Apple must rewrite Samsung “apology ads” following reprimand from UK court
Apparently sarcasm doesnt go over too well with the U.K. Court of Appeal.
November 02, 2012 at 10:12 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Apparently sarcasm doesn't go over too well with the U.K. Court of Appeal.
Last month, the court upheld an earlier judge's finding that Samsung Electronics Co.'s Galaxy tablets do not infringe on the design of Apple Inc.'s iPad. The ruling, which will apply throughout Europe barring a successful appeal from Apple, resolves the European portion of a long-running patent infringement battle between the two companies.
As part of its decision, the court ordered Apple to post a notice of the ruling on its U.K. website, to “correct the damaging impression” that Samsung was guilty of infringement. Evidently choosing to follow the letter—not the spirit—of the order, Apple posted a small notice at the bottom of its website and made sure to quote the lower court judge who decided that Samsung was not guilty of infringement because its tablet was “not as cool” as the iPad.
In response, the high court ordered Apple to remove the statement and replace it with a new one that acknowledges the prior “untrue” and “incorrect” notice.
Judge Robin Jacobs criticized the California-based company's notice at a hearing Thursday. “I'm at a loss that a company such as Apple would do this,” he said. “That is a plain breach of the order.”
Apple, meanwhile, is having better luck stateside: In August, a U.S. jury found that Samsung had infringed six Apple patents and ordered the Korean company to pay $1.05 billion in damages.
Read more at Bloomberg.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of technology-related patent tussles, see:
Apple loses UK appeal over Samsung tablets, must run apology ads
Apple beats Samsung in patent case
Federal Circuit reverses injunction against Samsung phone in Apple patent case
Samsung adding iPhone 5 to patent suits against Apple
Apple seeks to ban eight Samsung smartphones
How Apple v. Motorola could alter patent litigation
Steve Jobs' quotes allowed in Apple-Google patent trial
Jury says Google didn't infringe Oracle's patent
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
