or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Gatorguy

They paid 26% or just acknowledged the possible tax obligation? As I recall taxes serve as the justification for leaving (moving?) the bulk of their profits overseas to various tax havens just to avoid them. And no Google doesn't operate any differently AFAIK, nor probably MSFT.
I think it's more likely his old contract expired. His current opinions are much more in keeping with his old patent battles in Europe. Holding hands with the very company he demonized for years, Microsoft, and taking a decidedly pro-software patent position never jived with his prior history.That doesn't necessarily mean he hasn't found a new client. I've often thought his opinions over the past couple of years to be intended for support of someone else's agenda so maybe...
I find it "profoundly troubling" that you'd jump in to denigrate another member on a subject you apparently aren't as familiar with as you imagine you are. Ignorance or dishonesty?Jessi, what unique ornamental element(s) does the '286 patent offer protection for? Yes, design patent applications require that the protected design be unique, as the USPTO words it " new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture."That's both logical and required. All the...
Apple paid income taxes equal to 26% of it's corporate profits? When and where was that?
Apple had commented about Rubin's past employment during an ITC hearing a couple years back. The claim is that he worked as a low-level engineer during the time his bosses invented the methods in the '263 patent, commonly called the Real Time API patent. Apple doesn't go so far as to say he helped in creating it or even that he would have been aware of their work on it. But the hi-level folks he answered to at that time were listed as the inventors. I've never seen a...
Certainly possible it's all being brought up to confuse the jury and there's not much at all to support the claims. I'm sure things will be clearer after this next week's testimony where at least a few more Google folk have been ordered to appear.
The '889 patent you've linked is not the same as the '286 we were discussing. If they were then one ot the other would be invalid. I've no problem with Apple protecting a novel design in any event. Not sure why I'm bothering to ask you again as I suspect the same non-answer.but here 'ya go anyway: What do you see as novel in th4 described design protected by the '286 patent? Any unique feature at all?
Not true at all. If someone can show use of the innovation prior to the patentee applying for a patent (prior art) the law has long allowed for it to serve as a possible basis for invalidating at least business method patents (software).. It's even more significant for all types of patents issued after September 16th, 2011. Whether a business method patent of not, those accused of patent infringement can now challenge validity by "establishing it commercially used, in...
Which part of the design that Apple lays claim to do you consider to be unique, novel?Examine the details for yourself. The only elements Apple is applying for protection of are denoted by solid lines. That would omit elements drawn with superfluous dotted lines that indicate where inapplicable items such as a speaker, or display or microphone or button might go. The only thing drawn with solid lines and thus claimed by Apple as a novel design is what sir? To me (and...
In the first paragraph you say patents are simply a license to a monopoly. In the last one you claim it's property, presumably similar to any other and with the same rights. Actually you had it right the first time IMO:A patent is at it's heart just a temporary government granted monopoly over an original invention or design and not a piece of property with full rights of ownership. That's the way the founders considered them, drawn from British law based on the doc you...
New Posts  All Forums: