Apple Publishes Petulant Non-Apology Apology To Samsung

from the you-don't-say dept

As a UK court recently ruled, Apple’s UK website is required to post a notice about the court ruling that Samsung didn’t copy Apple’s design with its devices. Apple has now complied with a tiny link in the page footer:

The notice itself is amusing in its somewhat passive aggressive tone. It first notes the court ruling, and then explains:

In the ruling, the judge made several important points comparing the designs of the Apple and Samsung products:

What kind of important points? Well, all the ones about how Apple’s products are awesome, while Samsung’s… not so much.

“The extreme simplicity of the Apple design is striking. Overall it has undecorated flat surfaces with a plate of glass on the front all the way out to a very thin rim and a blank back. There is a crisp edge around the rim and a combination of curves, both at the corners and the sides. The design looks like an object the informed user would want to pick up and hold. It is an understated, smooth and simple product. It is a cool design.”

“The informed user’s overall impression of each of the Samsung Galaxy Tablets is the following. From the front they belong to the family which includes the Apple design; but the Samsung products are very thin, almost insubstantial members of that family with unusual details on the back. They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool.”

And then… it reminds you that other countries have ruled completely otherwise:

However, in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple’s design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple’s far more popular iPad.

In other words, it’s the petulant Apple “complying” with the UK judge, while at the same time making sure to add a “but, but, but… the judge is really wrong — other than the part where he likes our design.”

Filed Under: , ,
Companies: apple, samsung

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Apple Publishes Petulant Non-Apology Apology To Samsung”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Courts do not necessarily react kindly if they feel their orders have been interpreted, shall we say, too creatively.

The point of this order was to right a wrong.

It’s one thing to engage in a patent lawsuit and lose.

It’s another thing to engage in a patent lawsuit, go on a public rampage, damage the reputation of a competitor, and lose.

I wonder if the court would see this apology as trying to undo the damage Apple has done?

G Thompson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Wasn't apology, wasn't supposed to be

The actual statement from the Judge is found in the Judgement :

[87.] Finally I should say something about the notice itself. We heard no discussion about that. Plainly Judge Birss’s Schedule has been overtaken by events. Subject to anything that may be submitted by either side I would propose the following:

On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (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 No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High court is available on the following link [link given].

That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on ?.. A copy of the Court of Appeal’s judgment is available on the following link [?]. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.

[88.] In the result I would dismiss both appeals but vary the publicity order as indicated or in such other way as may be agreed or settled by further argument. I would hope that any such argument (and any other consequential) arguments can be resolved by written submissions.

Nowhere in those paragraphs were the rest of the petulant paragraphs that Apple included, nowhere was there the possibility of them being expanded upon by inserting paragraphs between them.

The only thing mentioned is that the publicity order may be varied “in such other way as may be agreed or settled by further argument”. Guess what? No other agreement or settlement was undertaken nor approved by any parties (well other than Apple itself it seems) so therefore the publicity order they have published is contemptuous.

I also notice the link entitled “Samsung/Apple UK judgment.” (found at 85) has NOT been changed further showing that Apple has acted with contemptuous intent on the publicity order

G Thompson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Thats exactly what I was thinking.

If we go back to the original order from the Appelate judge the order states that they have to state paragraph 1 and paragraph 5 of the “apology page“.

The court specifically placed both of those paragraphs together. Apple in their infinite egotism has now expanded them and absolutely diluted the order. This smacks of contempt and Samsung hopefully will bring this to the courts attention. Though I fervently hope the court will do this on their own initiative now.

If Apple wanted to add condescending and hyperbolic opinion to the page afterwards they should of done it after the original ordered statement was shown. Though even that could be considered dilution of the order. This though is absolute intent to deceive.

I’m now wondering what they will be placing as advertisements in the MSM newspapers they were also ordered to place adverts in.

anon says:

Re: Re:

Cheap and decent quality, just like the nexus 7, I am sure a lot of other tabs coming this xmas. SO that counts out the ?600 ipad and the ?800 surface etc.I have a playbook and to be honest i dont see all the fuss about android, yes it has some good apps, but i use the tablet for email and to browse the internet. maybe play some angry-birds but otherwise it is a family device.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

For me the appeal of android is that its not locked down by a multi-billion dollar corporation and I can alter it, customize it, legally distribute it, sideload apps on it etc, to my hearts content.

