or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by hjb

I understand that was a damage retrial, not about whether Sammy infringed Apple's IPs.  And since then, I think, they appealed the first case.
I said I never seen anyone confused with plastic Galaxy.  That anyone includes, young, old, too old, geeks, non-geeks & etc, but not me.  Not confused and all got what they wanted.  And who are those confused people? The first jury trial verdict would hardly guaranty fact.  And I don't think Samsung admitted they infringed Apple's IPs.  
Nope you obviously confused Galaxy with Goophone.  I never seen anyone confused with plastic Galaxy.
So what implementation suggested here copying?  Have you seen or heard of Goophone?  
Have you read that document?  Well, we all do this sort of analysis ,don't you think so?  Speaking of 'Copying', have you heard about Goophone? 
My point was that the 'Copycat document' is not a copycat document and you can not abuse anyone doing what we all do.  We all inspired from everyone.
Why? Why? and not by Apple?
I read that whole document what you called "copycat document".  IMO, that is not a copycat document.   That is a competitive analysis with a trend leading product or design.  Basically all companies do this.   Have you seen that Sony inspired iPhone design?  That strikingly resembles later iPhone 4.
Nothing new really   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYMpMt0lwUY
 What are they? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFeC25BM9E0
New Posts  All Forums: