A U.K. Judge is upset with Apple for posting an 'untrue' and 'incorrect' notice about its litigation with Samsung over the iPad, reports Bloomberg.
Apple was forced to publicly state that Samsung did not copy the iPad; however, the judge clearly wasn't happy with the statement and ordered the company to replace it within 24 hours.
“I’m at a loss that a company such as Apple would do this,” Judge Robin Jacob said today. “That is a plain breach of the order.”
Samsung says the notice created the “impression that the U.K. court is out of step with other courts."
Apple said the notice “is not designed to punish, it is not designed to makes us grovel. The only purpose is to dispel commercial uncertainty.”
Apple is now forced to add a three sentence note on its homepage in acknowledgment of “the incorrect statement,” with a link to a new notice.
Apple news, rumors, tutorials, price drop alerts, in your inbox every evening, free.
Unsubscribe at any time.
Success!
You have been subscribed.
Add Comment
Would you like to be notified when someone replies or adds a new comment?
Yes (All Threads)
Yes (This Thread Only)
No
Notifications
Would you like to be notified when we post a new Apple news article or tutorial?
Yes
No
Comments (4)
Comments are closed for this article.
0
NoGoodNick - November 2, 2012 at 2:47pm
Personally, I've consistently thought this one judge was overreaching into areas that the law doesn't support just to prove he wasn't favoring Apple. There's no judicial reason for requiring a comment that has nothing to do with the underlying lawsuit.
0
Steven - November 2, 2012 at 3:22am
It is interesting to consider why a major corporation would be legally required to issue an apology to another in a legal battle. It seems like an unusual judicial requirement.
0
Rick - November 1, 2012 at 6:45pm
Apple's recent legal challenges and court orders raise questions about the company's current trajectory.
0
dsa - November 1, 2012 at 7:20pm
If you think the law is so right and sacred, why did two courts have two completely different rulings? Don't you think something is wrong?