or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by whatever71

on a serious note though it's very very sad when companies resort to legal action over stuff like the above.   And surely someone somewhere has challenged the patent application?
  Now this is a classy one!  One that I'm sure apple would be more than happy to apply for patent & subsequently use in legal cases as would fit nicely with any claims to shape of tablets etc :)     Originally Posted by hill60  A wishy washy ruling from an idiotic pack of fools   Does this class as a double negative in which case being idiotic when already a fool makes them wise or clever!?  
  Does anyone have any figures to show how many mobile cases are ongoing?  I would genuinely be interested to see if apple top that list (as aggressors) or to see if it's actually the press that have singled them out.  Can't really argue with press picking up on some of the apple cases or comments used in cases though; scroll to bounce, shape of phone, trying to trademark app store, claiming people buy other brands thinking they are apple, claiming frand for non frand...
  I understand the difference in the words; I also understand that the uk press in particular wouldn't use words like inaccurate & misleading when untrue & incorrect packs more punch.  I don't think we'll know exactly who said what until a full transcript of the session is made available - if it ever will be.   Your comments on baffoons; not bad points there - it is the legal system though so you should expect nonsense to slip through where common sense should...
I think this shows who made the comment ref untrue info.  Admittedly this was off the dailymail so in no way can i guarantee this isn't made up!  Looks like it was the Samsung lawyer who made the comment, not one of the judges that gave the slap     The ruling came after a lawyer representing Samsung today told Lord Justice Longmore, Lord Justice Kitchin and Sir Robin Jacob that Apple had published a notice on its website on October 26 - in 'purported compliance'...
And what about the many worldwide cases that haven't gone in apple's favour?  Surely they too would add context to the uk decision rather than putting comments which imply the england verdict is the odd one out?  And are the English judges baffoons because they ruled against apple or is there something I don't know that you do?  Agreed though that Apple should have bent over & took it once & for all which they may have finally done. Another question for you that is off...
  Trading standards would possibly have something to say about apple & any other company using the word best to describe their products :)   Oh,english humour (note, not humor) in use there before anyone goes off & comes back with websites advertising their products as the best.  
man, you don't stop do you?  You need to go back to the reason for this thread.  What you keep going on about is noise - the english court required apple to do something simple - they were to redress the balance after implying that the english decision was wrong.  You are siding with apple making the comments about irrelevant german case & american case which as we all know stands a good chance of being overturned - this clearly shows apple playing with the facts.  I'm...
Yes Tulkas, but you're saying that the legal result is wrong & apple were blatantly saying the same.  Get over it, apple lost the appeal fair & square & have now semi-complied with the newspaper ads at least.  Interestingly there's some sites speculating that even that could cause a problem with no easy identification that the ad was from apple! As for attacking the person, take that up with the global moderator that inspires all on here to do just that.  Aah, I feel the...
New Posts  All Forums: