AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Judge calls Apple motion to reconsider Motorola ruling 'troubling'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Judge calls Apple motion to reconsider Motorola ruling 'troubling' - Page 2

post #41 of 56
4/3/12 at 8:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I'm assuming he is French speaking judging by his grammar.

Reply
Reply
post #42 of 56
4/3/12 at 8:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Thank you for the encouraging comments. I'll work harder at recognizing if I'm not being objective too..

You are more than welcome!

Your input is always appreciated, regardless of content.

You just keep on hanging in there.

Don't let anybody throw you off!

Reply
Reply
post #43 of 56
4/3/12 at 9:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

It is possible that Apple's attorneys simply messed up.

It's also possible that another judge would disagree with the reasons for denial.

Apple could be setting up a reason to appeal if they lose.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 56
4/3/12 at 10:03pm
Although Apples move to intel processors was one of the best ever, I remember a time when Apple depended on Motorola to make their processors. And I do remember a statement that Motorola didn't care is Apple supply wan't being met. Motorola din't give a shit. Basically that was the statement made by motorola. And yes IBM was making the G4 and G5 processor. But Apple depended on Motorola to come through. When Apple switched to Intel they basically told Motorola to shove it. Now Motorola decides to go after Apple and Apple is huge and has 100 billion saved. Apple is going to go Thermal Nuke on them. It's payback MF.
An Apple man since 1977
Reply
An Apple man since 1977
Reply
post #45 of 56
4/4/12 at 4:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

No sir, no sir and no sir. The case has not been tried, so no infringement has been proved and the patent has not been ruled valid. I can only assume you've confused proof of patent validity with the arguments made and accepted in claims construction.

If your statement that the patent has been ruled valid and infringed were true then the only thing remaining would be establishing the damages. That's clearly not what this is about at this stage.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._motorola.html
"Judge Richard Posner has issued an order upholding some of Apple's patent claims against Motorola Mobility that one analysis believes will likely result in a finding of infringement on Motorola's part."

Oh, and btw, since you seem so willing to attack Apple for making "silly" claims:
"Mueller viewed Posner as having "expressed some annoyance" at one of Motorola's arguments. The handset maker had argued that an example of a 27-degree angle in Apple's patent meant that the patent was only limited to that angle. After reading the patent, Mueller himself believes that the 27-degree angle is "clearly identified" as just an example.

"I reject Motorola's argument (this is the third time they've made it and the third time I reject it) that the structure must be limited to the 27-degree angle used as an example by the specification," Posner wrote."

Sounds like Posner likes to get irritated at everyone.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #46 of 56
4/4/12 at 4:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._motorola.html
"Judge Richard Posner has issued an order upholding some of Apple's patent claims against Motorola Mobility that one analysis believes will likely result in a finding of infringement on Motorola's part."

Oh, and btw, since you seem so willing to attack Apple for making "silly" claims:
"Mueller viewed Posner as having "expressed some annoyance" at one of Motorola's arguments. The handset maker had argued that an example of a 27-degree angle in Apple's patent meant that the patent was only limited to that angle. After reading the patent, Mueller himself believes that the 27-degree angle is "clearly identified" as just an example.

"I reject Motorola's argument (this is the third time they've made it and the third time I reject it) that the structure must be limited to the 27-degree angle used as an example by the specification," Posner wrote."

Sounds like Posner likes to get irritated at everyone.

Your own link say your statement that the patent is valid and infringed is absolutely wrong. "An analyst" thinks it might result in an infringement ruling. Even that would assume this goes to a trial and final judgement rather than settling beforehand. As for the patent validity, no ruling has been made on that. So far it's been about claims construction and what arguments will be accepted with regard to the patent claims. All pre-trial preliminary stuff to set the stage.

It's better just to admit a mistake when it happens, say thanks for the clarification and move on. Otherwise the hole just gets deeper.

