or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by hjb

  Nop, you are ignoring the fact that Galaxy Tab is not copy.  That Sammy attorney may have been confused or distracted by by the Judge or something.  Who knows what really happened.   Again nop, I use both iOS and Jelly Bean, so I am probably Apple/Google shill, but not as diehard as you.  I recommend different products to different people.  For example, I recommend iPhone and IPad to elders and someone who is less capable of handling handsets.  
    The only similarities (not even close to what Apple can call 'copy') are: 1. They are both tablets with rectangular shape with equal rims (same as prior tablets before the Apple patent),  2. Glass covered front. (except of course IPad has a hole ^^)
  If Apple is allowed this monopoly with the absurd design patent, we all loose except of course Apple and Apple shareholders.  Anyone with fair minded, except of course Apple and its shareholders, can see that.   BTW, I am not using it a lot, but my white IPad 2 with Zagg full body protection looks really beautiful.  It is just beautiful.  That's all.
  Good point Gatorguy!  
I like this 'not as cool' line.  It looks like a stupid reasoning, but I guess this line is intended to communicate Apple and Apple die-hard fans which seem to be isolated by day.  I see a humor in there.   Here is the full rulling. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2012/1882.html
I liked and actually enjoyed your comments even though I did not agree with you.  But, you are pouring out full of nonsense in this comment.     How about this? Regardless of how one feels about their Apple's ethics, their stealing of Apple's IP other's has clearly been highly profitable and has given them a production-level understanding of how to build superior handsets that other Android-based vendors can't match.(stealing, a quote by SJ)
Hahaha, you are joking right?  You and Koh gave me the best laugh this year.  What a joke!!!
Maybe not on your planet. It called the EARTH, lol.
So, what would be the irreparable harm that Apple would suffer when PI was not given?
According to Bloomberg Business Week, the Judge Koh said in the ruling that   “As Samsung itself concedes, the injunction will cause Samsung minimal harm because it has other tablet products on the market,”   So, the Judge acknowledges that there would be minimal harm to Apple if PI was not awarded to Apple.  So where is the irreparable harm to Apple?
New Posts  All Forums: