• Amused
  • Angry
  • Bored
  • Busy
  • Cheeky
  • Cold
  • Confused
  • Cool
  • Devilish
  • Fine
  • Hacker
  • Happy
  • In Love
  • Innocent
  • Lonely
  • Nerdy
  • Pensive
  • Roflol
  • Sad
  • Starving
  • Stressed
  • Yeehaw
  • Page 52 of 55 FirstFirst ... 2425051525354 ... LastLast
    Results 511 to 520 of 544
    Like Tree203Likes

    Thread: Apple vs Samsung: Lawsuits After Lawsuits

    1. #511
      PG Xtremist
      I am:
      ----
       

      Posts
      4,192
      XDA take on the recent ads by Apple.

      Now I don’t know about you, but this is about the worst example of following a judge’s orders I have seen in a long time. Here’s exactly what the judge told Apple to do [bold is mine]:
      Within seven days of the date of this Order the Defendant shall, at its own expense, (a) post in a font size no small than Arial 14 pt the notice specified in Schedule 1 to this Order on the home pages of its EU websites (“the Defendant’s Websites”), as specified in Schedule 1 to this order, together with a hyperlink to the judgment of HHJ Birss QC dated 09 July 2012, said notice and hyperlink to remain displayed on the Defendant’s Websites for a period of one year from the date of this Order or until further order of the Court (b) publish in a font size no small than Arial 14 pt the notice specified in Schedule 1 to this Order on a page earlier than page 6 in The Financial Times, the Daily Mail, The Guardian, Mobile Magazine and T3 magazine.
      The following notice shall be posted and displayed upon the Defendant’s Websites….
      “On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronics (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 000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High Court is available via the following link [insert hyperlink].”
      The defendant shall arrange for the following notice to be published in The Financial Times; the Daily Mail; The Guardian; Mobile Magazine; and T3 magazine:
      “On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronics (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 000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High Court is available via the following link [insert hyperlink].”
      Now one could argue that Apple complied with the judge’s order because they do in fact include the text from the judge. However, they then proceed to completely invalidate his statement by essentially stating that he was misinformed because other courts have found that Samsung does in fact copy Apple. Of course they neglect to mention anything about what the Court of Appeals had to say in their rejection of Apple’s appeal (emphasis is mine):
      Because this case (and parallel cases in other countries) has generated much publicity, it will avoid confusion to say what this case is about and not about. It is not about whether Samsung copied Apple’s iPad. Infringement of a registered design does not involve any question of whether there was copying: the issue is simply whether the accused design is too close to the registered design according to the tests laid down in the law. Whether or not Apple could have sued in England and Wales for copying is utterly irrelevant to this case. If they could, they did not. Likewise there is no issue about infringement of any patent for an invention.

      So this case is all about, and only about, Apple’s registered design and the Samsung products. The registered design is not the same as the design of the iPad. It is quite a lot different. For instance the iPad is a lot thinner, and has noticeably different curves on its sides. There may be other differences – even though I own one, I have not made a detailed comparison. Whether the iPad would fall within the scope of protection of the registered design is completely irrelevant. We are not deciding that one way or the other. This case must be decided as if the iPad never existed.
      What we have here is a blatant attempt by Apple to continue Steve Jobs’s legacy of a “reality distortion field” in how they view the world. The Court of Appeals went further to speak out against Apple’s attempts within the EU to go around the UK judge’s orders in sections 78-88 of the appeal ruling, stating that in order to make sure there was no doubt as to what the UK courts had ruled,
      “Apple itself must (having created the confusion) make the position clear: that it acknowledges that the court has decided that these Samsung products do not infringe its registered design. The acknowledgement must come from the horse’s mouth. Nothing short of that will be sure to do the job completely.”
      I fully expect the UK Court of Appeals to come down hard on Apple with this notice, given that they did not make things clear. Instead they spent more time attempting to discredit the judgments and trying to save face. This could very well be grounds for the UK Court to hold Apple in contempt and impose heavy fines, so we shall see what the next few weeks brings.
      An “Apology” Like No Other – xda-developers
      Standing by my Ideals even if it annoys some...

