UK Court Orders Apple to Change Samsung Galaxy Tab Statement

Apple has been ordered by the U.K. Court of Appeal to reword its court ordered statement saying Samsung didn't copy the iPad design. The iPad and iPhone maker had been ordered to post a statement on its U.K. website telling visitors claims that the Galaxy Tab copied the iPad design were false, but Apple went beyond the scope of that statement to point out other courts have ruled that Samsung's products do, in fact, copy its designs.

UK Court on Apple's Samsung copycat statement: We are not amusedUK Court on Apple's Samsung copycat statement: We are not amused

The court gave Apple 24 hours to change the wording on its website, and a request from Apple's legal team for 14 days was rejected, according to Bloomberg.

Apple accused Samsung of copying the iPad design for the Galaxy tablet product line, but Judge Colin Birss rejected the company's argument and ruled that Samsung's designs aren't copies. As part of his ruling, he said Samsung's designs "do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design. They are not as cool."

He also ordered Apple to post a statement on its website as well as in several print publications saying Samsung isn't copying its designs. Apple lost its appeal, so the notice went live on Apple's website late last week.

Apple's statement acknowledged the Judge's ruling and pointed out his "not as cool" comment, and then went on to point out that other courts have ruled that Samsung has stepped on Apple design patents with its products.

The U.K. Court of Appeal wasn't impressed with Apple's statement, prompting the order to change it quickly. Apple lawyer Michael Beloff said the posted statement met the requirements of the court's order.

"[The court ordered statement] is not designed to punish, it is not designed to makes us grovel," he said. "The only purpose is to dispel commercial uncertainty."

Judge Robin Jacob disagreed and ordered the company to reword the statement.

"I'm at a loss that a company such as Apple would do this," the Judge said. "That is a plain breach of the order."