As far as attacking Apple, I did nothing of the sort, nor used the word "silly" AFAIK. I actually said Apple had no direct blame for raising the ire of the judge IMO but that they needed to take a hard look at the legal team representing them to help assure this would be an isolated incident.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #47 of 56
4/4/12 at 4:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I'm assuming he is French speaking judging by his grammar.

His bio indicates he is, but I didn't catch the grammar clues. Very observant!

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #48 of 56
4/4/12 at 4:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Your own link say your statement that the patent is valid and infringed is absolutely wrong. "An analyst" thinks it might result in an infringement ruling. Even that would assume this goes to a trial and final judgement rather than settling beforehand. As for the patent validity, no ruling has been made on that. So far it's been about claims construction and what arguments will be accepted with regard to the patent claims. All pre-trial preliminary stuff to set the stage.

It's better just to admit a mistake when it happens, say thanks for the clarification and move on. Otherwise the hole just gets deeper.

As far as attacking Apple, I did nothing of the sort, nor used the word "silly" AFAIK. I actually said Apple had no direct blame for raising the ire of the judge IMO but that they needed to take a hard look at the legal team representing them to help assure this would be an isolated incident.

You're always attacking Apple. That's what you do.

Thanks for your point of view, random guy on the Internet. I'm sure Apple's legal team has no idea what they're doing.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 56
4/4/12 at 4:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

You are more than welcome!

Your input is always appreciated, regardless of content.

You just keep on hanging in there.

Don't let anybody throw you off!



You're not so far off. Reminds me of a little fishing adventure from several years ago (may be severely understated). Amazing the bets that are acceptable to a 17 year old.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #50 of 56
4/4/12 at 4:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Are you?

You obviously don't know what happened other than a third hand version of it. You certainly were not involved in Apple's legal strategy discussions. There may well have been a good reason for what Apple did.

It's interesting, isn't it, that a few people are reacting so passionately to this without being "in the room"? Invoking the name of Jobs, calling Apple lawyers incompetent, ....

It may be true. It may not be.

Why throw faux passion around when we are all simply oblivious of what's going on?
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 56
4/4/12 at 5:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Thanks for your point of view, random guy on the Internet. I'm sure Apple's legal team has no idea what they're doing.

Thanks for your comments 'nuther random guy on the internet. I'm sure it would be impossible for any legal team representing Apple to make any errors.

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
post #52 of 56
4/4/12 at 7:31am
I'm still trying to figure out why I so often have the mysterious urge to yell:

"Don't make me pull this forum over and separate you two."

or maybe:

"I can turn this forum around right now and you two can spend the rest of the weekend in your rooms."

Reply
Reply
post #53 of 56
4/4/12 at 8:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Why throw faux passion around when we are all simply oblivious of what's going on?

Sauce for the Gander?
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 56
4/4/12 at 12:11pm
Apple should threaten to stop selling all of its products in the US. That will teach everyone not to mess with Apple.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 56
4/5/12 at 5:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

He's regarded as one of the most brilliant and well-respected jurists in the US. The most cited legal scholar of the century with numerous books to his credit, Florian Mueller refers to him as a "rockstar" in the legal community. He's certainly not your run-of-the-mill Judge according to every article I can find on him.

it wouldn't hurt for you to do a little research on him if you haven't heard of him before.

But Posner doesn't hold a candle to Judge Judy. Now THERE's a jurist!
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 56
5/1/12 at 2:12pm

Judge Posner today issued a summary judgement in Motorola's favor concerning Apple's '949 touchscreen patent infringement claims. The judge has ruled Motorola does not infringe on any of the six claims asserted against it's use of finger taps on a touchscreen (the heuristics argument). According to the court it determined "that tapping an item on a touch screen wasn’t the same as swiping it."

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-01/motorola-mobility-defeats-apple-finger-swipe-patent-claim-1-.html


Edited by Gatorguy - 5/1/12 at 2:36pm

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply

melior diabolus quem scies

"No theatrics and no more personal attacks, just stick to the logic and tell me why I don't have any argument ~ Jragosta/2012

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Judge calls Apple motion to reconsider Motorola ruling 'troubling'