Don't let it get away!
Keep track of the stocks that matter to you.
Help yourself with the Fool's FREE and easy new watchlist service today.
Wimbledon just finished -- returning the most vaunted trophy in tennis to its rightful owner, by the way -- and London is abuzz with preparations for this summer's Olympic Games. But that's not enough global attention for the Brits. Judge Colin Birss made sure to keep worldwide attention on the U.K. with a legal decision that might change Apple's (Nasdaq: AAPL ) legal fortunes far beyond the British Isles.
Birss is the judge who famously told Apple that the Samsung (OTC: SSNGY) Galaxy Tab couldn't be confused with an iPad because it simply wasn't cool enough. This week, he followed up that backhanded compliment (yes, more tennis!) with a very unusual order. Apple must admit in writing that the Galaxy Tab didn't copy Apple's iPad designs, and the apology must be posted both online and in British newspapers for all to see. Apple's U.K. web site will be adorned with said apology for at least six months.
Apple's lawyers don't like the order at all. "No company likes to refer to a rival on its website," says Apple attorney Richard Hacon, comparing the required apology to free advertising for the competing product. Samsung takes a different view, of course: Apple's copycat claims caused real damage to Samsung's brand value, so a public mea culpa is the least Cupertino can do -- especially since Apple kind of copied the iPad idea from way older sources to begin with.
The most interesting aspect of this order is this: Samsung will surely point other courts around the world toward the British apology statements in an attempt to overturn Apple's design-based attacks. It will be up to judges in Germany, the U.S., and Holland to decide whether a court-ordered concession holds any weight in similar cases.
If that tactic works out, Samsung could try to stretch the tablet-centric apology to cover Apple's many smartphone lawsuits. If the American company overstated the originality of its iPad design, the logic would go, then why wouldn't they do the same in smartphone battles?
This strange order notwithstanding, it's hardly game, set, and match for Samsung. Apple may be able to appeal the Birss order, other courts may decide to ignore Apple's forced admission of guilt and, hey, there's still a chance that the companies might settle their legal differences before anything goes to trial.
We're talking about the two far-and-away most successful competitors in the exploding trillion-dollar market for smartphones and tablets. Whatever the final outcome of this skirmish, the larger war makes and breaks fortunes. Learn more about Apple's mobile strategy in a brand-new premium report, or just grab our totally free report on the mobile market as a whole.