or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Tulkas

So much for the "firewall".
  yup.     He goes on to explain while the front is the same, they look different from the back. You know, the side you don't use or see day to day. So it isn't copied. Brilliant. As I mentioned, I think he must have meant they were different because from the back you can read "Apple" or "Samsung" and immediately know they are different,
For anyone that things the court order makes any sense at all, think of it this way. let's say you have something that is protected, whether it is patent, copyright, trademark, etc. You hold protection on it. Someone else that wants to have a product very, very similar to your decides to sue to have your protection invalidated. Note that you have not accused them of anything publicly in this jurisdiction at this point, they sue to have your protection invalidated. During...
I would suggest the following ad:     After being sued by Samsung and in accordance with the court ruling, Apple hereby states that Samsung did not copy Apple's iconic iPad.   Clearly Samsung developed their tablet with no inspiration from Apple's design.   We would like to close this statement with additional comments from the court with which we wholeheartedly agree.   "When I first saw the Samsung products in this case I was struck...
Because Samsung was asking for a ruling that their tablets didn't copy Apple's product. The judge admits they are the same, but then says they aren't copied.
The "accuser" in a lawsuit if the claimant. Samsung was the claimant in this case. I never claimed Apple wasn't the aggressor in other cases. In this case, Samsung clearly was the instigator of the lawsuit. So anyone claiming that Apple must suffer much be punished by the UK courts because they filed the suit in the UK, is basing their opinion on flawed information.   And as far as the Apple v HTC lawsuit, again in the UK, it was HTC that sued Apple. So if it was a...
It's actually completely true. Apple only made claimed in the counter suit. Samsung sued over the design first, in the UK. Specifically to have the design protection declared invalid.     From the actual court document:   Plain English.
See when I read it, I think "what was the judge smoking?". First he acknowledges the Samsung was similar to the iPad, to the point of being the same.       But then he says an informed user would know the difference. He acknowledges that he was not an informed user and that is why the appeared identical. he, a judge ruling on the case, believes users would be more informed than he is on matter of design. He further says they are differentiated by the design on the back of...
Samsung sued in this case, not Apple. So your entire argument, being premised on making the accuser, the one filing frivolous lawsuits, should have some skin in the game, is fundamentally flawed.
You know that it was Samsung that initiated the frivolous lawsuit over design 'patents' right?
New Posts  All Forums: