Apple's snarky Samsung post not good enough for British judge

[xxMATTGxx]

So the only alternative to forcing Apple to post something they don't believe in is to hand them a victory?

How about just letting Samsung win and not force Apple to post things on their website which they don't believe themselves.

How about they stop suing each other over something rather stupid. Stop wasting the time of the legal system!

[HotelUser]

How about they stop suing each other over something rather stupid. Stop wasting the time of the legal system!

Agreed, although I doubt anybody will do that because they all want money.

[GommeInc]

When freedom of speech is withheld its a very dark day. I would hope no Canadian Court pulls this stunt over patents in the consumer industry. I'm capable of making my own opinions of Samsung and Apple without my countries legal system trying to spoon feed me their opinions.

It's now a fact that Samsung did not steal Apple's designs, not "their" (the Courts) opinions. Freedom of speech isn't effected at all, not in the same way that when a prisoner is locked up their liberty is removed. Apple can whine like a nine year old all they want, but they shouldn't use the Courts punishment as a place to do it. It's either they post the statement on their website, or harsher punishments will happen (huge fines and/or imprisonment of whoever).

The reason the Court is doing this is because Samsung has lost a lot of reputation over the matter, which may effect sales. Instead of banning products, which would be punishing the consumer more than Apple, the easiest option is to make Apple acknowledge that Samsung doesn't steal and to dust the matter under the carpet sooner rather than later. It's so simple, yet Apple are acting incredibly childish over it.

[HotelUser]

It's now a fact that Samsung did not steal Apple's designs, not "their" (the Courts) opinions. Freedom of speech isn't effected at all, not in the same way that when a prisoner is locked up their liberty is removed. Apple can whine like a nine year old all they want, but they shouldn't use the Courts punishment as a place to do it. It's either they post the statement on their website, or harsher punishments will happen (huge fines and/or imprisonment of whoever).

The reason the Court is doing this is because Samsung has lost a lot of reputation over the matter, which may effect sales. Instead of banning products, which would be punishing the consumer more than Apple, the easiest option is to make Apple acknowledge that Samsung doesn't steal and to dust the matter under the carpet sooner rather than later. It's so simple, yet Apple are acting incredibly childish over it.

It's not a fact that Samsung didn't infringe on the patents. As usually you do not seem to understand the difference between fact and opinion. Your court has their own opinion, the US and German courts have different opinions, as does the Korean courts. Samsung and Apple have their own opinions and likewise we as individuals have our own opinions as well.

The world is not so black as you would make it out to be. As a consumer I can form my own opinions about products without the help of my government (within reason). There's plenty of information about the court cases online that is at my disposal and every consumers' disposal. I don't need third parties to meddle in the private sector where they do not belong. Moreover because we have this lovely thing called freedom of press (or at least illusions of it), the mass media already had coverage on the outcome of the trial.

If the media took a side in the court proceeding then that's a media bias and although we don't like that, it should be allowed and the courts shouldn't meddle with that either (within reason).

Unless Apple or Microsoft or Samsung do anything which is actually illegal and which borderlines morality, if Canada or England or any other country want to tell these companies what to do they should buy a 51% stake in the companies. Otherwise they should stay the hell away from them and practice their rights infringing socialist ideologies elsewhere.

[GommeInc]

It's not a fact that Samsung didn't infringe on the patents. As usually you do not seem to understand the difference between fact and opinion. Your court has their own opinion, the US and German courts have different opinions, as does the Korean courts. Samsung and Apple have their own opinions and likewise we as individuals have our own opinions as well.

The world is not so black as you would make it out to be. As a consumer I can form my own opinions about products without the help of my government (within reason). There's plenty of information about the court cases online that is at my disposal and every consumers' disposal. I don't need third parties to meddle in the private sector where they do not belong. Moreover because we have this lovely thing called freedom of press (or at least illusions of it), the mass media already had coverage on the outcome of the trial.

If the media took a side in the court proceeding then that's a media bias and although we don't like that, it should be allowed and the courts shouldn't meddle with that either (within reason).

Unless Apple or Microsoft or Samsung do anything which is actually illegal and which borderlines morality, if Canada or England or any other country want to tell these companies what to do they should buy a 51% stake in the companies. Otherwise they should stay the hell away from them and practice their rights infringing socialist ideologies elsewhere.

You'd be amazed but it actually is fact now if the Court has decided it. It may not be fact else where, like the biased American courts, but in the UK when a case like this is decided it becomes a matter of fact ( @Tomm kept telling you this in the other thread). As per usual you show a low understanding of Court proceedings and forget that facts and opinions aren't always separate, they can merge together too.

For example:

It's a matter of fact that kissing in public in Abu Dhabi is illegal.
It's a matter of fact that kissing in public in London isn't illegal.

Facts change depending on the country. So now as it's a matter of fact that Samsung did not copy Apple in the UK, because the Courts have ruled this. However, in America it's a matter of fact that they did.

Don't forget that opinions can be formed based on fact. Facts are objective and opinions are subjective. However, when an opinion is based on fact it loses it's subjective nature. Court rulings are a good example of where an opinion becomes fact e.g. Negligence claims in courts are based on a Court case which turned matters of the case into facts to further identify causes as negligence. Court Opinions become Fact.

