Ondrej Holzman British court last week decided, that Apple must clearly state on its website that Samsung did not copy its design with its Galaxy Tab. Apple's lawyers made great use of the situation and even made some advertising out of the apology.
Although Apple did say in its statement that Samsung did not copy its design according to the court's decision, it later used the words of the judge in its own favor, who declared that the South Korean company's products were "not that cool." Of course, this suited Apple, so he used the same wording in his apology, where he also pointed out that in addition to the British court, for example, the German or American one recognized that Samsung had indeed copied Apple's design.
Full text of the apology (original <a href="https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1932/8043/files/200721_ODSTOUPENI_BEZ_UDANI_DUVODU__EN.pdf?v=1595428404" data-gt-href-en="https://en.notsofunnyany.com/">here</a>), which is actually written in 14 point Arial font, can be read below:
British court ruling in Samsung vs. Apple (freely translated)
On 9 July 2012, the High Court of England and Wales ruled that Samsung's Galaxy Tablets, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7, do not infringe Apple's design patent No. 0000181607–0001. A copy of the entire High Court judgment file is available at the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html.
In making his decision, the judge made several important points comparing Apple's design and Samsung's devices:
“The incredible simplicity of Apple's design is remarkable. In short, the iPad has a unibody surface with an edge-to-edge glass front with a very thin bezel in a simple black color. The hem is precisely finished around the edge and combines the curves of the corners and the side edges. The design looks like an object that the user wants to pick up and hold. It's a straightforward and simple, polished product. It's great (cool) design.
The overall user impression of each Samsung Galaxy Tablet is as follows: from the front, it belongs to the category that includes Apple design; but Samsung products are very thin with unusual details on the back. They don't have the same incredible simplicity that befits Apple's design. They're not that cool.'
The judgment applies throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 18 October 2012. A copy of the Court of Appeal judgment is available at the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html. There is no injunction against a patented design throughout Europe.
However, in Germany, for example, a court there, dealing with the same patent, decided that Samsung committed unfair competition by copying the design of the iPad. A US jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing Apple's design and utility model patents, for which it was fined over one billion US dollars. So while the British court found Samsung not guilty of copying, other courts found that Samsung blatantly copied Apple's much more popular iPad when creating the Galaxy tablets.
Apple's apology is only a small victory for Samsung in the giant patent dispute, but the South Korean company is hopeful of more success in the future. The patent office has started to investigate the patent with the designation US 7469381, which hides the effect bounce back. This is used when scrolling and is a "jump" effect when you reach the end of the page. There were even reports in the media that he was rejected, but that was premature. The Patent Office is currently only investigating its validity, and the whole matter may take several months. The result can then be the recognition of the validity of patents, or, on the contrary, its cancellation. Samsung is hoping for the second option, which would eventually not have to pay Apple such high damages ordered by the American court. However, we have to wait and see how the review of the patent's validity will turn out.
I don't understand the sentence "...which is actually written in 14 point Arial font...". Why does the author highlight this? I must be missing something. Would someone explain this? Thanks :)
The court ordered Apple in what font and in what size they must write the apology ;)
I would dare to say that this is rather a mockery of Samsung ;) every person with eyes and a brain clearly knows... that Samsung is simply copying, so an apology is rather counterproductive for Samsung ;)
apple is no longer beautiful, it's ugly and everyone only buys it because it has a bitten apple, hands on heart APPLE is no longer beautiful :(
I don't see anything ugly, so far...
I don't know where in your clouded world there is an exit to real life. And when you find it, you will prove to all of us that Apple products are perfect, after all, they are like the most beautiful oraz on earth. It's not just a piece of metal, it's a work of art. Hey! You are not contradicting yourself by chance, your name is Iphone 4S, it is beautiful, while your comment says how ugly Apple is.... That's stupid don't you think? :)
The best apology years ago, at least in my opinion, was this one: http://blog.kompost.cz/2007/04/omluva-mgr-radku-hulnovi.html