UK Court Sanctions Apple For Non-Compliance 217
drinkypoo writes "We've been following the story that Apple was ordered by a UK court to post an apology to Samsung both in newspapers and on Apple's UK website. After originally posting a non-apology and then hiding a real one, Apple finally complied. Now, PJ over at Groklaw reports on the ruling from the UK court itself, which condemns Apple's conduct in this matter. 'Since Apple did not comply with the order in its estimation, adding materials that were not ordered and in addition were "false," the judges ordered Apple to pay Samsung's lawyers' fees on an indemnity basis, and they add some public humiliation.' The judge wrote, 'Finally I should mention the time for compliance. Mr Beloff, on instructions (presumably given with the authority of Apple) told us that "for technical reasons" Apple needed fourteen days to comply. I found that very disturbing: that it was beyond the technical abilities of Apple to make the minor changes required to own website in less time beggared belief. ... I hope that the lack of integrity involved in this incident is entirely atypical of Apple.'"
The UK judge (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Enlighten me (Score:5, Interesting)
It essentially boils down to Apple trying to "superficially" comply, while actually completely disregarding the purpose behind the order.
For an example, there was recently a sting operation set up to catch a major traffic offender, who routinely drove on the sidewalk to evade stopped traffic from a routine school bus stop that made the news this last week. [huffingtonpost.com]
As part of her punishment, she has to wear a sign declaring that she is an idiot, and that only an idiot would try to pass a school bus while driving a car, by driving on the sidewalk.
The intent behind the order is very clear, and directly tied to the heart of the infraction it was proscribed for.
If the woman had followed after Apple's example, she would have worn the sign alright, but it would have given counter examples as to why driving on the sidewalk like that was perfectly justifiable, and made allusions that the judge that made her wear the sign was mistaken in his judgement, and that 2 other judges in similar cases (which were improperly conducted for different reasons, or later invalidated in their rulings) concurred with her point of view.
Re:Enlighten me (Score:5, Interesting)
The heart of the issue is that the judge told Apple to "clarify" any misconceptions that Samsung had violated the specific patent in question. The judge was concerned that consumers would be confused about whether or not buying a non-Apple device would lead to problems down the road.
What Apple did is glossed over the apology, and then went on to mention all of their other litigation against Samsung in other country and touted the positive (for Apple) verdicts in those countries. It was basically a marketing piece that said in short, "The judge is wrong, Samsung really is stealing our ideas, look at all of these other countries who think so."
The judge called them out on their BS and told them to comply with the court order to "clarify" the misconceptions. Apple spouted some BS about how it was going to take 14 days to change the message. The judge told them that was a load of crap. Apple then changed the message, but made it much less prominent than the first one they posted. Again, the judge called them out on it.
In short, Apple's legal team is the same as legal teams all over the place. They are a bunch of assholes who think they are smarter than everyone else and will do whatever they think they can get away with.
I dislike lawyers intensely. I really do. I never realized how bad they are until I worked with them. We provide services to them. We are on their side. They still treat us like crap, like we are the adversary. They are constantly trying to trip us up over the slightest things. It's like their brains are hard wired to press any perceived advantage and exploit even the slightest gap. They want systems with five nines up time, yet they are the cheapest, tightest, penny pinching bastards on the planet. I really think they demand the insane SLA so that they have something to dispute with the intention of extracting concessions on the monthly fees. It is to the point where I will not get on the call with a client unless a member of our legal team is on the call. When I do get on the call, I give short, brief and extremely limited answers. I do not explain in detail. I do not think outside the box. I take everything literally. It sucks because I have to become a different person when I deal with them. I cannot even offer constructive solutions because then it turns into a game of, "Why are you only thinking about this now? Why did you not predict this need of ours a year ago? That sounds negligent to me."
Re:Standby in Three... Two... One.... (Score:5, Interesting)
I wouldn't mind apple at all, if apple conducted itself in a manner that wasn't synonymous with being contrite cock gobblers.
Apple's ENTIRE business structure revolves around continual invocation of "The dick move". (We are apple. You want our shiny products! But---- If you want the shiny products, you have to do everything we say! If you dont, we'll break your, or rather, OUR, shiny product to stop your defiance.) [essentially. That and a whole lot more.]
If apple just made products and sold them like any other company, instead of trying to create a bullshit mystique and bullying every other product manufacturer and their own potential user base while lieing through their teeth about being innovative, I wouldnt have any problem with them, much like I dont have any problem with the dozens of other handset makers out there.
I dont have a boner for Google, or Motorola, or HTC, or Samsung, or any of the others. (and, contrary to your seemingly diametrically polarized world view, I actually DISLIKE google for a large number of reasons.)
I just dont like Apple, because Apple conducts itself like a total douche.
It bothers me greatly that such a large number of people are so beholden to Apple, that they would attempt to justify any action it takes, regardless of how horrendous it is, rather than make the personal admission that perhaps their devotion wasnt justified.
I was simply sarcastically pointing out that stories like this draw them out of the woodwork without fail to cast apologetic rhetoric in favor of their preferred tech company.
Companies don't deserve loyalty. They show us absolutely none. They deserve none of ours.
It is as simple as that.
Nice work, Soulskill (Score:4, Interesting)
I didn't write my submission nearly so elegantly, nor with proper inline links. Now that is what I call editing.
Re:er... what now? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Standby in Three... Two... One.... (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree with you completely. I used to be a mac user for over 15 years, but in the end I just couldn't bring myself to give anymore of my money to Apple or for Jobs for the arrogance and the overall assholeness. It was very liberating to finally to move first to Ubuntu and then to Windows 7 (I use software that's only Windows and Mac) and find that Windows 7 is a great OS. OS X feels in someways suffocating, and perhaps partly it's because of the strict guidelines of the GUI, but probably much more because of the attitude of Apple and of its rabid fanbase.
Using Apple's products is like being in jail all the time, where other inmates are constantly telling with bright eyes how lucky they are to be there. Granted, I still think OS X is in some ways better (e.g. multitasking), but after few years of using Windows 7 I don't miss OS X at all. And I haven't been interested to buy any other Apple's products either. Of course Apple is now with iphones and ipads much bigger, and its userbase is much much larger than only with macs, and probably overall the userbase is not that brand faithful anymore. Apple itself is just getting worse.
Re:Enlighten me (Score:5, Interesting)
I admit the mistake. It is however, one that is hard for me to break. :(
When I read "Prescribe", I see it as a compound of the prefix "Pre", meaning "comes before", and "Scribe", meaning "to write or mark."
So, "prescribe" means "Written in advance". (Such as with a doctor's script. He writes down the course of your treatment in advance of your receiving it. A prescription.)
When I see "Proscribe", I see the prefix "Pro", (antonym of "Con") meaning "In favor of / supporting". (Nevermind that 'conscribe' is not a word, or at least not a proper word.)
So, "proscribe" means "Written in support of." (Like with an editorial, citing a proposed course of action; a proscribed action.)
I accept that this is not conserved by actual definition of those words. It is simply a malfunction in my ability to parse language I guess.
As the site linked to points out, this is a very common mistake, for pretty much exactly the reasoning I pointed out. I understand that English has many special exceptions, but "proscribe" is particularly cumbersome in that respect.
I will however, endeavor to correct my usage.
Re:The UK judge (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Apple committing slow suicide, Tim Cook assisti (Score:2, Interesting)
The fact that Apple is still selling apple products in UK is testament to Tim Cook's more even keel.
How easily you forget the Steve that swore to use Apple's entire cash cache (ha!) to destroy Google. Steve's solution might well have been to pay applicable fines, pull ALL iOS products from the UK, write an open letter to the judge and let public pressure roast the responsible magistrates alive.
Like it or not, Apple IS the big kid in the playground, and they DO make excellent products that generates enormous public demand. Steve repeatedly used that demand like heavy artillery, I don't think he'd hesitate to do so with the little island off the coast of Europe.
The bottom line is that the UK (through consumer demand) needs Apple far more than Apple needs the UK market.
Re:How a company *should* apologise... (Score:5, Interesting)
Just googled a bit, and her are some corporate apologies:
http://www.cbc.ca/undertheinfluence/season-1/2012/05/19/when-brands-apologise-sorry-seems-to-be-the-smartest-word-1/ [www.cbc.ca]
Re:Standby in Three... Two... One.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Some companies do show loyalty-- for instance, off the top of my head, I can mention that Logitech, AMD, and Antec have been awesome to me whenever I have called them about broken or missing parts. Each of them has sent me no-postage, no hassle, no cost replacements for parts that went broken or missing. In AMD's case, they replaced an OC'd processor with non-stock mods and a cracked die-- with no questions. With Logitech, they replaced 2 G9 mouses-- one had had its cord eaten by a rabbit, the other stopped clicking. The rabbit-eaten one was upgraded to a G9x, again without cost.
So I will disagree with you regarding loyalty. They had financial incentive to be loyal-- as now I highly recommend those products from a customer service standpoint-- but they treated me well which is why I treat them well.
Re:Apple and their lawyers were lucky (Score:2, Interesting)
I can only assume Apple overruled or ignored rather lawyers, who most certainly would tell them that playing this kind of game was only going to lead to more severe sanctions.
I sense the limp wrist of Tim Cook pulling these strings. By the way, Apple has lost $150 billion of market value in the eight weeks since the iPhone 5 introduction.
Re:Enlighten me (Score:4, Interesting)
I dislike lawyers intensely. I really do. I never realized how bad they are until I worked with them. We provide services to them. We are on their side. They still treat us like crap, like we are the adversary. They are constantly trying to trip us up over the slightest things. It's like their brains are hard wired to press any perceived advantage and exploit even the slightest gap.
Years ago my brother found what he thought was a niche opportunity. He noticed a lawyers district downtown had very few computer shops and, figuring lawyers need notebooks, backup services and the like, opened a small shop near there advertising specifically to them, with things like special discounts to members of the bar association, monthly maintenance contracts, repair services and the like. Just guess what the result was after a few months. Yes, that! Exactly what's just crossed your mind!
In a related note, once I and a few friends, one of which is a lawyer (a very nice one, not your usual villainous kind), were dinning together, and during the conversation we asked him who was right in a case that was receiving some attention in the news, and even he couldn't contain himself. His reply: "Depends. I'm the lawyer for which side?" We all laughed and all, but yeah.
To those how haven't read Gulliver Travels, download a copy from Project Gutenberg and do a search for "lawyers" and similar terms. At one point Johnathan Swift provides one of the best descriptions I've ever seen of the profession. Read (or reread) it. It's well worth the effort, both for the laughs and for the awful realization that everything he says is absolutely true.
Re:Standby in Three... Two... One.... (Score:1, Interesting)
So, let me start by saying that this move was stupid and unprofessional on Apple's part. They're being some sore losers.
Apple's ENTIRE business structure revolves around continual invocation of "The dick move". (We are apple. You want our shiny products! But---- If you want the shiny products, you have to do everything we say! If you dont, we'll break your, or rather, OUR, shiny product to stop your defiance.)
As far as I can see, their business structure revolves around products that are engineered to meet actual consumer needs rather than the "sticker and spec fetish" that most manufacturers obsess over. Their stuff is rarely the best in any given category, but they're usually in the top 10% of their market when you consider the overall product.
You're claiming they deliberately "break" stuff. So what's been broken? Are you referring to newer software not running on older hardware? I don't get that, the old OS still runs fine, all the stuff you bought runs fine. You get four or five years of upgrades for that device and then it will continue to function until the hardware dies. And Apple hardware continues to beat the industry in terms of useful life.
I just dont like Apple, because Apple conducts itself like a total douche.
From my perspective, in the hundreds of cases where I've dealt with Apple employees in developer conferences, discussing bugs, talking to them at Apple stores, customer support on the phone, they've always been entirely courteous and professional. If their lawyers are assholes to their competitors, I don't see why I should give a fuck, that's what lawyers are paid to do. The worst I can think of is that some developers have been burned when Apple incorporated functionality they provided into the OS, even their accounts of it, though, were that it was just business.