or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Cpsro

If Google is indemnifying Samsung, that seems like a nice reason to impose a punitive award of triple the jury's assessment. Can't have companies thinking they can infringe others' IP just because it won't cost them anything.
Source?You use the word "likely", which suggests you're merely hoping/conjecturing.
Yes, imagine, because that's far different from the reality. This device will only provide reasonably accurate results if what you're testing is in its database. If that salty, greasy spaghetti sauce at Olive Garden hasn't been quantified, then there's no telling what results you'll get--other than cardiovascular disease.
It's not blind trust, it's assessment of relative risk. Open source software has more than its own share of security issues and other bugs. Just because it's "open" doesn't mean any eyes--let alone educated, discerning eyes--are looking at it. Furthermore, a closed-source provider like Apple has a greater interest in fixing problems sooner. This is how Android has become a security and support nightmare, and iOS is the more secure and stable platform.
Bzzzt! Android is just a hunk of bytes. It does nothing without hardware to run it on.
And if the infringement is willful, the judge can triple the damages awarded by the jury.
Name one product Google produced (let alone sold) that practiced the art described in Apple patents.Samsung was sued here because Samsung was the infringer, not Google. The jury thought they were so smart in questioning this, but they were wrong.
And the new conversation is: Samsung is sick
Duh. Yes, I've priced the processors Apple uses (actually more expensive ones that are dual-processor-capable, which the ones in the Mac Pro are not). A dual 12-core system with a decent graphics card (for graphics only) costs less than Apple's top of the line Mac Pro and smokes it performance-wise.
But what's stopping Apple?
New Posts  All Forums: