1. Made on the home page itself
2. In a 14pt font which (according to http://www.getallfix.com/2011/11/convert-empxpt-and-in-css/) should be some 19px high.
They also revised the time it has to be there down from 6 months to 1 month.
Open to interpretation, IMHO, though I would have assumed the judge meant the front pages.
>Mr Carr [for Samsung] realistically recognised that Apple had a genuine interest in keeping it uncluttered. He proposed that instead of requiring the notice to be on the web page itself, it would be sufficient if there were a link provided from that to the notice. There are some links already provided. All that need be added is a link entitled "Samsung/Apple UK judgment." I think that would be appropriate and proportionate.
When your big advantage is that you and your products exude class where others don't, gloating about it like a little kid just feels very wrong.
Casual visitors to apple.com/uk are not going to read this.
Unfortunately, the class you mention tends to be overshadowed by this. Apple can't afford to be classy, if it gives up it's bullying ways for even a short period of time, it will find that Samsung responds not in kind, but will sense weakness and launch an even stronger offence.
What we have now is a case of mutually assured destruction, eventually both companies will be so wrapped up in legal dealings and spiteful actions that they will lose sight on what's really important: giving your customers cool and functional gadgets to play with, which as well as being bad for both of these companies is also bad for the industry and we, the consumers.
"Goldstein is not a crook?! Goldstein is not a thief?!"
"This intonation does not sound like a revocation at all."
"Your honour, I have read what has been written. The intonation has not been written here."
"Well, then at least apologize!"
"I apologize that Goldstein is a crook! I apologize that Goldstein is a thief!"
But to be honest given what the judge actually said, he surely can't have expected anything else? Cherry picking was obviously going to be an option for Apple and he frankly gave them the cherry to end all cherries.
Sure they have pursued some questionable patent cases - but it is hard to deny they are one of the pre-eminent creators and makers in the world today - they have been truly innovative and brought massive change to multiple technology streams. They are about as far from being a hoarding patent troll as one could imagine yet that is how they seem to be portrayed in some parts of social media.
Even if you strongly disagree with their approach to suing competitors, I would have thought the real innovation and change Apple has brought to the scene would count for something and result in some more balanced coverage.
I think some of the specific patent cases Apple is pursuing against Samsung are a bit ridiculous (rounded corners), but I also think when you look at what Samsung has done as a whole, it is pretty clear they were ripping off Apple designs for a while (try and play spot the difference between a Apple 3GS and a Galaxy S1). Maybe Apple had to pursue the more silly specific patent cases because there was no way to patent the overall look-and-feel of a device (no lawyer here).
Anyway just my 2c
It's not just that they're suing folks, it's that their actions seem to be deliberately designed to suppress the market and suppress competition. It doesn't feel genuine.
And while they do innovate, I don't think they do half as much they're given credit for. They didn't invent the smartphone, nor the mp3 player, yet most people likely think they did.
At least with Apple they are trying to protect (justifiably or not) genuine, recent innovation, and they are being open about it. MS is suing more Android makers than Apple over alleged Linux patent violations in Android that it will not disclose (thus prevent Linus from fixing the supposed infringements), but probably relate to some ancient, legacy FAT file-system standard. This is just as dirty as the worst of MS misbehaviour in the 90s and shows they have not changed at all.
But then why aren't people on HN down on Samsung in the same way?
One do not see the design crowd being angry at Apple. Those that work with design, tend to agree that apple is innovative in the area of design and user interaction. In the area of design, apple is correct to be attributed for being innovative and thus little hate.
But technology wise, apple has brought forth close to nothing in innovation, and has brought forth a bunch of obvious patent instead. Added, they lock down devices so to almost taunt those that want to innovate. Thus, As an technology developer on the market, Apple is a horrible company. The only positive thing Apple has given to technology developers has been the marketing power, which has opened up monetization for areas like smartphones and other handheld devices.
It ackowledges the judgement in the UK but also mentions conflicting judgements elsewhere in the world. Seems pretty balanced to me.
I think Apple's problem is, at least in part, one of standards - we hold them up to very high standards, both technology-wise, and also at an ethical level, Apple give out the message that they are "the good guys".
When someone you love turns out to be not quite as perfect as you imagined, the love can turn to hate or anger very quickly.
Apple have tried their best to seek inspiration from the above. That is why people are hard on Apple.
Yeah. Suing everybody around, blocking customers from buying products they want and http://www.5min.com/Video/Apples-Incredible-Great-Best-Gorge...
I wonder why less and less people likes them.
