Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by majormajor 5081 days ago
I have heard that some areas have three-state legal systems, at least for certain types of cases, but that's not the case here. The ruling was "they do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design." Not "Apple has not proven that Samsung infringed."

You don't have to agree with the ruling, but the legal ruling was a "false," not a "null." A "not guilty" verdict may arise due to a lack of evidence or a badly tried case, but legally it means the same thing as a "not guilty" that came about because the accusation was obviously untrue.
1 comments
Terretta 5081 days ago
> The ruling was "they do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design."

Essentially, that Samsung didn't copy them well. As I understand it, the judge also refused to stop Apple from saying Samsung did copy them, saying Apple was entitled to its opinion.

Since the actual ruling is that Apple should note that Samsung's tablet doesn't legally infringe on Apple's registered designs, to your point, Apple's UK home page should just quote the judge:

Home Page Headline: "They are not as cool" -- UK Judge

Home Page Body: "The UK Courts require us to point out that Samsung's tablet does not have the same understated simplicity of our designs."

link
pyre 5081 days ago 

  > the judge also refused to stop Apple from saying
  > Samsung did copy them, saying Apple was entitled to
  > its opinion
While I would lean on the side of agreeing here, I find this part odd due to how strict U.K. libel laws are...
link