or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by DavidW

 That's what it cost if you pay month by month. It's only $70/year if you pay all at once. 
 You got to have a hole in your head, if you think the VR seen in "The Matrix" will ever become a reality. 
I know for sure iTunes backup or ask you if you want to backup before it restore your iPhone to factory settings. I have a friend who's not tech savvy at all, and was trying to transfer some photos from her iPhone to her friends computer (a PC). In the process her iPhone froze. When she disconnected the iPhone form the computer, all she got was a "plug into iTunes" message. So she went back to iTunes on her friends computer and thought "restore" was what she needed to do....
A non SEP patent for a feature that every phone maker wants to have in their phones is way more valuable than any SEP patent that every phone maker has to have in their phones. SEP patents doesn't make one phone any different from the next. Which is the whole point of having SEP patents. It's the non SEP patents for features that is unique and desirable in a phone that is valuable. It can make the difference between consumers buying one phone over another and paying more...
 So far, it's not the regulators that Apple has to be concern about, it's the judges.  Well, it doesn't matter what Mueller thinks. Obviously, Samsung didn't think this was going to help their case, otherwise they wouldn't have dropped the SEP patents from their suit against Apple. 
 I know that. What I was questioning was how the original post cited that Mueller said that Apple was shooting itself in the foot by stating that their patents are worth such a high licensing fee, when they were also fighting a case against Samsung for the high fee they wanted for their SEP patents. But if the 5 patents Apple is suing for are not SEP, then what does it matter how much they ask for and how is it hurting  Apple with their case against Samsung abusing...
 I think you're misreading the original post. It's Apple that is claiming that the 5 patents they are suing for would cost Samsung $40 per device. Obviously it was Samsung that was unwilling to accept thoses terms, but used the patents anyway. 
  Which is why I don't see anything wrong with asking a $40 per device in licensing fees if they are not SEP patents.
 What did Motorola/Goolge say when they were seeking injunctions against Apple and Microsoft, with their SEP patents no less ............. oh yeah ........... "It only takes one bullet to kill".  What's good for the Google is good for the gander.  And just to put in perspective how much $1B is going to hurt Samsung ....... http://www.androidauthority.com/reuters-samsung-14-billion-ads-marketing-galaxy-other-devices-this-year-320700/
 I must have missed the part where it's stated that the 5 patents that Apple are using in this case against Samsung are SEP patents and therefore subject to FRAND terms. 
New Posts  All Forums: