or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by tooltalk

  Well, not really.. IMO, losing money to patent trolls (*cough*) is not intellectual property theft.  And it remains to be seen whether Mr. Hogan's verdict will be upheld in the court of appeals (or whether it be declared a mistrial/retrial this December).  Samsung doesn't have to pay anything for at least another 2-3 years.   Given Samsung's mobile 100+% growth in revenue, units old, (90+% or $3B+ more yoy) profit, I think Samsung could easily afford to give away a...
  HTC made the same announcement a couple of years back - when Samsung wasn't able to keep up with HTC's demand, largely due to the increasing internal demand from Samsung mobile division.  I thought HTC switched from Samsung's AMOLED to SONY's TFT LCDs.   I'm not too surprised that HTC switched back to Samsung (from Sony), especially considering Samsung's large share of AMOLE manufactured worldwide, 95+%. Almost everyone in AMOLED business has manufacturing/yield...
    inspired < copied < stole
  so what is that rate?
  eh? Well, if Samsung's lawyers knew what they were doing, that crucial evidence, which was later leaked to the public, would not have been rejected in the first place (also note, a much greater number of Samsung's evidence/witnesses were rejected vs Apple's witness/evidence).   Furthermore, I don't think it's common for a member of the jury to run in a victory lap giving interviews as to how they came to such a biased verdict. After all, no other member of the jury came...
  I think everyone copies each other. In fact, I can't stop thinking about Braun T3 Radio when I look at iPods or iPhones; or Braun's LEI speaker when Apple's iMac.  We'll talk when Apple comes up with something *original*.   Apple lost the GUI lawsuit against Microsoft years back; there are still Apple fanboys out there claiming that Microsoft, a legitimate licensee of Xerox's patents, stole Apple's GUI. So what's your point again?   PS. I have no doubt Samsung...
Well, according to the court papers (Apple vs. Samsung), Apple made it clear that they don't license their core-patents, period.  Apple's patent offer to Samsung in 2010 largely consisted of non-core OS patents that had nothing to do with the recent lawsuit. That's just too bad that now Apple is trying to fight back Samsung with patents that Apple bought from Nortel & others. With $120+B in cash, Apple should seriously consider spending more on real technology R&D.
  Really?  where is iPhone 5 Mini?
  Well, there is nothing in FRAND / SEP dictating how much or what percentage patent holders can charge, is there?  The point of FRAND is to promote industry wide adoption by making their standard essential patents widely available for licensing & at fair, reasonable rates. Again, if Apple can charge around 20% for low-end Android phones for a handful utility patents, I don't see why 2.25% is unreasonable, unfair for FRAND patents?   What's more uncommon is Apple's patent...
  so let me get this straight, Apple wants to charge $25 / per device for a handful of utility patents, but also wants to access Samsung's vast communication 3G/UTMS patents for pennies in exchange for Apple's meager collection of comm/tech patents?
New Posts  All Forums: