• Section Navigation

  • Poll

    How much music do you have? (Votes: 255)

    1. < 5 GB (Votes: 18)

    2. 6-10 (Votes: 13)

    3. 11-20 (Votes: 22)

    4. 21-30 (Votes: 22)

    5. 31-100 (Votes: 48)

    6. 101-150 (Votes: 29)

    7. 151-250 (Votes: 19)

    8. 251-500 (Votes: 27)

    9. 501 GB -1TB (Votes: 27)

    10. 1TB - 3TB (Votes: 11)

    11. 3TB - 5TB (Votes: 6)

    12. > 5TB (Votes: 13)

  • UK Judge Orders Apple To Publicly State On Its Website That Samsung Didn't Copy The iPad

    Well, that certainly didn't go the way Apple would've liked. A UK judge presiding over one of many lawsuits involving Apple products—specifically concerning the Galaxy Tab line's alleged infringement of the iPad's design—has ordered Apple to publicly post on the UK version of its website that Samsung did not copy the iPad. Said the internet, "Oh, snap!"


    The UK judge presiding over the case was the same one who made headlines recently for saying the Galaxy Tab lineup was "not as cool" as the iPad, and thus unlikely to be confused for Apple's slates. It's really hard to imagine an outcome that could be less flattering to both sides. Samsung wins the case, but only because the judge believes their products aren't good enough to stand next to the iPad, and Apple not only loses but is forced to publicly declare, despite the company's obvious beliefs on the subject, that Samsung didn't rip them off wholesale. Fortunately for Apple, at least, the court did not approve Samsung's request that Apple be forbidden from restating its claims that Samsung is a dirty, dirty thief. Apple simply has to place the notice on its website. What the company says elsewhere on the matter is completely up to Apple.


    The ruling may seem pretty harsh to some (and it certainly is embarrassing for Apple, even if the damage is mostly limited to the UK audience), but it also highlights the huge differences in how what are essentially the same cases can be interpreted. Just a few hundred miles away in Germany, for example, courts ruled that Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 not only infringed Apple's iPad design, butbanned the sale of the tablet altogether, claiming that "Apple's minimalistic design isn't the only technical solution to make a tablet computer." I say tomato, you say ban all usage of the word tomato.


    Hardly a day goes by anymore where we don't hear about some new ruling, new lawsuit, or new dispute on a patent/trademark/trade dress dispute. Hopefully, though, we can start to see an end to all these cases that seem to be so dependent on opinion that even the courts have wildly different views on what does and doesn't qualify as infringement.


    Hey, I said "hopefully". A guy can dream, can't he?
    Comments 5 Comments
    1. duke0102's Avatar
      duke0102 -
      Great news for Samsung but I imagine Apple will place this message on there own adverts in massive 1 pixel text at the bottom.
    1. Gaza's Avatar
      Gaza -
      Awesome news for Samsung, I despise Apple....
    1. Xbox_360's Avatar
      Xbox_360 -
      I wish the judge would have also said in huge text in the top of the page, it would have made my day. Apple will more then likely hide it so well in small text that even using a magnifying glass you wouldn't find it.
    1. TheFoX's Avatar
      TheFoX -
      Makes you wonder doesn't it. I am surprised that Apple didn't try to sue the BBC for its use of the letter 'i' in the word iPlayer, considering that Apple use the letter 'i' for things like iPad (pad), iPhone (phone), iPod (mp3/4 player).

      Obviously, their use of the letter 'i' is some sort of trademark, since phone, pad and pod are already words of the English language.

      Normally, when people copy a concept, you endeavour to do better. No one can possibly protect ALL ideas and concepts, and a certain amount of copying is naturally going to happen. After all, the new colonies still speak English, French and Spanish, with a smattering of Dutch and Portugese. No NEW languages have evolved in those colonies. They have copied what has gone before.

      Also, imagine a world where AMD were not allowed to copy the Intel instruction set, meaning that the only company who could make a PC was Intel. Our machines would have still been overpriced. Having competition means that pricing is more competitive. If Apple were the only ones to make a smartphone, who knows how expensive it would be.
    1. MysticRiffs's Avatar
      MysticRiffs -
      Quote Originally Posted by TheFoX View Post
      Makes you wonder doesn't it. I am surprised that Apple didn't try to sue the BBC for its use of the letter 'i' in the word iPlayer, considering that Apple use the letter 'i' for things like iPad (pad), iPhone (phone), iPod (mp3/4 player).

      Obviously, their use of the letter 'i' is some sort of trademark, since phone, pad and pod are already words of the English language.

      Normally, when people copy a concept, you endeavour to do better. No one can possibly protect ALL ideas and concepts, and a certain amount of copying is naturally going to happen. After all, the new colonies still speak English, French and Spanish, with a smattering of Dutch and Portugese. No NEW languages have evolved in those colonies. They have copied what has gone before.

      Also, imagine a world where AMD were not allowed to copy the Intel instruction set, meaning that the only company who could make a PC was Intel. Our machines would have still been overpriced. Having competition means that pricing is more competitive. If Apple were the only ones to make a smartphone, who knows how expensive it would be.
      Not as silly as it sounds, yep. Microsoft got the shaft twice, now. First for naming the Modern UI Metro, and now for the name SkyDrive.