The rivalry between Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (LON:BC94) continues to brew. In the latest twist of events, a U.K. court has ordered Apple to pay Samsung legal fees for a misleading apology. Apple’s apology, which was posted on Apple’s site, was meant to retract previous allegations where the company noted that the design of Samsung’s galaxy tablet was copied from the iPad.
Nevertheless, Apple’s apology focused on the highly publicized high court findings that said Samsung’s Galaxy tablets were not as cool as Apple’s iPad. In addition to that, the notice indirectly questioned the U.K. court’s ruling, exclaiming that courts in Germany and the U.S. had found Samsung guilty of infringement. As expected, the notice did not amuse the U.K. court and as such, the U.K. court ordered Apple to revise the statement and remove the supposedly inaccurate texts from what should have been an otherwise direct apology. The decision to impose a legal fee was arrived at after Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) failed to comply with an initial order to retract the apology at the onset of November.
Charlie Munger: Invert And Use “Disconfirming Evidence”
Charlie Munger is considered to be one of the best investors and thinkers alive today. His thoughts and statements on investment research, investment psychology, and general rational behavior are often incredibly insightful. Anyone can learn something from this billionaire investor and philosopher. Q2 2020 hedge fund letters, conferences and more If you’re looking for value Read More
While Apple’s peevish apology was seemingly entertaining, the blowback seems to have landed at its doorstep. Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) will not only have to pay Samsung legal fees, but it will also need to restore lost goodwill from the U.K. court. The U.K. court expressed discontent with Apple’s behavior, citing that some of the remarks in Apple’s apology were false and misleading. The U.K. court also lashed out regarding Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL)’s remarks on its inconsistent ruling when compared with other courts. “There is a false innuendo that the U.K. court’s decision is at odds with decisions in other countries, whereas that is simply not true,” it noted.
Towards the end, the judgment author, Sir Robin Jacob, issued a harsh remark. “I hope that the lack of integrity involved in this incident is entirely atypical of Apple,” he noted.
Although Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) is under legal obligation to revise its notice, the revision will not quench the unquestionable rivalry between it and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (LON:BC94). Competition between the two smartphone makers has reached unprecedented levels, as each one of them tries to cash in on the insatiable demand for smartphones and tablets.