|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 30 2013 @ 10:52 AM EST |
I don't think Apple got all that. All the while this 'bad
publicity' for Samsung was going on their sales went through
the roof and they actually passed up Apple in smartphone
sales. In the end you could consider this a very expensive
but very successful ad campaign that put Samsung on the map
as a direct threat to Apple -- consumers took notice.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 30 2013 @ 03:49 PM EST |
We all know most of this is rubbish, but when they put all
of
these "facts" on their home page and in advertising, it
reaches potential
customers and sways them toward Apple
and/or away from Samsung.
I say
facts in quotes because they aren't necessarily facts,
but they are legally
allowed to say things that haven't been
proven false. They claimed Smasung
copied them and they did
win $1B dollars. only until after appeals court
will we
determine whether or not any of that is actually true... but
until then
Samsung's name is drug through the mud and Apple
gets nothing but good publicity
and more kool-aid to spread
to its followers.
Except Apple were
forced by the court to put on their UK only (sadly) homepage a message
clarifying the position accurately that Samsung had not copied them, along with
being close to being charged with perjury for posting an embellished message
trying to justify their actions (clear indication that they were guilty) with
which the court was not at all happy, forcing Apple to change it to a court
supplied text.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
