attorney?

[ajones]

Planet Apple. Must be a wonderful place to live

[kingpotnoodle]

Haha sometimes the arrogance of Apple is just shocking, embodied in a person it would be one of those smug tosspots that everyone just feels like hitting with a spade.

All these legal stuff is really starting to harm the company image now, they need to put a hold on some of this and just start to compete fairly. Good products win sales not a court judgements about copying the (dubious) looks, it's blatant malicious litigation and so school playground ("miss judge he copied me..."). FFS apart from the colourful Nokia Windows phones nearly all smartphones and tablets are broadly the same shape, size and design.

Patents and design rights are there to protect genuine innovations, black/silver rectangular devices with rounded edges does not qualify. See old Nokia phones, monitors, TVs, microwave doors...

[ajones]

Patents and design rights are there to protect genuine innovations, black/silver rectangular devices with rounded edges does not qualify. See old Nokia phones, monitors, TVs, microwave doors...

But you've just described Apple's entire patent portfolio. I'm also sure that they include patents for dexterous touch sensitive devices used to transfer input commands onto a generic touch sensitive screen…. Hang on, that’s a “finger”…

[crossy]

Judge Robin Jacob said, regarding Apple’s appended published statement “I’m at a loss that a company such as Apple would do this. That is a plain breach of the order.”

Well in that case m'lud grow a pair and slap them with a contempt of court fine! Meanwhile the rest of us will be gasping for breath (with laughter). And why have Apple done this? Easy, based on their actions they seem to think that they've got a god-given right to do what the heck they like, in whatever way they like. I'm personally saddened that a great company (as Apple were) have fallen so far.

Apple requested 14 days in which to make the changes to its website. This delay has been rejected by the judges who said today that “I would like to see the head of Apple make an affidavit setting out the technical difficulties which means Apple can’t put this on” to its website within 24 hours, said Judge Jacob, “This is Apple. They cannot put something on their website?

14 days to update a single page - what the **** are they using to do their website? Emacs compiled each time they use it? Seriously, if Apple need that amount of time to make a simple update then there's no hope for them. More likely that they wanted time to similarly "clarify" the statement by running it through the Legal/PR Newspeak generator...

Here in the US I see a lot of hate going towards Judge Lucy Koh, her ruling and handling of the case clearly indicates she's getting her pockets lined with cash.

In that case the posters are ignoramuses - informed opinion is that LK was pretty impartial, (c.f. her "are you on crack?" comment to the Apple legal sharks), but rushed through the trial as soon as was feasible - I saw one article saying that she's a "9 to 5 judge" - does her 8 hours and then wants to get home to her family. Pretty reasonable attitude in that case. No, my objections to that trial are more to do with the amount awarded and that dammed patent troll in the jury, Samsung should have got that turkey whipped straight out!

As a retired attorney, I laugh at this as totally asinine, arrogant behavior on the part of this Judge. Apple complied word-for-word with his order as to what was to be published. Then freedom of speech applies. The Judge has NO business prohibiting Apple from directly quoting from the Judge's comments in explaining his decision!

Far be it from me to argue with an "attorney" - especially one who hasn't mastered the caps lock - but the reports I've read said that the judgement handed down was pretty specific about the apology that had to be printed. And doing it the way that Apple UK did was pretty close in my book to contempt - a non-apologetic apology, (and you notice that they carefully avoided that the Samsung award in the US is still under appeal - although most commentators seem to think that Apple were probably correct in that one case - but the award was excessive).

[avi8tor]

Give them 500 lashes too I think!

[Willzzz]

As a retired attorney, I laugh at this as totally asinine, arrogant behavior on the part of this Judge. Apple complied word-for-word with his order as to what was to be published. Then freedom of speech applies. The Judge has NO business prohibiting Apple from directly quoting from the Judge's comments in explaining his decision! Nor has he the authority to prohibit Apple from telling its customers and shareholders what other courts in other countries have ruled. Another Little Lord Fauntleroy in the court system!

They can quote from the judge's comments, that is fine. But they should do so in a separate article so as not to detract from the apology.

[tealsteam]

have they completely removed the appology, because i cant find the original link on the home page?

[Biscuit]

have they completely removed the appology, because i cant find the original link on the home page?

For the moment it looks like they have yes