Many months ago, a UK judge ruled that Apple had sued Samsung without right, that it had incorrectly stated that Samsung had copied the design of the iPad tablet, and issued a ruling that forced Apple should publish an official apology to Samsung in widely circulated newspapers and on its website. Apple appealed the decision again today lost that call, a British judge issued a ruling forcing Apple to publish newspaper ads and a message on its website, confirming that Samsung did not copy elements of the iPad. These ads must have the Arial font of minimum size 14, and regarding the duration of the display, the ad could be public on the Apple website for at least 6 months.
Apple Inc lost its appeal over a ruling that its rival Samsung's Galaxy tablet did not copy the iPad in a British court on Thursday. The world's two leading smartphone makers are fighting over patents, both for smartphones and for tablets, in courts around the world. The Court of Appeal upheld its judgment that despite some similarities, Samsung did not infringe Apple's design, in part because its products were "not as cool" as the iPad. The US company was instructed to run ads saying the Korean company did not copy the iPad, both on its website and in selected newspapers. Judge Kitchin said on Thursday that the notices must be in a font size no smaller than Ariel 14.
Samsung won the lawsuit against Apple because the judge considered that the Galaxy Tab is not as cool as the iPad, and its design is not as simple and beautiful. In the end, it seems that the advantages of the iPad tablet in front of the competitors do not seem to be so favorable, and soon we may see the ads run by Apple based on this decision. The Samsung Galaxy Tab was withdrawn from sale in Germany, Australia and the USA (for a short period of time) based on lawsuits won by Apple, but it seems that in Great Britain the judges did not side with the Americans.
We continue to believe that Apple was not the first to design a tablet with a rectangular shape and rounded corners and that the origins of Apple's registered design features can be found in numerous examples of prior art. Should Apple continue to make excessive legal claims in other countries based on such generic designs, innovation in the industry could be harmed and consumer choice unduly limited.
