or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Gatorguy

It was "out" in the last trial almost two years ago. Nothing in this story is actually new apparently. It's all old recycled stuff that was written about 18 months ago or more.http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/151854/quite-smooth-samsung-actually-sold-1-10-of-the-2-million-galaxy-tabs-it-claimed-in-2010
Ah, so when you can't dispute the facts or find a flaw in the logic it's time for the trump card: Impune the character of the poster. So are congratulations in order for your timely investment in a time-honored playground tradition?
Intellectual property as opposed to real property where your ownership of it doesn't expire after a relatively short period of time. They are not one and the same or have the same rights granted them by the Constitution.
I think you meant that for @Evilution
Patents are not real property and not treated as such, evidenced by separate and unrelated laws for them on US books and separate special mention in the Constitution. What do you think the founders meant by "promote the progress of science" etc. as the stated reason for US patents?
Why should that be an issue? If you look at the reason the US found a reference to patents to be valuable enough to be included in the Constitution it wasn't simply property rights. The stated purpose of US patents is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts". How does getting a software patent, not using it in a product, but trying to prevent anyone else from using it either meeting the founders rational for US patents enshrined in the Constitution?
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/178163/exclusive-apple-vs-samsung-docs-reveal-galaxy-tab-was-a-flop-and-samsung-knew-it#post_2514508
Nope didn't miss it. I pointed it out as a matter of fact, highlighting Dick Applebaum's followup post.
Thanks! That's a good example of a helpful and informative post . So there's really no new "top secret sales data revealed" in this article. As DED would have said, we've seen all this before... and reported right here at AI.
Well obviously there's no "if" since Samsung clarified what the numbers concerned in a public statement published by leading news media and distributed to millions of readers.EDIT: In the next post Dick found real reasons to look at Samsung as unethical and a poor business neighbor. I probably don't like Samsung as a company any better than you do but with so many verified instances of Samsung executives shortcomings' and the company's proven questionable practices there's...
New Posts  All Forums: