Originally Posted by Graham
My understanding is that Apple came straight out of the court case and repeated their line about Samsung 'blatantly copying', in spite of the fact that the case had basically just ruled that they didn't.
Samsung complained that the constant repetition of this statement was commercially damaging to them. The judge said that Apple were entitled to express their opinion, but concurred that some redress was required to counteract what is effectively propoganda, given that the ruling was that no blatant copying had in fact taken place.
I wonder if this is connected with the UK having stronger libel laws than the US.