Its not really so much that I love android as I hate the closed nature of the alternative mobile devices. Walled gardens suck, and being locked into one is no better than any industry with an abusive monopoly player. 40 bucks for a power cord is absurd.

Jeremy says:

Apple has managed to turn technology into fashion

Clothing designers sue each other for infringing on each others esthetic designs. Technology companies actually try to innovate and compete with each other. Apple is therefore not a technology company, they are part of the fashion industry, and their childish litigious behavior in that industry is no different than models or designers in the clothing industry having a catfight. They are deliberately blocking innovation because they want to own all the esthetics/ergonomics as fashion. The worst part is, because there’s no case for monopoly w.r.t Apple (as there was with Microsoft), they’re going to be a thorn in the technology industries side for a long time.

Kevin says:

Re: Apple has managed to turn technology into fashion

The fashion industry does not have patents. They can’t sue each other over stuff like aesthetics. This is why clothing designers cover their clothes in their logo’s so it’s easily recognized as their brand. The abundance also make’s the fabric harder to replicate for counterfeiters.

Zane Stuart says:

Petulant Apple

It seems Apple is hoping UK consumers aren’t very smart. Has anyone mistaken a Samsung product for an Apple product or know someone who has? The judge, in that point of the suit, rightfully ruled against Apple.

Trying to point out rulings in other countries just makes it sound like Apple is whining. Patent laws differ from country to country and Apple’s attorneys/solicitors should know better than to expect that every country’s courts would rule in Apple’s favor.

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Petulant Apple

“It seems Apple is hoping UK consumers aren’t very smart. Has anyone mistaken a Samsung product for an Apple product or know someone who has? The judge, in that point of the suit, rightfully ruled against Apple. “

That’s trademark you’re thinking of. This was not a trademark case, it was patents.

Designerfx (profile) says:

factually incorrect- microsoft technique

how hard is it for people to realize that apple + microsoft are pretty much working in harmony at this point and even employing identical techniques here?

“A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple’s design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc.”

Where they make a comment that isn’t factually incorrect but is entirely misleading. Facebook and Oracle have been doing this too. Coincidence of the anti-google? Nope.

Do you think they’re going to rewrite that statement when it gets overturned in the court or on appeal? Again, nope.

Anonymous Coward says:

had Samsung done this sort of ‘apology’, as was wanted in a previous case, Apple would have gone absolutely ape-shit! strange how they take this action now the shoe is on the other foot. to me it just shows a further example of how childish Apple is. Tim Cook is showing what his mentality is like as well by listing the various ‘we won here over this’. when Jobs was alive, God rest him, Apple was pathetic in the way it behaved. i bet he would be proud though if he was able to see that his company is still going down the same road he was leading it, ie, just as pathetic!!

jupiterkansas (profile) says:

My old iPod recently broke and instead of rushing out to buy a new one, I’m actually exploring other options. So far I’ve been getting by just fine using my LG phone and PowerAmp.

And it’s only because Apple keeps being a douche with their lawsuits, proprietary cables, closed in systems, and ridiculously high prices ($150 for a 16GB music player).

John Fenderson (profile) says:

Apple is looking terrible all around

Also, see the petulant comments made by Apple’s CEO about Microsoft Surface:

Disregarding the technical merits of the comments, the tone of them is similar to the ad and makes Apple sound weak & scared. You’d think Apple could afford a decent PR person to help handle these matters.

Dave says:

Apple being childish

Well, they certainly have thrown their toys out of the buggy. I don’t see an actual statement that Samsung haven’t copied them, as ordered. Judging (joke – get it?) by previous Judge Birss cases, he’s probably not going to like that. I get the impression that he probably thought the case was a complete waste of time and money anyway and was gently taking the you-know-what out of Apple.
High time that Apple accepted that there is a word called “competition” and items that do a similar job are bound to have a similar appearance as well. I don’t hear Sony suing Toshiba because their televisions also have a screen and come with a remote control and neither do I hear Ford suing Toyota (or any other car manufacturer) because their product also has four wheels, seats and/or anything else that appears on most other cars. The whole Apple/Samsung thing is ludicrous. Most of what Apple sells can be purchased from other manufacturers to do much the same job at considerably less than the highly inflated prices that Apple seems to think they’re worth. Beats me how Apple have managed to con. the public for so long that their products are somehow “special”. Clever cult marketing – I’ll give them that but, at the end of the day, I would hope that folk with any sense would see right through it. This little temper tantrum shows them up for what they really are. Rather like spoilt brats in my opinion.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...