The former basically has to run a positive advertising campaign for the latter

Jul 19, 2012 06:21 GMT  ·  By
Apple will have to publicly apologize to Samsung for speaking ill of Galaxy Tab
   Apple will have to publicly apologize to Samsung for speaking ill of Galaxy Tab

In what has to be the most ironic turn of events in the whole Apple-Samsung patent war, a UK judge has ruled that the maker of the iPad has to positively advertise the Galaxy Tab line for at least six months.

About ten days ago, the UK court handling the patent litigations between Samsung and Apple reached the conclusion that the former's Galaxy Tab doesn't infringe Apple's IP.

The semblance of objectiveness was a bit tarnished, though, when the judge said the Tab was “not as cool” as the iPad.

Still, even with personal tastes seeping into what should have been an impartial setting, the justice system representative got to work on how this mess was going to end.

Apple still has some time to place an appeal, much to Samsung's disapproval, but there is something quite embarrassing it has to do as well.

The Cupertino, California-based corporation has been ordered to essentially run a positive advertising campaign about the Samsung Galaxy Tab series.

Announcements will have to be published on its website, saying that Samsung did not copy their design. At least one of the notices will have to stay there for six months.

In addition to that, Apple will have to publish similar public apologies (they can't really be classified as anything else) in newspapers and magazines.

Long story short, Apple needs to “correct the damaging impression” that its lawsuit spree created.

Of course, since this is still the IT industry, a place where frankness is all but extinct, there is little chance for the acquiescence to possess any degree of straightforwardness.

We suspect Apple will focus extensively on the “Galaxy Tabs are not as cool” remark in its public admittances, even as it continues in its efforts to gain injunctions against all other allegedly infringing devices (and by patenting lots of technologies, many of which it never uses).

Nevermind that said system was supposed to be an enforcer of fair play instead of the opposite (and we're not the ones saying it). Then again, though it is a sad thing to say, it's no different from what any other IT player would do.