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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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
Word Smiths | 627 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Word Smiths
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 11:47 AM EDT
A PR person put that up without referring to the legal department ?

If true then Legal must be agitating for another bunch of dismissals, however my suspicion is that US legal insisted on it whatever UK legal thought.

Seems to fit the attitude in Cupertino.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Word Smiths - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 11:57 AM EDT
  • Word Smiths - Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 12:16 PM EDT
    • Word Smiths - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 12:39 PM EDT
      • Word Smiths - Authored by: mtew on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 04:30 PM EDT
        • Word Smiths - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 08:04 AM EDT
          • Word Smiths - Authored by: mtew on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 10:27 AM EDT
            • Word Smiths - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 11:27 AM EDT
So if UK representation wasn't involved....
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 12:38 PM EDT

Who represented Apple in Court this morning?

Given the arguments presented:

    A) What apple did was within the ruling
    B) Apple needs 14 days to change some text on a single Web Page
Unless you're suggesting Apple's representation in the UK Court this morning was US Legal Representation with no UK Barrister, Apple's UK Legal representation is shown to be sharing at least part of the blame for the situation.

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • So if UK representation wasn't involved.... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 01:16 PM EDT
    • Right... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 01:36 PM EDT
      • Right... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 02:20 PM EDT
      • Right... - Authored by: Tyro on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 03:04 PM EDT
  • QC - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 04:27 PM EDT
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 )