As good as Apple can be, sometimes it just can’t catch a break. Not only is it obvious that iPhone and iPad competitor Samsung slavishly copies Apple’s popular products (Samsung. Where Innovation Is Copied), but now Apple is being compelled to tell the world it just ain’t so. That’s a good example of adding insult to injury.
What happened? Apple tried to protect their intellectual property and designs from Samsung’s notorious copying by filing suit in country after country. Win some, lose some. In the U.K., Apple lost big time.
A London judge, probably blind and deaf because it’s obvious he couldn’t see that Samsun’s products are almost atom-by-atom clones of Apple’s products, and deaf because he couldn’t hear Apple’s obviously superior argument, and physically disabled because simply touching each device would have revealed the truth, has ruled that Samsung didn’t copy Apple.
Say what? How can that be?
In a Bloomberg report, Judge Colin Birss says Samsung’s products are not likely to be confused with Apple’s products because they’re “not as cool“. Well, duh.
Worse, the judge ordered Apple to publish a notice on Apple’s U.K. website and in local papers that Samsung did not copy designs for the iPad. See? I told you the judge was blind, deaf, and disabled.
In fact, a blind person, simply by touching an iPad and then a Samsung tablet, could tell they’re virtually identical. So, Judge Birss is more disabled than a blind person.
How can a U.K. judge make such a mistake? It’s in their genes, I guess. Is it possible Judge Birss is a descendent from the Duke of Bedford? Or, is he another attention hound?
Whatever it is, you can be sure of one thing in this case. Apple will appeal the ruling. In the meantime, I’m willing to bet that Apple is also looking for component suppliers not named Samsung.
Update: I fly to the U.K. on business six to eight times a year. If I disappear, then you’ll know that Judge Birss has friends in low places.