Note to Apple: UK judges don’t get American snarkiness. The UK Court of Appeals Thursday told the iPhone maker its recent apology to Samsung was “incorrect” and required a new notice on the website “acknowledging the inaccurate comments.” At issue: comments from the trial’s first ruling in which the judge declared Samsung’s tablet “not as cool.”

Judge Robin Jacob ordered the changes to Apple’s website be made within 24 hours, rejecting the Cupertino, Calif. firm’s request for 14 days to make the edit. “This is Apple. They cannot put something on their website?” Jacob reportedly said…

According to Bloomberg’s Jeremy Hodges, the order “is not designed to punish, it is not designed to makes us grovel,” Apple attorney Michael Beloff told the court. “The only purpose is to dispel commercial uncertainty.”

In July, a UK judge ruled Samsung’s tablets did not infringe upon Apple’s design, saying the products from South Korea were not “cool” enough. When Apple published the apology on its UK website, along with saying Samsung’s tablets didn’t infringe, the company also included the court’s “cool” remarks, as well as favorable mention by a German court. That gave the “impression that the UK court is out of step with other courts,” argued Samsung attorney Henry Carr.

My only question is why Apple thought its apology to Samsung wrapped in a seeming endorsement of the iPad would not ire the legal community? If the shoe were on the other foot, Apple would be crying foul seconds after the “apology” went public.

What do you think? Why did Apple write a snarky apology that inherently would not stand up to legal challenge?


    • aj

      apple’s appology seemed to be more childish to me.. it was almost lik no ma’am i did my work better but they copied it waahhhh :”””(

  • Lordthree

    Apple shouldn’t Have been made to post a ridiculous statement anyway. They really are trying to make them grovel.

    • Apple sued and tried to block the sale of the Galaxy Tab and they lost. They deserve some sort of punishment for holding up the sale of Samsung tablets.

      • Lordthree

        They payed a bond. That’s the correct procedure. Being ordered to ‘post an apology’ is ridiculous and illegal. Apple has full right to post anything they feel like.

      • So it’s OK for Apple to essentially SLANDER the hell out of Samsung with no recourse?

        I’m sure if Samsung made outlandish claims and blocked the sale of Apple devices which a year or two later get tossed out of court… you would want some sort of apology from Samsung…

        With that aside… it’s time both Samsung and Apple started fighting in the R&D area and not the court rooms.

      • Lordthree

        Blah blah blah- ‘no more litigation- time for innovation’ you sound like a broken record.
        It’s not slander if it’s true. Samsung ripped off Apple wholesale and Apple can say whatever opinions they have and cite whatever court cases they want.

      • You do what a court tells you to. The law is the law. Courts word is the law. Otherwise we can drop the entire legal system all toghether and let the strongest survive. Cant single out what laws to follow. Either we follow them all or we dont

      • goofygreek

        really, samsung did, i think the uk court system will disagree with you on that one.

      • Emre SUMENGEN

        They did not block any sale… They asked the court to block, and the court ruled against it… It’s done…

        They didn’t write “Samsung copied our device” on their website. They didn’t write “Samsung is SHIT” on their website…

        Actually, that was Samsung, who gave out iSheep ads all over the world…

        There’s no reason for Apple to apologize, and this is a dumb ruling to begin with.

      • ryubro

        Samsung will never do R&D when they know they can copy Apple’s ideas and designs, and nobody can stop them doing it if they make things a bit less cool. Thanks UK Court for taking away motivations for R&D (and all the creative works) from both Samsung and Apple.

  • Apple can be such a b*tch… Even when i read the apology they wrote; it doesn’t sound as COOL. I’m an apple fan but really Apple gotta behave & respect their dignity a times. I’m sure Mr. Scott didn’t write that apology. Well, I think Apple should re-write the apology bcos it wasn’t as COOL. Lol:)

    • Emre SUMENGEN

      If that can be the reason for a COURT RULING, it can as well be an APOLOGY…

      Oh my god, what’s wrong with you guys?

      Noone is speaking about that damned judge, ruling no-foul just because “They are not as cool”, but bitching when a giant corporation writes this on their website.

      What did people expect? Would any company of that caliber go on and write “Yeah, we’re ruled that we sucked”?

      And,I can’t understand the reason for this apology ruling either…

      If you believe your rights are not being honored, you go to court. How does this affect the other party?

  • go to mama

    • Guess urs didn’t raise u well… U betta disappear from this forum.! Rubbish

      • She did!!

        Sorry if you felt offended by my comment, but a lot of people here agree that this started to be very childish… It is not right or wrong anymore… It is “I want to have the last word” childish fight….

        Finally, You are forgiven.. and sorry again for my offended 3 words comment.. I will do it again..

  • When I read Apple’s apology, I couldn’t believe myself that a corporate giant like Apple could behave like a amateur start up. Shame.

    I think judge did right, to allow Apple to correct this mistake in 24 hours.

  • Falk M.

    Haha, glad I saved that webpage as pdf when I saw it 😛
    Piece of history! 😀

  • It is astonishing that the free speech types have not leapt onto this.

    “UK Judge forces Apple to suppress reporting of Court Statements”.

    Unless the court proceedings are sealed, Apple is quite within its rights to report on the outcome, especially since not to do so would be prejudicial in the market place and thus it would be liable to its shareholders.

    The next step for Apple is to post the one paragraph the Court approves of disclosing, but on a background out of the old MySpace.

    • The court order didn’t ask Apple to report on the outcome. It asked it to apologise.

      • Matt got it. They where ordered to publish an apology. Nothing else. Nothing less.

      • Emre SUMENGEN

        A court can’t order you not to publish anything else…

        Yes, they ordered an apology, and Apple did it.

        They also stated the reason for the apology… What’s wrong with it?

      • They where ordered an apology. Not the reason why. It pretty much kills an apology if you come up with ironic and sarcastic comments about it u know. Wouldnt work between two individuals if someone has to apologise. And it clearly didnt work here either

      • Emre SUMENGEN

        As far as I know, the court order had not dictated what to write specifically. Am I wrong?

        And, I think, that order itself was nonsense to begin with.

      • Specific enough imo. However, i do agree with the nonsense part of your post

      • Emre SUMENGEN

        Fair enough 🙂