Apple loses UK appeal, must run pro-Samsung adverts

David Price
19 October, 2012
View more articles fromthe author

Apple has lost its appeal against a UK ruling that Samsung did not copy its iPad. The judge at the time ordered Apple to acknowledge the ruling with adverts that would “correct the damaging impression” that Samsung was a copycat, both on its own website and elsewhere.

Back in July of this year, Judge Colin Birss ordered Apple to buy advertisements in major UK newspapers acknowledging his ruling that Samsung did not infringe on Apple’s iPad design patents with its Galaxy Tab line of tablets.

Bizarrely, part of Judge Birss’ reasoning was 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.”

The acknowledgement of the ruling, Birss said, had to be posted on Apple’s British website for six months and appear in the Daily Mail, the Financial Times, and the Guardian, among other UK national newspapers.

Apple appealed against the ruling—and the attached humiliation of acknowledging it publicly—but now faces defeat, and appears to have no choice but to set its ad agencies on the problem.

Interestingly, one of the judges involved in the appeal process chose to make it clear that the case does not in fact revolve around a simple question of copying.

Sir Robin Jacob said: “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.”

It’s a significant setback in Apple’s patent war against Samsung, which has ebbed back and forth with notable victories for both parties and a number of stalemates. Apple was victorious in the biggest battle of all—the courtroom showdown in its home state of California, which saw Samsung slapped with a US$1 billion fine—but Samsung has chalked up points in Europe, Australasia and Asia.

Apple has yet to comment on the defeat; unsurprisingly, Samsung has been more forthcoming.

“We continue to believe that Apple was not the first to design a tablet with a rectangular shape and rounded corners, and that the origins of Apple’s registered design features can be found in numerous examples of prior art,” a spokesperson stated.

“Should Apple continue to make excessive legal claims in other countries based on such generic designs, innovation in the industry could be harmed and consumer choice unduly limited.”

One Comment

One person was compelled to have their say. We encourage you to do the same..

  1. Tony J. says:

    Here’s my take. Judge Birss and Jacobs probably do realize the problem that they have created here. Biriss’s personal comment about ‘coolness’ when it comes to an Apple product of course triggered media attention that was unintended perhaps, but nonetheless focused attention on the wide difference in legal opinion between the preliminary German ruling that led to a ban and the UK court findings of complete exoneration. So it seems Apple will be punished for the politics of the UK vs the EU as it pertains to such rulings, as much as it will be for losing the (counter) claims. To me, the Samsung tablet overall design is obvious in its theft and is not countered by a simpleton’s mantra that you can not patent rectangles. Samsung, Apple and the UK courts have created a mess here and the public flogging of Apple, even though Judge Jacobs takes pains to note that it is not intended to make Apple grovel, adds to the mockery.

Leave a Comment

Please keep your comments friendly on the topic.

Contact us