Apple Apologises - Eventually

It can't have missed your notice that Apple and Samsung have been falling out with each other recently.  I blogged a week or so ago about the various court cases they have had (and I understand one or a thousand others may have mentioned it too).

the upshot is that the Korean courts think both companies are pretty much as bad as each other for copying ideas, the US courts (including 12 American jurors) thought that the American company Apple was great and wronged by the non-American company Samsung, awarding costs of $1 billion.  The UK courts agreed that Apple was cooler than Samsung, but that was all.  They ruled that Apple had been bad-mouthing their competitor and insisted that Apple place the following statement on their UK website and post it in a number of UK newspapers.

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. 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.

Apple appealed the decision but was over-ruled.  However they posted a modified version of the ruling that went like this:

Samsung / Apple UK judgment

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 linkwww.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.

The UK courts, understandably, had a dicky fit over this statement, which effectively appears to attempt to divert the reader away from the judgement.  It probably implies that the UK courts were wrong, seeing as other courts appear to have differed in opinion.  Given that Apple started the whole issue by bringing Samsung to a UK court they felt that Apple hadn't been listening to them, so the courts hauled the Apple lawyers back in and gave them a fair old dressing down.  Consequently the original statement, as directed by the UK courts, has now replaced the modified statement.

Is this just a semantic spat?  Will it convert people who may have been swayed by the court case and any statements made before or during to consider Samsung devices?  I doubt it; in fact, most of us just watch these arguments going on out of curiosity and then buy whatever we were going to buy anyway.  I live in a household where Apple and Android devices (admittedly not Samsung badged, but possibly manufactured) live harmoniously side-by-side and I'm sure I'm not the only one.  The only real opinion the user will have is that the net effect of all the court actions and punitive fines is going to be passed on to us eventually, and we'll still buy the device we fancy.  Even if it is an uncool Samsung device.

But the real problem for Apple is that Samsung are probably going to go back to the US courts and make the not unreasonable challenge to their $1 billion charge.  They will probably argue that as Apple had recourse to one more layer of judiciary in the UK, the UK Supreme Court, but clearly chose to place the retraction on their website and in several newspapers instead, it demonstrates that they did not believe they had an absolutely correct argument regarding infringements.  That action alone should compel the US courts to reconsider their previous judgement.  Hopefully both companies will be told to go away, stop wasting court time and the consumer might find that the next generation of Apple and Samsung devices are a little bit more affordable than they might have been.

Here's hoping.

--------------------------------------------------------------

I can be followed on Twitter too - @RayASullivan
or on Facebook - use raysullivan.novels@yahoo.com to find me

Why not take a look at my books and read up on my Biog here

Want to see what B L O'Feld is up to?  Take a look at his website here

Worried/Interested in the secretive world of DLFs?  Take a look at this website dedicated to DLFs here, if you dare!