(Sorry if I'm breaking the rules by using a BBC site, it's been a year and I still don't know how some of these forums work )

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18895384

Basically Apple lost a lawsuit against Samsung in the UK, the judge stating that the Galaxy Tab was "not cool" as the iPad. Now the judge wants Apple to post a notice on their website that Samsung did not copy the iPad. They will also have to put the statements on newspapers and magazines (So look out if you read The Sun or something, British users ), to "correct the damaging impression" that Samsung copies Apple.

Discuss, but no flamewars. Mods have the right to close the thread if things get out of proportion.

BURN!!! bump in apple's huge ego

I've also saw it on engadget, someone is impersonating Judge Koh (the US judge that let Apple win the lawsuit in said country) in the comments.

US copyright laws are kinda stupid, and for that I apologize on behalf of my country. I don't believe Samsung copied Apple, but Apple is big and powerful and can basically brute-force most of their claims.

I found the impersonation quite funny (on Engadget)
and you don't have to apologize on behalf of your country. Everyone is literally respected on BetaArchive regardless of country. Apple's gotta do all the sorry work for the British courts.

Its about time! I get sick of these lawsuits that are just meant to limit competition. I'm wondering if we will see Windows 8 tablet lawsuits from Apple when it comes out.

Oh, most likely. And they'll lose, because if there's any company that can stand up to Apple in court, it's Microsoft. But it shall be an epic battle!

>puts on "Ride of the Valkyries"

In seriousness, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple slaps Microsoft with a lawsuit over Windows 8.

Yes, they probably will. But like I said, Microsoft will win. There aren't enough similarities to uphold an infringement case, and the similarities that ARE there are mostly inbuilt limitations of the chosen form factor (for Surface). Apple will lose and look like morons in the process, and it'll give Microsoft a nice PR boost.

Since when does Apple not look like morons And this is why I said I wouldn't be surprised - like you said, there aren't enough similarities. The only reason I can see why Samsung got sued over the Galaxy Tab was because it looked so similar to the iPad.

Real papers for real men. I'll read it in the Guardian.
Hopefully with this embarrassment and hopefully a few more to come, maybe Apple will stop being so childish and continuing the tiring patent war. Apple really are childish when it comes to copyright and patent. I heard they managed to copyright the phrase "multi-touch" somehow. Does anyone have a source for that?

It's funny, because this is the same judge who recently said in a court of law that Samsung couldn't have copied Apple because the iPad is "so much cooler".
Obviously, these are the types of judges who shouldn't be making decisions like these.

Yeah, the judge's really nuts. Is the word "cool" really applicable in court judgments? I'm not sure about that....

There are some stories that serve to remind me that the UK Justice System is actually pretty good, and this is one of them.

First, you must accept that this judge was ruling according to UK Patent law, which thankfully is nothing like as screwed up as US law. Patents are much more limited in scope - most relevently in this case, software patents are automatically completely invalid.

The simple fact is though, these cases are frankly frivolous and a waste of the court's time. And his response was by far the most effective way to discourage such pointless action in the future.

And "cool" is entirely valid in this context - Apple were claiming that Samsung had copied the look and feel of their device. If it inspires a totally different reaction from the user, it's perfectly fair to say that this suggests they're different enough for the law.

Cool? Is it really an adjective that best describes the comparison of Samsung and Apple devices in the COURT? I don't think so.....

It's a lawsuit based on nothing but perception ("look and feel"). Of course it makes sense to use such a subjective term in a ruling on the matter.

If Apple wanted to be taken seriously, they shouldn't have filed such a frivolous lawsuit. This is really not a matter for the courts to decide, but while Apple insist it is, then they can expect some sarcastic derision from the judge while he does his job.

Apple's contention was that the two devices were too similar to be distinguished by customers. That Samsung had cloned their "look and feel". When they insist on such nebulous terms (which is essential, because they have no solid ground), they can expect to be struck down by nebulous concepts such as "what is cool and what isn't".