Apple has lost an appeal against a July ruling that said Samsung's Galaxy Tab did not copy its iPad design.
London's High Court said the Tab's design was not similar to the iPad, therefore, Samsung did not infringe on Apple's designs.
Apple originally sued Samsung and lost a July ruling because the judge said Samsung's products were "not as cool" as Apple's. The judge then ordered Apple to publish ads, delivering the message that Samsung's product did not infringe.
"We continue to believe that Apple was not the first to design a tablet with a rectangular shape and rounded corners and that the origins of Apple's registered design features can be found in numerous examples of prior art," a Samsung spokesperson said to the BBC. "Should Apple continue to make excessive legal claims in other countries based on such generic designs, innovation in the industry could be harmed and consumer choice unduly limited."
Apple claimed that the front face and shape of the tablets were the same. The BBC reports that one of the three judges in the case owned an iPad and explained why Apple lost the ruling.
Because this case (and parallel cases in other countries) has generated much publicity, it will avoid confusion to say what this case is about and not about," wrote judge Sir Robin Jacob.
"It is not about whether Samsung copied Apple's iPad. Infringement of a registered design does not involve any question of whether there was copying: the issue is simply whether the accused design is too close to the registered design according to the tests laid down in the law."
"So this case is all about, and only about, Apple's registered design and the Samsung products."
According to Reuters, Samsung stated, "We continue to believe that Apple was not the first to design a tablet with a rectangular shape and rounded corners."
The South Korean company added, "We continue to believe that Apple was not the first to design a tablet with a rectangular shape and rounded corners and that the origins of Apple's registered design features can be found in numerous examples of prior art."
Reports say today's ruling should be the end of the battle between the two in Europe.