我對于一些法官采取獨特的判決作為補救之道的案例常感到很有意思。一個最知名的案例就是判罰幾個破壞退伍軍人墓園的孩子們去看“拯救大兵瑞恩”(Saving Private Ryan)這部電影。
蘋果公司(Apple)日前在英國就面臨了這樣的一種判決：一名法官要求蘋果必須在該公司網站首頁刊登三星(Samsung)未侵犯蘋果 iPad 專利的聲明啟事。據報導：“根據三星律師提供的法院命令草案復本，除了蘋果公司網站以外，蘋果還必須在Financial Times、Daily Mail、Guardian Mobile magazine與T3等多家媒體付費刊登這項聲明?！?
英國法院采取這項措施的理由之一應該是因為蘋果普遍使用專利法作為阻撓三星 Galaxy 平板電腦在全球銷售的工具。但這項看來有利于三星的判決其實是很諷刺的──這位英國法官表示 Galaxy 并不至于和iPad 混為一談，因為 Galaxy并沒那么“酷”！
另外，這位法官還否決了三星提出封鎖蘋果針對 Galaxy 發(fā)表公開聲明的要求。他表示，蘋果公司有發(fā)表意見的權利。
這是蘋果公司在幾個星期內第二次得公開發(fā)表明了：蘋果在上周先是宣布退出EPEAT綠色認證機構，但過沒幾天就又決定重返，接受產品認證分級。蘋果公司由于飽受客戶和環(huán)保份子的批評，該公司硬件工程資深副總裁Bob Mansfield日前發(fā)表一封公開信，為蘋果的錯誤決定道歉。
而蘋果與三星之間的幾次法律訴訟案也演變得很有意思。業(yè)界專家檢視 Galaxy 與 iPad 的設計之間明顯存在著差異，但侵權指控還得經過辯護與幾次反訴。盡管這位英國法官或許無意開啟先例，但這個“不夠酷”的辯詞可能很快地就會開始出現在法律字典中。
另一方面，想想你在小學時是否接受過“我不會再......”的抄寫處罰？你覺得這種方式有用嗎？你會因為怕被罰寫而不再做同樣的事嗎？
編譯：Susan Hong
本文授權編譯自EBN Online，版權所有，謝絕轉載
本文下一頁：參考英文原文：Apple 'Sentenced' to Letter-Writing，by Barbara Jorgensen, News of the Day
相關閱讀：
• 智能機之爭，三星怎么跑蘋果前面去了？
• 顫抖吧，安卓！約3成安卓用戶下一個手機將選iPhone
• 蘋果樹大招風，重歸綠色認證機制引猜測AZTesmc
{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?
責編：Quentin
