or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by jungmark

This is so bunk and a waste of my taxes. The competitors can charge the same rate as Apple. They choose not to.
No it's not. 1. Facebook was released more than a year after the iPad. 2. When was the watch Sdk released?
When was the last time Apple release a product, then pulled it, only to release it again?
Can't wait for actual numbers.
Remember when the grey lady had journalistic integrity? Those were the days.
Are the design patents only being challenged here? Pretty sure the utility patents are a major component of the suit.Easy, FRAND is fair and reasonable and non discriminatory. You shouldnt be able to charge one company one price and another company 10x as much for the same patent simply because they can afford it.
No because if they were mostly dissatisfied, they would have chosen "dissatisfied" or "somewhat dissatisfied ".The fact is people rather complain than complement on the Internet. So based on that, 97% is fantastic.And your analogy is off. These aren't Apple fans but Apple watch owners. Many of them are non techie types. So a more appropriate analogy is surveying NBA ticket buyers on whether they think LBJ is great.
There's a difference between FRAND and non FRAND patents.Typical troll response. If Apple's design patents were so trivial, why didn't the major players come up with them first?Difference between FRAND and non FRAND and a difference between stealing and licensing.
Don't want to pay the damages, don't steal. It's simple: Damages for theft >> license agreements. If not, why would anyone want to pay licensing fees when they could steal and not pay a dime for years?
Google: we like de facto patents for free please.
New Posts  All Forums: