or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Cash907

There was no court order prohibiting them from doing this.
Unless the judge specifically forbade them from making rejected evidence public, it's completely lawful.   Seems to me like Samsung is playing the long game here, and doesn't expect a favorable outcome from this judge. These tactics seem like they are setting up evidence that they were discriminated against, which they can use during the appeal, as well as building up their image in the court of public opinion.
  I see you're new here.
  Apple is patenting the wedge, and tech that other companies have already had on the market for years, but they're the INNOVATIVE ones?   Yup, chug that Koolaid, because you clearly swallowed any objectivity you had a long time ago.
  So you're saying it's ok even if it looks and functions the same, as long as the underlying mechanism is different? I think you need to rethink your statement, because you just completely invalidated Apple's suit against Samsung.
  It would certainly be more honest.   Not that I expect honesty from any company, mind you, even the oh so shiny house that Jobs built.
  But of course. This naturally explains Apple's 40% gross profit margin... their pursuit of quality.   *rolls eyes*   I have no problem with corporations making money. Hell, that's what corporations are SUPPOSED to do, but it really irks me when folks like Ive try to have it both ways here. That's naturally what is spurring Apple's ridiculous litigious actions of the last few years: Quality. We can't have other companies making "quality" products for less, now, can we?
  Glock is, and always will be, garbage compared to Walther.
And these ads are horrible. If they were Geek Squad ads, those of you who liked them would be trashing them, and you know it.   Ponder that a spell, and then comment back.
BBY employees don't get spiffs from the manufacturers either. Not sure where washing machine boy gets his info, but his whole schtick is getting old.
New Posts  All Forums: