I can't even tell what's going on any more. All of this notice-posting is meant to undo the "harm" Apple has caused by saying Samsung copied the iPad, right? But the court insists that it never even touched the question of whether Samsung copied the iPad. Yet the same court is upset about Apple suggesting that Samsung did copy the iPad.
So, to sum up:
- Apple said that Samsung copied the iPad;
- the court wants Apple punished for saying that;
- although the court never made any determination about whether Samsung copied the iPad;
- and Apple is still forbidden from saying that Samsung copied the iPad.
Yes, but if you believe that Samsung's business incurred substantial damage from a perception of infringement, surely that perception would have to be "Samsung copied Apple's products", not just "Samsung infringed Apple's Community Registered Design No. 000181607-001".
Basically, if the case was "big" (over the issue of Samsung copying the iPad), then:
- the court would have had to rule on whether Samsung copied the iPad; and, if it ruled negatively, then
- Samsung could have claimed to have incurred a significant damage to its reputation after being smeared as a copycat, and
- the court would have had reason to prohibit Apple from reiterating the copying accusations.
However, if the case was "small" (over the issue of Community Registered Design No. 000181607-001, and explicitly excluding the question of whether Samsung copied the iPad), then:
- the court would merely have to rule on whether Samsung infringed that specific design, explicitly leaving open the question of whether they "copied the iPad" or not; and, having decided negatively, then
- the damage to Samsung's reputation would have been insignificant, since (some) people care about whether they are copycats or not, and the court's decision on that specific registered patent does not touch the greater question, and thus
- the court would have no grounds to prohibit Apple from saying: "the court ruled that Samsung didn't violate this specific registered design; however, we still believe that they copied our products, and here are a few other cases where they were found to infringe our IP".
You see what I mean? I don't see how you can have BIG damages, BIG punishment, BIG limitations on what Apple can say if you don't also have the BIG decision that would justify all that. And the court has said over and over that they have made no such decision.
Apple sues over the design. The design is not the design of the iPad.
Apple says 'they copy our products! See, look at this court case'
Case goes against them, they're ordered to apologise. They fail to stick to the terms and put a load of stuff around it that muddies the waters and talks about unrelated cases in other juristictions.
Judge gets annoyed and makes them take down the other stuff as misleading, specifically noting that they haven't even tested the question of the iPad, and that the decision in this case does not contradict decisions in other cases where this design was brought up.
And the court clearly does think it can make apple carry an unembellished statement, and they're probably right .otherwise I guarantee we'd be seeing appeals.
So, to sum up:
- Apple said that Samsung copied the iPad;
- the court wants Apple punished for saying that;
- although the court never made any determination about whether Samsung copied the iPad;
- and Apple is still forbidden from saying that Samsung copied the iPad.
Nope, still confused.