蘋果電腦(Apple)控訴韓國三星電子(Samsung)侵權，告遍世界各地，但7月在英國吃下敗訴，被英國法院要求在網站首頁刊登道歉信，日前蘋果確實刊登一條《有關蘋果與三星判決》的道歉信網頁連結，但內容卻酸到極點，並指稱「(三星)沒有我們酷」，遭英國法院要求在48小時內「重寫」。

蘋果指稱三星抄襲其智慧型手機、平板電腦的專利，目前訴訟已延燒逾10國。7月英國法院的判決出爐，認為三星電子並未抄襲蘋果專利，要求蘋果需撰寫一篇對三星的道歉信，並刊登於英國網站首頁。

日前蘋果電腦確實刊登一條《有關蘋果與三星的判決》的道歉信網頁連結，但內容卻酸到極點，信中不僅提到三星設計雖較蘋果薄，但設計精神卻差很遠，並直指「(三星)沒有我們酷」。

但蘋果此種道歉信寫法，英國法院並不領情，根據最新消息指出，蘋果電腦被英國法官要求必須在48小時內，重新撰寫一篇正式的道歉信，且須刊登在英國網站首頁，直到12月15日才能撤下。

--

Samsung / Apple UK judgment

On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic(UK) Limited’s Galaxy Tablet Computer, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do notinfringe Apple’s registered design No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the Highcourt is available on the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html.

In the ruling, the judge made several important points comparing the designs of the Apple and Samsung products:

"The extreme simplicity of the Apple design is striking. Overall it has undecorated flat surfaces with a plate of glass on the front all the way out to a very thin rim and a blank back. There is a crisp edge around the rim and a combination of curves, both at the corners and the sides. The design looks like an object the informed user would want to pick up and hold. It is an understated, smooth and simple product. It is a cool design."

"The informed user's overall impression of each of the Samsung Galaxy Tablets is the following. From the front they belong to the family which includes the Apple design; but the Samsung products are very thin, almost insubstantial members of that family with unusual details on the back. They do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool."

That Judgment has effect throughout the European Union and was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 18 October 2012. A copy of the Court of Appeal’s judgment is available on the following link www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1339.html. There is no injunction in respect of the registered design in force anywhere in Europe.

However, in a case tried in Germany regarding the same patent, the court found that Samsung engaged in unfair competition by copying the iPad design. A U.S. jury also found Samsung guilty of infringing on Apple's design and utility patents, awarding over one billion U.S. dollars in damages to Apple Inc. So while the U.K. court did not find Samsung guilty of infringement, other courts have recognized that in the course of creating its Galaxy tablet, Samsung willfully copied Apple's far more popular iPad.