18 
Last week Apple lost an appeal against a UK High Court of Justice ruling, and was told to post a public apology to Samsung. In Arial. Now it’s popped up online.
The apology isn’t a friendly “sorry I screwed up”, but a rather long, dull passage of legalese. No surprise, really, but it is good to see that Apple is complying with the order that the passage be posted in Arial. When the apology hits the newspapers—presumably today or tomorrow—it should appear in text “no smaller than 14 pts” in size.
The original legal case in question threw out Apple’s complaints about Samsung, when Judge Colin Biriss explained that Galaxy tablets “do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design… They are not as cool.” As a result, Biriss judged that consumers were unlikely to confuse the two tablets, meaning that Samsung’s product didn’t infringe on Apple’s registered design.
The apology is Apple’s gesture toward admitting that’s the case. You can read the apology online on the Apple UK website, but it’s pasted in full here:
On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited’s Galaxy Tablet Computer, 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 www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html.
In the ruling, the judge made several important points comparing the designs of the Apple and Samsung products:
“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.”
That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 18 October 2012. A copy of the Court of Appeal’s judgment is available on the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.
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.
That’s not an apology of any kind. That’s just admitting they got stung in court. If anything, the wording flips the “apology” into a promo piece, pointing out their products are “cooler” than Samsung’s, or, so say the courts.
I’m not on anyone’s side, Samsung or Apple, as from what I see, both are as guilty as each other tbh, but hopefully they’ll get stung for contempt.
It could certainly be argued that by quoting other judgements that went in their favour Apple are implying the UK decision is wrong, which would be grounds for contempt. However I’m sure Apple’s Lawyers have gone over this and have plenty of legal arguments prepared that justify it.
I think they’ll get hauled over the coals for it. The court ruling was that Apple had to admit they didn’t copy the design, whereas their response merely states what the judge says. There is no acknowledgment on Apples part to say they accept the judgement. They don’t need to agree with it, just that they accept it. That’s all.
Yup. It’s the most self-serving apology evers.
Correct me if I’m wrong – but didn’t the ruling state the apology must be checked and approved by the court?
No I believe they are trying to skirt the judgement, however everybody who realises they are just an electronics company knows that they must be really rump rustled right now and anus devastated but sshhh no tears now, only dreams…
“The apology isn’t a friendly “sorry I screwed up”, but a rather long, dull passage of legalese.”
I don’t really know what you expected.
I think it’s quite funny
the Apple execs in the offices are condescendingly saying this
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nsb7abmj1tbx9nw/applesung.jpg
forgot to add smiley face
“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.”
Translation:
“Oh by the way, we won in Germany so it’s just you guys who are stupid.”
I’m reminded of two little schoolboys standing in front of the headmistress, one being made to apologise to the other, making no eye-contact, scowling, pouting and muttering at the floor.
Don’t see any element of an apology here, if they were asked to post a public apology then where is that part? This is just pointing out the ruling and then taking a parting shot at that ruling by implying the UK are incorrect in this judgement.
Next time I do something wrong and have to apologize, I’ll just point out what I did without saying sorry and all sorted.
To be fair to Apple (now there’s a phrase I never thought I’d say), it’s not like the judge told Apple to apologise and actually mean it.
Paraphrased as thus:
On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung do not infringe Apple’s registered design.
In the ruling, the judge basically said: “The iPad’s design is better than the Samsung’s, so they’re not the same.”
That Judgment was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
However, Germany and the U.S think Samsung are copying bastards.
http://i.imgur.com/VWr6I.gif If only you could embed this as the header image I would be so happy.
Or this http://l.yimg.com/a/p/sp/editorial_image/ba/bad69729ff1134a11e6ae3a995e854d0/u_mad_bro_young_giants_fan_pouts_big_time_over_foul_ball.jpg
What’s the significance of Arial here?
It’s possibly been used for DDA compliance as it’s legal
The judge said Apple had to post their ‘apology’ in a font which could not be smaller than Arial size 14.
Well, unless I’m doing something wrong, copied and pasted into Word, it’s not big enough.
The link to the “apology” appears to be Calibri size 11 and the apology itself is Arial 10.5. The Header is size 12.
Right you are irononreverse – the only thing I can see Apple can argue is that the Judge stated that it should be “printed” in no less than Arial pt.14 and because they also have to publish notices in newspapers, they could argue online isn’t printed so doesn’t need to meet the criteria. But given the wording of the statement, I’m not too sure the judge will be happy with that explanation.
What a childish response from Apple.
Doesn’t the following line from the ruling put them in hot water though?
“82 .Given the massive publicity of HHJ Birss’s “not as cool” judgment, if there had been nothing else I would not have let the order he made come into force. Events had made it unnecessary.”
With reference to what Apple have on their website:
“In the ruling, the judge made several important points comparing the designs of the Apple and Samsung products:…
‘They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool.’”
Also I still believe the “apology” should have been in Comic Sans.
apology? not to me. it might as well be in windings
In all fairness, do you honestly think Samsung wouldn’t do anything anything similar if it was them having to apologise?
i think the point is that its not Samsung having to apologize because it isn’t Samsung making slanderous accusations.
Spoken to Colin this morning; he is not happy. As his original judgment was upheld by CoA it comes down to him whether this counts as an apology. I’m sure we will see things developing from here.
Even as an apple fanboy, I would love to see them get done for contempt of court, though I really doubt it would come to that.
Where is the apology? I don’t see the words ‘apology’, ‘sorry’ or ‘apologies’ anywhere on the statement. If I were Samsung, I’d be disappointed that the apology wasn’t there. If I were the British courts, I’d be disappointed at Apple’s thinly veiled swipe.
Apparently Apple’s “design is Cool” and Samsung’s “not as cool” passes as an apology these days; could of fooled me.
I absolutely cannot believe Apple have the gall to mention here similar cases in other countries. Apple should be done for contempt of court. The bullshit outcomes in two other countries do NOT belong in this statement.
I hope they get burned for this. How dare the lying cheating fuckers insult the UK justice system?
That they brought up the $1bn dollar case (about something else) in the USA is also outrageous.
Throw the book at them…
They should have enforced stricter rules for the apology.
Like a splash page that’s the first thing that appears on the site with the exact words, “We are sorry for lying. We would like to apologise to Samsung for being such dicks”