Apple Posts Revised Court-Ordered Apology, Skips The Passive Aggressive, Judge-Undermining Remarks

• Samsung / Apple UK judgment

Let this be a lesson to you all: if a judge orders you to issue a statement saying X, it might not be a good idea to say "Well, that guy said X, but everyone else in the world thinks he's an idiot, so it doesn't really matter." That's roughly what Apple did when it posted this court-ordered concession on its website. When the UK judge came back and said, "Um, no, try that again," the Cupertino company was forced to issue a new version, sans snark. Here it is in full:

Samsung / Apple UK judgment

On 9 July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic(UK) Limiteds Galaxy Tablet Computers, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do notinfringe Apples Community registered design No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of
the High Court is available from www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html.

That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales on 18 October 2012. A copy of the Court of Appeals judgment is available from www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html. There is no injunction in respect of the Community registered design in force anywhere in Europe.

This version lacks any mention of the German or US cases that the previous version claimed contradicted the UK court's opinion. Unsurprisingly, the judge was not pleased with Apple insinuating to the world that his judgment was obviously incorrect. In addition to the dedicated page with the above statement, the company also placed the following on the front page of its website:

On 25 October 2012, Apple Inc. published a statement on its UK website in relation to Samsung's Galaxy tablet computers.That statement was inaccurate and did not comply with the order of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales.The correct statement is at Samsung/Apple UK judgement.

Obviously, this isn't something that Apple was too keen on putting on its front page. It's also worth pointing out that the company clearly complied with the 48-hour redo mandate, indicating the requested two weeks to comply due to "technical difficulties" was the delaying tactic the judge thought it was.

The notice will remain on Apple's UK site for a period of one month, presumably starting now that the revised version has been posted. This is pared down by the appeals court after the initial ruling which stated the declaration would need to be visible for a six month time period.

In the meantime, we'll leave you to the comments to discuss just how deserved this punishment is. We're sure at least a couple of you have opinions.

Source: Apple

Thanks, Debadatta