And again it's not the Government telling Apple, and people have already formed these opinions that Samsung did not copy. However, Apple made these claims and damaged Samsung's reputation, and as a suitable punishment it was thought best to simply demand Apple make a notice telling their UK customers that they lost a pointless court case to begin with. It's not harming anyone, but Apple's ego. It's as simple as that.

[peteyt]

When freedom of speech is withheld its a very dark day. I would hope no Canadian Court pulls this stunt over patents in the consumer industry. I'm capable of making my own opinions of Samsung and Apple without my countries legal system trying to spoon feed me their opinions.

I believe in Freedom of speech but Apple has to take the consequences of its actions. It's been going around too long trying to sue over stupid things (I know not the only one). I'm hoping things like this will put people off it.

[HotelUser]

You'd be amazed but it actually is fact now if the Court has decided it. It may not be fact else where, like the biased American courts, but in the UK when a case like this is decided it becomes a matter of fact ( @Tomm kept telling you this in the other thread). As per usual you show a low understanding of Court proceedings and forget that facts and opinions aren't always separate, they can merge together too.

For example:

It's a matter of fact that kissing in public in Abu Dhabi is illegal.
It's a matter of fact that kissing in public in London isn't illegal.

Facts change depending on the country. So now as it's a matter of fact that Samsung did not copy Apple in the UK, because the Courts have ruled this. However, in America it's a matter of fact that they did.

Don't forget that opinions can be formed based on fact. Facts are objective and opinions are subjective. However, when an opinion is based on fact it loses it's subjective nature. Court rulings are a good example of where an opinion becomes fact e.g. Negligence claims in courts are based on a Court case which turned matters of the case into facts to further identify causes as negligence. Court Opinions become Fact.

And again it's not the Government telling Apple, and people have already formed these opinions that Samsung did not copy. However, Apple made these claims and damaged Samsung's reputation, and as a suitable punishment it was thought best to simply demand Apple make a notice telling their UK customers that they lost a pointless court case to begin with. It's not harming anyone, but Apple's ego. It's as simple as that.

It funny how we're not arguing if Apple should of won or lost, yet you just had to include that you think the American court decision is bad anyway. Typical Gomme. As soon as we're no longer talking about Apple you bring up something negative about them. You're like a dog drooling in excitement for a human to throw a ball, so you can go blindly chasing after it.

I would be just as mad if the situation had been reversed and Samsung had to post such a statement. You forget that I'm a large Galaxy fan and avid user. I've owned way more Android phones in my life than Apple products and I love them all.

Perhaps instead of letting your blind hate for Apple fog your judgement, you could actually debate the topic of forcing corporations to make statements which don't reflect their own opinions.

It's not a fact in England that there was no infringement and it's not a fact in America that Samsung did infringe. Those rulings were made and in the sense of a law it's a fact I suppose, but people can still disagree and form their own opinions.

Now read this carefully and don't misquote me because I know you get confused very easily:

You can abide by a law yet still disagree with said law and publicly express your disagreement.

Apple should still be allowed to abide by the ruling that there was no infringement (aka Apple understands that they lost in court), yet Apple should still be allowed to publicly uphold the believe that there was infringement.

Consider this: just because you've been convicted of a crime doesn't mean after you've been found guilty you automatically have to confess to everyone.

[GommeInc]

It funny how we're not arguing if Apple should of won or lost, yet you just had to include that you think the American court decision is bad anyway. Typical Gomme. As soon as we're no longer talking about Apple you bring up something negative about them. You're like a dog drooling in excitement for a human to throw a ball, so you can go blindly chasing after it.

I would be just as mad if the situation had been reversed and Samsung had to post such a statement. You forget that I'm a large Galaxy fan and avid user. I've owned way more Android phones in my life than Apple products and I love them all.

Perhaps instead of letting your blind hate for Apple fog your judgement, you could actually debate the topic of forcing corporations to make statements which don't reflect their own opinions.

It's not a fact in England that there was no infringement and it's not a fact in America that Samsung did infringe. Those rulings were made and in the sense of a law it's a fact I suppose, but people can still disagree and form their own opinions.

Now read this carefully and don't misquote me because I know you get confused very easily:

You can abide by a law yet still disagree with said law and publicly express your disagreement.

Apple should still be allowed to abide by the ruling that there was no infringement (aka Apple understands that they lost in court), yet Apple should still be allowed to publicly uphold the believe that there was infringement.

Consider this: just because you've been convicted of a crime doesn't mean after you've been found guilty you automatically have to confess to everyone.

Hmm, I see you're doing your usual thread-derailment method. We are debating, but your version of debating is that you're right and everyone is wrong. Are you going to bother to respond to my points or do your usual "Gomme hates Apple" argument, despite the fact I have never said that nor questioned your hate or love of Samsung :rolleyes:

PS. It is fact that Samsung did not infringe Apple patents in the UK. But seeing as you know nothing of law or politics I won't bother to respond to this part. If you can't accept fact then so be it, it's your problem if you cannot be bothered to educate yourself.

[mrwoooooooo]

a court order has nothing to do with free speech

[Chippiewill]

I think freedom of speech is a pretty cool idea...

Who said anything about free speech?

-

It's fairly commonly regarded that in the UK that you don't have freedom of speech in the same way as the US. Apple publicly slandered Samsung for copying their product, the court found this as not true, this is not about freedom of speech this is about repairing damages dealt.