Apple's in trouble again. The company has been told that it has to rewrite the statement it posted on its website about Samsung.
The company has 48 hours to rewrite the statement, which is being described as "non-compliant" with the original court order. At issue is the fact that Apple has added in details from other court cases in the US relating to other non-design patents to suggest that other courts had found against Samsung.
Apple added the following information to its statment: "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."
Apple also included extracts from the July ruling where Judge Birss reasoned that the iPad is "cool" but Samsung tablets, while "very, very similar" when viewed from the front, "are not as cool". He added that they do not embody Apple's sense of "extreme simplicity".
At a hearing in London this morning, Apple was told that the revised statement must have an 11-point font and be displayed on the company's website front page, according to The Guardian.
The Apple v Samsung statement, which was initially posted on 26 October, is currently linked to from the bottom of the front page of Apple's UK site.
Apple reportedly asked for at least 14 days to revise the statement, but the judge said he "cannot believe" it would take so long.
"I’m at a loss that a company such as Apple would do this," Judge Robin Jacob said, according to Bloomberg. "That is a plain breach of the order."
The statement has to remain on the front page of Apple's UK website until 14 December.
In addition to posting the statement on its website, Apple also has to take out adverts publicizing the statement in the Financial Times, The Guardian, Daily Mail, T3 magazine and Mobile magazine.
Read the complete text of Apple's statement about Samsung here:
{Apple has now updated the statement, read: Apple complies with court order and amends Samsung statement)
Follow Karen Haslam on Twitter / Follow MacworldUK on Twitter
Related:
Apple posts public apology to Samsung
Apple vs Samsung: Apple loses UK appeal, must run pro-Samsung adverts
Apple v Samsung: complete summary of patent trial
Apple v. Samsung Highlights Insanity of Tech Patents
Everything you need to know about Apple vs Samsung
Macworld Poll: What tagline would you suggest for Apple's court-mandated adverts?
Samsung DID NOT pay Apple $1bn with 30 trucks full of nickels
Contact Us
Digg
It's easy and free to get the latest news headlines, reviews and opinions straight to your email inbox. Sign up NOW to make sure you receive the latest Mac news, reviews and tutorials on your favourite topics.
Comments received
Hilbo60stwin said on Thu, 01 Nov 2012
I do think that this enforcement is way too excessive!, punishment, (if any) should be in kind, i.e., Apple should only be forced to do this if they had previously posted comments criticising Samsung. It seems to me that this judge is intent on 'rubbing Apple's noses in it', totally out of order!
Hilbo60stwin said on Thu, 01 Nov 2012
If Apple issue an apology in the way that this judge wants, then it is going to have a serious effect upon subsequent cases that Apple want to bring, in short, it will destroy any chance of winning any court case.
fonejacker said on Thu, 01 Nov 2012
these jackass judges are the worst type of over-paid civil servant. Totally out of touch with the real world. The legal game (hardly a profession) drag cases for month/years, allows stupid cases to proceed, over charge for everything. They can't do anything in 2 days themselves. This judgement is so wrong in so many ways. They certainly know what a deluxe blow-up doll is though.
richardap1 said on Tue, 06 Nov 2012
Funny how one sided all these comments are. In fact Apple asked a Holland court for the exact same thing if Samsung lost (before the UK judgement was announced). Samsung would have to post a statement on their website saying that they had infringed copyright. Apple can't have it both ways
Disclaimer
Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not reflect those of Macworld. Macworld accepts no responsibility legal or otherwise for their accuracy of content.
Click here to read the house rules.
Click here for the latest reader comments