三星抄得不够酷，苹果反要登报道歉

我对于一些法官采取独特的判决作为补救之道的案例常感到很有意思。一个最知名的案例就是判罚几个破坏退伍军人墓园的孩子们去看“拯救大兵瑞恩”(Saving Private Ryan)这部电影。 苹果公司(Apple)日前在英国就面临了这样的一种判决：一名法官要求苹果必须在该公司网站首页刊登三星(Samsung)未侵犯苹果 iPad 专利的声明启事。据报导：“根据三星律师提供的法院命令草案复本，除了苹果公司网站以外，苹果还必须在Financial Times、Daily Mail、Guardian Mobile magazine与T3等多家媒体付费刊登这项声明。” 英国法院采取这项措施的理由之一应该是因为苹果普遍使用专利法作为阻挠三星 Galaxy 平板电脑在全球销售的工具。但这项看来有利于三星的判决其实是很讽刺的──这位英国法官表示 Galaxy 并不至于和iPad 混为一谈，因为 Galaxy并没那么“酷”！ 另外，这位法官还否决了三星提出封锁苹果针对 Galaxy 发表公开声明的要求。他表示，苹果公司有发表意见的权利。 这是苹果公司在几个星期内第二次得公开发表明了：苹果在上周先是宣布退出EPEAT绿色认证机构，但过没几天就又决定重返，接受产品认证分级。苹果公司由于饱受客户和环保份子的批评，该公司硬件工程资深副总裁Bob Mansfield日前发表一封公开信，为苹果的错误决定道歉。 而苹果与三星之间的几次法律诉讼案也演变得很有意思。业界专家检视 Galaxy 与 iPad 的设计之间明显存在着差异，但侵权指控还得经过辩护与几次反诉。尽管这位英国法官或许无意开启先例，但这个“不够酷”的辩词可能很快地就会开始出现在法律字典中。 另一方面，想想你在小学时是否接受过“我不会再......”的抄写处罚？你觉得这种方式有用吗？你会因为怕被罚写而不再做同样的事吗？ 编译：Susan Hong 本文授权编译自EBN Online，版权所有，谢绝转载 本文下一页：参考英文原文：Apple 'Sentenced' to Letter-Writing，by Barbara Jorgensen, News of the Day

相关阅读：
• 智能机之争，三星怎么跑苹果前面去了？
• 颤抖吧，安卓！约3成安卓用户下一个手机将选iPhone
• 苹果树大招风，重归绿色认证机制引猜测WMCesmc

{pagination} Apple 'Sentenced' to Letter-Writing Barbara Jorgensen I’ve always enjoyed hearing about judges who use unusual remedies to make a point. One well-publicized case involved sentencing some kids who vandalized veterans’ graves to watch the movie Saving Private Ryan. Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL) is facing one such sentence in the UK: a judge is requiring that Apple publish a notice on its Website stating Samsung Corp. did not infringe on Apple’s iPad patent, Bloomberg reports: As well as Apple’s website, the company must pay for notices in the Financial Times, the Daily Mail, Guardian Mobile magazine, and T3, according to a draft copy of the order provided by Samsung’s lawyers. One of the reasons cited for this measure is Apple’s widespread use of patent law as a means to block sales of Samsung’s Galaxy tablet around the globe. But it’s a backhanded victory for Samsung: the justice said the Galaxy couldn’t be confused with the iPad because it is not as “cool.” In another twist, the judge denied Samsung’s request that Apple be blocked from making public statements about the Galaxy. Apple is entitled to its opinion, he said. This is Apple’s second comeuppance in as many weeks: Last week, Apple withdrew from the EPEAT environmental ratings organization, only to return several days later. (See: Apple's EPEAT Fiasco.) Apple was roundly criticized by customers and environmentalists alike, and Bob Mansfield, Apple’s senior vice president of hardware engineering, signed a letter of explanation that for Apple rated as an apology. The whole Apple-Samsung legal saga lapsed into silliness several lawsuits ago. Experts’ examination of the Galaxy’s and iPad’s designs show significant differences, yet infringement accusations require a defense and, apparently, several countersuits. Although the UK judge probably didn’t intend to set a precedent, it's possible the “uncool defense” will soon start cropping up in the legal lexicon. In the meantime, did the "I will not..." punishment work for you in grade school? Or would you do the same thing again?