Featured Articles

Snapdragon 400 is Qualcomm’s SoC for watches, wearables

Snapdragon 400 is Qualcomm’s SoC for watches, wearables

We wanted to learn a bit more about Qualcomm's plans for wearables and it turns out that the company believes its…

More...
Qualcomm sampling 20nm Snapdragon 810

Qualcomm sampling 20nm Snapdragon 810

We had a chance to talk to Michelle Leyden-Li, Senior Director of Marketing, QCT at Qualcomm and get an update on…

More...
EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
Nvidia GTX 980 reviewed

Nvidia GTX 980 reviewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
PowerColor TurboDuo R9 285 reviewed

PowerColor TurboDuo R9 285 reviewed

Today we will take a look at the PowerColor TurboDuo Radeon R9 285. The card is based on AMD’s new…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Friday, 02 November 2012 11:03

Apple's reality distortion field fails on UK Justice

Written by Nick Farrell



Judges tell it to stop mucking about


Apple's attempt to make the UK justice system do what it says have failed completely. In the case of Apple versus Samsung, Jobs' Mob was told by the court that it had to say sorry for claiming that Samsung had nicked its IP.

Apple decided that the best way to say it was sorry was to publish and advert in which it claimed that the British ruling was out of step with other rulings in the EU. After all, in Jobs' Mob's universe it invented the rounded rectangle and anyone who disagreed with it is clinically insane. Samsung complained to the US Appeals court saying that an advert for Apple was not the same thing as an apology to Samsung.  It also contained a Mitt Romney approach to the truth in that it claimed that the UK ruling was not as important as the one in Germany.  In fact the ruling applies across the EU.

Michael Beloff QC, representing Apple, said that his glorious company and complied with the court order. Although his evidence seemed to be based on saying “because we told you so.” He claimed that the text of the advert should not be required to punish Apple or to make the company grovel.  Even if a court had found that it had not invented the things that Apple claimed it had, and had effectively defamed Samsung for claiming it was a copycat.

Beloff insisted that the purpose must be to dispel commercial uncertainty. The best way to do that apparently is to publish an advert for Apple gear and forget to mention the word sorry. He asked for 14 days to post the replacement. It takes a long time to type the words as the typist has to go through therapy to deal with such a shift in their universe. Beloff added that there were technology problems in putting it up on the Apple site and this took time too.

It seems that the Apple servers assume that anything that is not positive about Jobs Mob will automatically reject phrase “Apple says it is sorry.”

One of the other judges, Sir Robin Jacob, added he would like to see head of Apple Tim Cook make an affidavit about why that is such a technical difficulty for Apple. [You can check out the sentiment at Cupertino after the break. Ed]

Last modified on Friday, 02 November 2012 12:05

Nick Farrell

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Related Video

blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments