decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Apple will have to apologise | 627 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
UK Judges Respond to Apple's Snarky Notice: Take It Down and Tell That It Was Untrue ~pj
Authored by: jmc on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 09:55 AM EDT
They managed to put the original notice up a week after the original appeals
were turned down so why should it take two to change it?

Apple were really lucky that they weren't fined for contempt just for saying
that alone.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Some very ancient advice for Apple and others
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 11:04 AM EDT
From the Wisdom of Ptahhotep best summarized as:-

Deliver only the message. Do not add to it, do not take away from it and do not
discuss it.

It was good advice then and it still is.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Additional ancient advice
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 11:35 AM EDT
When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is
stop digging!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

UK Judges Respond to Apple's Snarky Notice: Take It Down and Tell That It Was Untrue ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 12:01 PM EDT
they spent one week to come up with the creative snarky response that they had,
now they want two weeks to copy and paste what the Judge told them they have to
say? Apple is becoming more and more a whiny brat imo. I don't understand why
they can't take their loss and move on. They always have to be right (or appear
to be right, anyway)

~ukjaybrat - IANAL

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

UK Judges Respond to Apple's Snarky Notice: Take It Down and Tell That It Was Untrue ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 12:11 PM EDT
Apple must have the worlds worst web masters. 14 days to
change a static page and change the font of a url link.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

UK Judges Respond to Apple's Snarky Notice: Take It Down and Tell That It Was Untrue ~pj
Authored by: esni on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 12:26 PM EDT
Suggest the court block sales of the iPad in the UK until they are in compliance

---
Eskild
Denmark


[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Bets on Apple's compliance?
Authored by: Tolerance on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 04:42 PM EDT
What the court said was offensive about the 'unapology' was
that it referenced cases in other jurisdictions and
committed other legal sins to the extent that "it was a
plain breach of the order".

But Android partisans should not take great comfort from the
episode. Never mind that the original trial judge observed
that Apple's product was so cool that it helped Samsung's
product differentiation.

The point is that Apple did not invent this style of
competition. It has learned how to wage commercial warfare
along these lines from masters, who showed that you can get
away with evil with almost complete impunity.

Where actual punishment is in the form of dollars, it
becomes a cost of doing business. This latest episode,
though, strikes at Apple's reputation, which is why they are
sailing perilously close to contempt of court. I await
eagerly Apple's response. I predict snarkyness, coolth, an
appeal to the British sense of humour, and a finger raised
to the high court.

Disclaimer: I do not now own, nor have I ever owned, either
an iOS or an Android device. Though I did buy an iPad for my
wife (I get my knuckles rapped if I touch it). And I have
installed thousands of OS/X Apples and Linux devices.


---
Grumpy old man

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

ZDNet Article with PJ/Groklaw quote
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 07:49 AM EDT
Link

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

M$FT's betrayal of Nokia - The other shoe drops...
Authored by: Gringo_ on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 11:24 AM EDT

An article by Joel Johnson at NBC news says Microsoft may make its own Windows Phone hardware.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Get your Google back...
Authored by: Gringo_ on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 11:32 AM EDT

If you were one of those unfortunates who bought a Surface and now sit there dazed and confused and wondering why your search is broken, here is how to "Get your Google Back" (article links to Google video).

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Apple will have to apologise
Authored by: Gringo_ on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 11:45 AM EDT

The Register is now saying Apple must apologise for its surly apology on its website on Saturday.

The three sentence statement that Apple will have to display on its homepage will say:

On 25th October 2012, Apple Inc published a statement on its UK website in relation to Samsung's Galaxy tablet. That statement was inaccurate and did not comply with the order of the Court Appeal of England and Wales. A correct statement can be found at this link.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Oops - all my posts above were meant for "Off topic" - n/t
Authored by: Gringo_ on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 12:32 PM EDT

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )