Apple will have to say that Samsung did not copy iPad
Samsung will have extra help to promote its tablet , the Galaxy . This Thursday (10/18), the Court of Appeal in England ordered Apple to publish in the main newspapers and on its own website an advertisement explaining that the competitor did not copy the iPad. The North American company will also have to publish on its page, for at least a month, a copy of the decision in favor of Samsung.Apple tries to prove that the Galaxy is a copy of the iPad. In addition to England, the company has been trying to block the sale of the competing tablet across Europe and the United States. For now, Apple has only been suffering defeats on the European continent. Even in the United States, where the score was in its favor, the game started to turn around last week , with a considerable victory for Samsung.
The Court of Appeal's decision ends the dispute in England. Apple can only appeal to the UK Supreme Court if there is an unclear point in patent law or European rules on the matter, but not to re-discuss whether one product is a copy of another.
In July, a judge from the Eglish High Court of Justice had already ruled that the Galaxy's design is not a copy of the iPad and, therefore, no patent from the North American company was Chile Phone Number infringed. The decision gained publicity in the world press due to one of the arguments used by the judge to decide in favor of Samsung: the Galaxy is not as cool as the iPad, said the judge.
Days later, the se court ordered Apple to publish an advertisement in the main newspapers and on its website saying that its rival's tablet is not a copy of its own. This Thursday, the English Court of Appeal not only recognized that there was no copying but also maintained the order for Apple to advertise to others.
https://zh-cn.dmdatabases.me/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/rtyruiytu002.jpg
The decision was made by a panel of three judges. They considered that, initially, the comment “the Galaxy is not as cool as the iPad” had given the case so much publicity that it would no longer be necessary to force Apple to disclose the result of the trial. But, after analyzing the confusion of injunctions spread across Europe and the world, they decided that it is fairer for Samsung to clarify consumers about the legality of its tablet.
Judge Robin Jacob, who led the trial, noted that Samsung's victory will be widely publicized in the press. For him, however, reports written by journalists are not enough to clarify.
The clarification must be made directly from the mouth of the person causing all the confusion, that is, Apple itself. Nothing less will adequately accomplish the mission, he said.
頁:
[1]