Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Apple forced to advertise for Samsung Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/right...161541675.html

    All I can say is LOL. They deserve this for trying to sue everyone who has anything even remotely similar to their brand/products.

    I am waiting for them to start suing apple trees for trademark infringement.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    That's the problem with minimalist design. If your design is so simple (like a black piece of plastic with a button and a screen), obviously competing products are going to look similar.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Apple aren't trying to sue everybody. All the companies are as bad as each other in this stupid patent war.

    As for the ruling? It is slightly ridiculous as it reeks of treating Apple as some sort of naughty schoolboy but if it stops this stupid suing and counter suing culture of the big multinationals, then I couldn't care less. Apple will no doubt appeal and if they fail on that you can sure as hell know that they will get a sly dig in at Samsung considering the same Judge in his verdict called Samsung 'uncool'.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It's a square, every tablets gonna look like it.

    And good, if you've been going round claiming they copied you thats essentially libel, and they'd have to rectify it.
    Offline

    3
    A cruel and unusual punishment.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    This makes me giggle so much.

    That'll teach em.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Good. The lawsuits have been outrageous. I do love Apple products (in their own unique way, along with PCs, Android phones, etc... each for their own reasons, I am no fanboy).
    At times though, their business practices suck. But they are a company and their first goal is profit. If they think that being as litigious as they have been in recent years can boost their earnings it's probably time to blame the system not the companies as they aren't the only ones up to these tricks.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Honourable Judge Briss QC)
    They [Samsung Galaxy Tablets] do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool. The overall impression produced is different.
    :facepalm:

    Something tells me he has an iPad.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    A win for Apple, in my opinion

    Samsung are not "as cool" is the official ruling

    Then they can state explicitly that Samsung have not been successful in replicating anything nearly as good as the iPad
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I believe Apple are going to appeal this decision.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    That judge is a joker. :rofl:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    WTF? "not as cool" is a valid legal ruling now? I had to check I wasn't reading a Daily Mail article...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Sounds like the judge is having a laugh tbh. I kinda wonder if his job will be threatened after this tbh.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tooosh)
    WTF? "not as cool" is a valid legal ruling now? I had to check I wasn't reading a Daily Mail article...
    Well, to be honest he did spend 150 paragraphs talking about the law, the two expert witnesses, the design specs etc. His job was to decide whether Samsung copied Apple, and to do that he needed to be in a position of an "informed user" (someone who knows what tablets are, and wants to buy one, but isn't an expert) and if I'm correct, he was only able to judge if it was a copy by just looking at, not by using it. So the "not as cool" ruling was just a conclusion of all the differences.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zaliack)
    Well, to be honest he did spend 150 paragraphs talking about the law, the two expert witnesses, the design specs etc. His job was to decide whether Samsung copied Apple, and to do that he needed to be in a position of an "informed user" (someone who knows what tablets are, and wants to buy one, but isn't an expert) and if I'm correct, he was only able to judge if it was a copy by just looking at, not by using it. So the "not as cool" ruling was just a conclusion of all the differences.
    Still though, it's kind of hard to believe after all that his conclusion was "not as cool".
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    So wait, Apple can somehow claim the rights to such a generic and simple design yet Microsoft can't claim rights to the name 'tablet' despite making the first one ten years ago?
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snagprophet)
    So wait, Apple can somehow claim the rights to such a generic and simple design yet Microsoft can't claim rights to the name 'tablet' despite making the first one ten years ago?
    No, that's why they lost.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zaliack)
    No, that's why they lost.
    Well hopefully Apple will get put in it's place by this.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snagprophet)
    Well hopefully Apple will get put in it's place by this.
    I hope not. A lot of lawyers benefit from Apples feeble attempts to maximise profits :P
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zaliack)
    I hope not. A lot of lawyers benefit from Apples feeble attempts to maximise profits :P
    Aha good point.
 
 
 
Poll
Is GoT overrated?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.