or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by e_veritas

  Isn't the question at hand whether or not an alleged patent infringer can be held in contempt of court with regards to an Exclusion Order? It seems to me that none of your cited articles indicate they CAN, while Gatorguy's links clearly indicate they CAN'T.   An Exclusion Order is directed to Customs, not to the patent infringer, and they are the only ones who are compelled to action. In would make sense for the patent infringer to take action though, unless they wanted...
  They haven't decided between a single operating system, and they possibly never will. Samsung's business model is to make a wide variety of products, throw it at the wall, and see what sticks. This style is great for rapidly adjusting your designs to the changing consumer 'winds' in minor iterations, but obviously doesn't lend itself well to coming out with 'revolutionary' designs. Fortunately, we have risk taking innovators like Apple to fulfill that role...   In...
  Well, considering that one of the criteria for being granted a PI is for Apple to prove that they "face a substantial threat of irreparable damage or injury if the injunction is not granted", I would think this was self-evident.   I suppose one could make the argument that Apple's lawyers don't truly represent Apple, or they are possibly ignorant of how a preliminary injuction works. Is this something you are suggesting???
  Seriously?!?   I have news for you, Apple did NOT invent regular expressions in programming. This patent deserves to be grouped with the likes of Amazon's "one-click" patent, and the handful of other patents that are abusive, anti-competitive, and completely void of any "invention". Fortunately for Apple, the fact that this patent is SO old makes invalidation from "prior art" extremely difficult.
  You can't buy a Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany, you have to settle for a Galaxy Tab 10.1N instead !!!  Argh, that 10.1N has it's speakers pointing forward instead of to the side...
  I completely agree that Apple's brand image has taken a beating from all of these lawsuits. Many people associate today's Apple with yesterday's Microsoft, and I don't see how this is a good thing.   These lawsuits could be an effective tactic if they were actually benefiting Apple, but almost all of these cases have resulted in rulings not in Apple's favor, with the rest being 'watered-down' rulings with nominal impact.
  Right, because since Apple already makes the MOST profit, they have NO interest in any growing their profit anymore. /s   Your logic never ceases to amaze me...
  Considering that Samsung sells more smartphones than any other company, that comment is just plain silly...
  Why do you keep using the 0.9% figure? That percentage may be beyond the range of error to be significant, but that percentage only tells us that Apple's marketshare growth has increased more than Google's. The original contention to the figure was the article saying Google had "ceded" marketshare. Since 'cede' means to lose, there is only 1 percentage that is relevant to that phrase, and that is the claim of a 0.2% loss of marketshare on Google's part. That 0.2% IS NOT...
  Right, because humans are obviously unnatural... /s
New Posts  All Forums: