61–70 of 116 posts
Did anyone seriously expect Apple to be contrite?
I don't really get why everyone is so down on Apple on HN (I am a Google/Android user FWIW). Sure they have pursued some questionable patent cases - but it is hard to deny they are one of the pre-eminent creators and makers in the world today - they have been truly innovative and brought massive change to multiple technology streams. They are about as far from being a hoarding patent troll as one could imagine yet th…
"A judge said we must apology because we are cooler and so Samsung didn't copy because they aren't cool. But other judges said that we are cooler and Samsung still copied us! So we must be right!" Sincerely: a 6 year old.
Didn't the order require the statement to be: 1. Made on the home page itself 2. In a 14pt font which (according to http://www.getallfix.com/2011/11/convert-empxpt-and-in-css/) should be some 19px high. Instead this is a link to the statement (in a div with the class sosume - little gag there) in a 11px font size... not to mention the fact that the additional paragraphs after the statement itself somewhat go against…
This isn't even an apology in the slightest. It's only on the UK site as well. (I've checked .de .com .fr and it's no where to be seen, which makes sense if you are Apple). However, if they are going to display it only in UK, then they should have at least spelt "judgment" correctly. They use "/uk/legal-judgement/" (Over in UK there is only a single "e" not two). Anyway, totally not an apology . It looks more like an…
Actually, "judgment" is the correct spelling in this context: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_(law)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think in this case, the story is more about Apple's disregard for the spirit of the court order than being down on Apple in general. I'm generally an Apple fan, but this seems kind of petty and oddly antagonistic towards the court.
Really? It seems about in line with what any corporation would write if ordered to give such a statement. It ackowledges the judgement in the UK but also mentions conflicting judgements elsewhere in the world. Seems pretty balanced to me.
This isn't even an apology in the slightest. It's only on the UK site as well. (I've checked .de .com .fr and it's no where to be seen, which makes sense if you are Apple). However, if they are going to display it only in UK, then they should have at least spelt "judgment" correctly. They use "/uk/legal-judgement/" (Over in UK there is only a single "e" not two). Anyway, totally not an apology . It looks more like an…
1) The order from the court was for the UK site only. This makes sense - it was a UK ruling from a UK court which has no jurisdiction in any other countries.
There are separate cases in places like Germany. It make no sense for the UK courts to force Apple to make statements in other countries covering rulings made under laws that don't apply there and which may (and in some cases do) contradict rulings made under the laws of those countries.
2) There was no demand for an apology and I'm not sure why you think that there is. The court is very specific about what has to be said which is that Apple make it clear that the court ruled that Samsung did not copy the iPad. They also include wording which must be in there and details on the font size and that there must be a link to the actual ruling.
3) Judgements is a perfectly valid spelling here in the UK, they're used interchangeably. Check justice.gov.uk if you don't believe me - you get significant numbers of hits for both. EDIT: I bow to the greater knowledge of others here - both spellings are common but it seems that judgment is the one used for legal rulings.
Actual ruling here: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html
(Note that the appeals court changed 6 months to 1 month but upheld the link from the homepage).
I wonder if the US office had any say in how this is written. As someone who has been a guest in the UK for nearly a decade, to me this reads like someone, as the British say, taking the piss.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One would think that a company with $.12 trillion in the bank could afford to be classy once in a while.
Apple tends to be fairly ruthless in their dealings with other companies and act without remorse (like many other companies, Samsung of course included) and it's become the only way to survive in the horrific world of IP law suits. Unfortunately, the class you mention tends to be overshadowed by this. Apple can't afford to be classy, if it gives up it's bullying ways for even a short period of time, it will find that…
They were ordered to give an apology, and instead forwarded a conceited, weasley worded temper tantrum. There's nothing ruthless about that, it's something toddlers do every day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? It seems about in line with what any corporation would write if ordered to give such a statement. It ackowledges the judgement in the UK but also mentions conflicting judgements elsewhere in the world. Seems pretty balanced to me.
If they were truly told to write an apology, then people are down on them because this isn't one. You cannot really apologise for anything without using the words 'sorry' or 'apologise'.
Apologies imply feelings, and corporations do not have feelings.