    2. #512
      King Of The Kings
      I am:
      Nerdy
       

      Location
      Auburn, Sydney
      Posts
      374
      My Consoles
      PC
      My PC Specs
        CPU: Pentium M
        Motherboard: Acer Travelmate 4002LCi
        Memory: 1 GB
        GPU: Intel GMA
        HDD: Toshiba 120 GB
        OS: Windows XP
      Mark our word Evil corporation : "You may take our phones, but you will NEVER TAKE OUR FREEDOM."
      Last edited by Generall; 29-10-12 at 03:13 PM.
      Qalandaram Mastam

    3. #513
      PG Xtremist
      I am:
      ----
       

      Posts
      4,192
      Standing by my Ideals even if it annoys some...

    4. #514
      PG Xtremist
      I am:
      ----
       

      Posts
      4,192
      Now that judge is telling Apple it has 24 hours to remove the notice, and 48 hours to come up with a new one. Apple's lawyers argued that they needed two weeks to comply with the new order because of the "technical difficulties" associated with putting up a corrected statement. What constitutes a "corrected statement?" Getting rid of those four extra paragraphs that make it look like UK courts are silly and have no idea what they're talking about. Yes, fixing that would take two weeks according to Apple's lawyers.
      Apple can't change something on it website I thought only their OS was closed sourced now it seems they have got noobs as lawyers.
      Well, the judge had a response for that, too: "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 their website ... I just can’t believe the instructions you’ve been given. This is Apple. They cannot put something on their website?"


      http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/11...a-court-order/
      Standing by my Ideals even if it annoys some...

    5. #515
      PG Xtremist
      I am:
      ----
       

      Posts
      4,192
      Standing by my Ideals even if it annoys some...

    6. #516
      Thurkey Hobo
      I am:
      ----
       

      Location
      Ankara
      Posts
      1,452
      My Consoles
      PC
      Apple has lost their legal claim to the iPhone name in Mexico


      LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

    7. #517
      PG's Original Coolboy \m/
      I am:
      Cheeky
       

      Location
      Lahore
      Posts
      5,485
      My Consoles
      PC
      My PC Specs
        Monitor: Don't know :S
        CPU: Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.40 GHz
        Cooler: Stock
        Motherboard: Stock
        Memory: 4 GB Stock
        GPU: Intel GMA 3100
        HDD: Seagate 500 GB
        Chassis: Stock
        PSU: Stock
        Soundcard: Stock
        OS: Windows 7 Ultimate
      Quote Originally Posted by yousaf465 View Post
      Apple can't change something on it website I thought only their OS was closed sourced now it seems they have got noobs as lawyers.




      UK Judge To Apple: Your Apology Is Bogus, Rewrite It (Or, How Not To Deal With A Court Order)


      BTW, all you android fans are just bashing Apple? Why not Android?

    8. #518
      PG Xtremist
      I am:
      ----
       

      Posts
      4,192
      Quote Originally Posted by CB Bhallu TC View Post


      BTW, all you android fans are just bashing Apple? Why not Android?
      Apple had some respect when Jobs was at helm after him it just bunch of "fighting Kids" who are just patent trolling.
      Standing by my Ideals even if it annoys some...

    9. #519
      PG's Original Coolboy \m/
      I am:
      Cheeky
       

      Location
      Lahore
      Posts
      5,485
      My Consoles
      PC
      My PC Specs
        Monitor: Don't know :S
        CPU: Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.40 GHz
        Cooler: Stock
        Motherboard: Stock
        Memory: 4 GB Stock
        GPU: Intel GMA 3100
        HDD: Seagate 500 GB
        Chassis: Stock
        PSU: Stock
        Soundcard: Stock
        OS: Windows 7 Ultimate
      Quote Originally Posted by yousaf465 View Post
      Apple had some respect when Jobs was at helm after him it just bunch of "fighting Kids" who are just patent trolling.
      Lol, all these patents were made in the time of Jobs.

    10. #520
      PG Xtremist
      I am:
      ----
       

      Posts
      4,192
      Quote Originally Posted by CB Bhallu TC View Post
      Lol, all these patents were made in the time of Jobs.
      Yeah but he didn't went to this level chasing these patents , IMHO.
      Standing by my Ideals even if it annoys some...

     

     
    Page 52 of 55 FirstFirst ... 2425051525354 ... LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •  
    All times are GMT +5. The time now is 02:04 PM.


    Back to Top Copyright 2014 PakGamers. All rights reserved.