However, if they are going to display it only in UK, then they should have at least spelt "judgment" correctly. They use "/uk/legal-judgement/" (Over in UK there is only a single "e" not two).
Anyway, totally not an apology. It looks more like an accusation and a reassertion how bitter they feel about the verdict, by cherry picking quotes to suite them.
------
(Edit: In the interest of setting the point straight since this is the top comment and it seems to be getting wrongfully upvoted, Apple didn't legally have to "make an apology". They just had to make it clear that Samsung did not infringe Apples registered design [1]. However, I do think that in spite of quoting the judgment extract verbatim, they still fall short of this requirement, since they continue for 3 more paragraph drilling out other points that supported Apple).
[1] : http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html#para87
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.1) The order from the court was for the UK site only. This makes sense - it was a UK ruling from a UK court which has no jurisdiction in any other countries.
There are separate cases in places like Germany. It make no sense for the UK courts to force Apple to make statements in other countries covering rulings made under laws that don't apply there and which may (and in some cases do) contradict rulings made under the laws of those countries.
2) There was no demand for an apology and I'm not sure why you think that there is. The court is very specific about what has to be said which is that Apple make it clear that the court ruled that Samsung did not copy the iPad. They also include wording which must be in there and details on the font size and that there must be a link to the actual ruling.
3) Judgements is a perfectly valid spelling here in the UK, they're used interchangeably. Check justice.gov.uk if you don't believe me - you get significant numbers of hits for both. EDIT: I bow to the greater knowledge of others here - both spellings are common but it seems that judgment is the one used for legal rulings.
Actual ruling here: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html
(Note that the appeals court changed 6 months to 1 month but upheld the link from the homepage).
I would regularly get a red pen marker through my essays if I used the wrong version (so you quickly get things like this drilled into you). If it's written with the "e" version on justice.gov.uk then they are either using it wrong, or they are using the non legal version (ie "In my judgement this painting looks like a fake", compared to, "In the courts judgment, the painting was a held to be a forgery").
It might seem pedantic, but I guess that's the way law is. For instance, court and Court (when used legally) also mean and can refer to two different things.
On point 2) Do you think that Apple made it clear that the court ruled in favour of Samsung? One line was given to this, whereas 20+ was given to why Apple feel that this judgment was a mistake? I've updated my original comment anyway.
(I agree that they didn't have to include the link for other countries as per your first point).
On the contrary. The court was very specific that this case actually has nothing to do with whether Samsung did or did not copy the iPad, and went to some lengths to explain why not.
"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." (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html at [3]).
Registered design law is not copyright law. You can infringe a registered design without having ever copied, seen, or even know of the design you're infringing on. Conversely, you can copy a design but alter it enough that it "produce[s] on the informed user a different overall impression" from the original and not infringe.
Pedantically, it appears to be from a English & Welsh court, not UK.
Edit: Apparently apple were never ordered to make an 'apology'. They were ordered to make a 'publicity order'. They used the EXACT wording[1] as ordered by the court, as well as quotes from a judge in the matter.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html#para8...
Such allegations can cause real damage to a company's reputation, and a publicity order publicising the judgment of the court that the allegations were false is a measure to undo some of that harm.
However, they added that the move need not "clutter" Apple's homepage as it would only have to add a link entitled "Samsung/Apple judgement" for a one-month period.
>Mr Carr [for Samsung] realistically recognised that Apple had a genuine interest in keeping it uncluttered. He proposed that instead of requiring the notice to be on the web page itself, it would be sufficient if there were a link provided from that to the notice. There are some links already provided. All that need be added is a link entitled "Samsung/Apple UK judgment." I think that would be appropriate and proportionate.
"The following notice shall be posted and displayed upon the Defendant's Websites currently at..."
Doesn't specifically say homepage. The text is 14px, which arguably isn't 14pt at anything other than 72 dpi.
As someone who has been a guest in the UK for nearly a decade, to me this reads like someone, as the British say, taking the piss.
[Edit: sorry, that's the initial judgement. This, I believe, is the order regarding the apology: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/2049.html]
Either way the whole thing's ridiculous in the extreme. A flat panel with a screen isn't a novel design whoever made it, the magic is getting all the bits small and low-power and high resolution and bright and powerful enough for it to work.
-EDIT- The actual text as specified by the judge forms the first part of the page, the rest is Apple giving it a little PR spin and casting doubt on the whole thing.
Using the 1 billion US judgement as an example of how ou've been wronged is a bit of a stretch though, that thing's leakier than a colander.
Apple has added its own extra paragraphs though, which do change the tone.
Did anyone seriously expect Apple to be contrite?