Apple Ordered to Pay All of Samsung's Court Costs in UK Tablet Design Dispute
Following a series of events in a UK court case between Apple and Samsung that resulted in Apple having to publish a revised notice acknowledging that Samsung's Galaxy Tab devices had not infringed upon the registered design related to the iPad, the court has now ruled that Apple must pay all of Samsung's legal fees. The order was made after the court decided that Apple's behavior in the matter had been inappropriate and showed a "lack of integrity".
As to the costs (lawyers' fees) to be awarded against Apple, we concluded that they should be on an indemnity basis. Such a basis (which is higher than the normal, "standard" basis) can be awarded as a mark of the court's disapproval of a party's conduct, particularly in relation to its respect for an order of the court. Apple's conduct warranted such an order.
The order also highlights the court's issues with Apple's original statement, which contained improperly inserted text within the notice that was required by the court. The court's order specifically permitted Apple to comment on or publish its own information relating to the case, but the company was judged to have purposely circumvented the intent of the order by inserting information judged to be false within the ordered text.
I do not think the order as made precluded any addition to the required notice if that addition had been true and did not undermine the effect of the required notice. But I do consider that adding false and misleading material was illegitimate. For by adding such material the context of the required notice is altered so that it will be understood differently. [...]
The reality is that wherever Apple has sued on this registered design or its counterpart, it has ultimately failed. It may or may not have other intellectual property rights which are infringed. Indeed the same may be true the other way round for in some countries Samsung are suing Apple. But none of that has got anything to do with the registered design asserted by Apple in Europe. Apple's additions to the ordered notice clearly muddied the water and the message obviously intended to be conveyed by it.
Beyond the inclusion of false and misleading text within the required notice, the court also took exception to Apple's claim that it would take 14 days to modify the notice posted on its website. The court ultimately gave Apple 48 hours to make the changes, and the company complied with that demand.
Popular Stories
Apple's AirPods have been credited with saving a woman's life after a potentially fatal fall, People reports.
When a 60-year-old florist in New Jersey tripped and hit her head in her studio, she lost consciousness and awoke heavily bleeding. With nobody around to call for help, she realized she had her AirPods in, and used a "Hey Siri" command to call 911. An operator was able to stay on the ...
Apple is working on a number of new products that are set to launch this fall, and Bloomberg's Mark Gurman says that it will be "the widest array" of new devices that Apple has introduced in its history.
In his latest "Power On" newsletter, Gurman explains that Apple is working on four new flagship iPhones (iPhone 14, iPhone 14 Max, iPhone 14 Pro, and iPhone 14 Pro Max), an updated low-end Ma...
Apple has always emphasized the depth of thought that goes into the design of its products. In the foreword to Designed by Apple in California, a photo book released by the company in 2016, Jony Ive explains how Apple strives "to define objects that appear effortless" and "so simple, coherent and inevitable that there could be no rational alternative."
But every once in a while even Apple...
As we roll into the latter half of January, we're starting to hear more about a potential spring Apple event, which is likely to take place in March or April. There are a number of potential announcements on deck, so an event would be a good opportunity for Apple to get them all out there.
We've also been going back and forth on some iPhone 14 rumors, and we've taken a look at a number of...
AT&T today announced the launch of upgraded AT&T Fiber plans, which support speeds of up to 5 Gigabits for some customers. There are two separate plans, one "2 GIG" plan and one "5 GIG" plan, available to new and existing AT&T Fiber subscribers.
According to AT&T, the new plans are available to nearly 5.2 million customers across 70 metro areas including Los Angeles, Atlanta, Chicago, San...
Three months after their launch, the 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros continue to experience high demand and seemingly short supply, with shipping dates for both models stretching into multiple weeks in several of Apple's key markets.
In the United States, the baseline 14-inch MacBook Pro with the M1 Pro chip is estimated to ship in three to four weeks, promising an arrival by at least...
Following months of bleak news about Peloton's "precarious state," including the revelation that it has halted production of its bikes and treadmills, Apple is being floated as a potential buyer of Peloton's troubled fitness business.
Yesterday, CNBC reported that Peloton will temporarily stop production of its connected fitness products due to a "significant reduction" in consumer demand, a ...
Earlier this week, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman tweeted that Apple "will be holding a spring event" to announce a new iPhone SE and other hardware. In a recent edition of his newsletter, Gurman said the event is likely to occur in March or April.
Gurman did not elaborate on what "other hardware" will be announced at Apple's purported spring event, but rumors suggest at least four products are...
Top Rated Comments
Apple has really lost their ability to focus on product and would rather get into school-yard squabbles than focus on their business
Apple 2012 = Microsoft 1998.
Please show me where he threw a "tantrum" ?
Apple didn't "playfully" do anything. It was strategic. And it backfired. They hedged a bet and lost. They knew the first post wouldn't comply. They lied about how long it would take to correct it. Then they had fun with the javascript code.
The judge ordered a specific message to be posted. Apple didn't post that message exclusively. They added commentary and negating the purpose of the message in the first place.
You can love Apple and think what they did was funny. But I can't see how anyone would think what they did was in the spirit of what the court required. Unless you're just blind.
But do show us any evidence of a tantrum. I'm pretty sure he made a ruling and when it wasn't kept to the letter of the law, he responded in kind.
You just don't like the outcome. Maybe it's you that's posting a tantrum?