Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

Judge will work it out. You do not fuck with a legal judgement in the UK - they will start pulling the big guns next. Place your bets: frozen assets or criminal charge?

Where in the legal judgement did it say it had to be "above the fold"? They could have specified this if they'd wanted it.

I believe the GPs point is that judges do not take kindly to cat-and-mouse games, where you technically follow the court order by the letter but twist and turn it in such a way that it's spirit is violated. The order is not intended as a challenge on how to best wriggle out of it, and just because the court did not explicitly specify every last detail of how the message must be displayed does not mean that it will tolerate any tricks.

By that token, though, the court did specify what they wanted: a link, 11pt text. So they'd not afraid of specificity. If they're wanted something more attention-grabbing, they could've said it must include, e.g. "a graphic at least x pixels by y pixels."

I think another way of looking at it is this: if they don't request a particular location for the link, do they think Apple's going to put it anywhere other than the bottom of the page? And if so, the consequence (where this javascript exists or not) is that on a great number of devices you won't see it unless you scroll down.

They don't have to also specify that the text should be in a color different than the background and is not covered by a black rectangle. There are rules for contempt of court. They include jail time. They should be applied for such repeat contempt.

What would that achieve? The people making the decisions are in the US, outside of the UK's jurisdiction. So the court would have to go after some minion in the UK office, punishing someone for the sake of punishing someone rather than for the sake of justice.

Oh please, are you really going to use the Nuremberg defense?

That wouldn't be a case of the Nuremberg defense, which is the excuse that "I was just following orders". It's entirely possible that none of the Apple employees in the UK were involved in the decision or implementation of how to post their court-mandated apology. In that case, the only employees in the UK's jurisdiction would be guilty only of working for the guilty corporation.

Yes, because an court order to make a statement is a lot like the Holocaust...

That's not what the term "Nuremberg defense" implies in the least.


From the link: One of the most noted uses of this plea, or "defense," was by the accused in the 1945–46 Nuremberg Trials, such that it is also called the "Nuremberg defense". The Nuremberg Trials were a series of military tribunals, held by the main victorious Allied forces of World War II, most notable for the prosecution of prominent members of the political, military, and economic leadership of the defeated Nazi Germany.

You don't get it. The phrase "Nuremberg defense" is not a reference to the trials, it's a reference to the type of defense. So, if you here that in conversation, they aren't equating the situation to the holocaust, but rather the type of defense used (I was just following orders).

The only person equating anything to the holocaust was you.

technically follow the court order by the letter but twist and turn it in such a way that it's spirit is violated

Isn't doing this the main reason we have lawyers in the first place?

It's a spirit of the law issue, again.

Judges aren't friggin robots. You don't get to fuck around and have them go "BEEP BOOP WELL TECHNICALLY NOT A VIOLATION BEEP BOOP".

The whole point of a judge is to, well, use his/her judgement. If this judge thinks Apple is fucking with him AGAIN, I can't imagine he'll be at all lenient. Apple is holding his authority in contempt.

This is a very slippery slope to go down. It's arguments like these that cause you to end up with laws that have lists of thousands of things in them.

Would you rather have fair use be a list of 10 things, and only those 10 things, or something that you should follow the spirit of?

Indeed. Do we need studies that show people do scroll below the fold? I noticed that on the Apple homepage the modules cut off at the bottom (on my resolution) it's clear there is more to the page. Seriously, it's 2012. Do we still have to fight about 'the fold?'

In the UK the judges will not be ammused. But this aspect of legal terminology does cover such matters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_and_spirit_of_the_law

I don't know how things work in the UK, but I wonder whether the equivalent of contempt charges will be forthcoming.

Toss a few of them in prison for a bit, and see whether that improves cooperation.

While I was being ascerbic, I was not being facetious.

We have a similar problem in the U.S.; in corporations, effectively no one ends up being personally responsible.

However, if an individual personally fails to implement a judicial ruling, that anonymization and "monefication" of penalty may dissolve.

I'm of very mixed opinion and feeling about several laws that may be involved -- both aspects of IP law and aspects of UK libel law.

But I also rather dislike unbridled corporate arrogance.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact