I assume that you, as a moderator, can see the email addresses. You could have tested the address and you would have found that it is in fact a real e-mail address. I call you out for lying on that one.
As to being someone who has already been banned. That is outright nonsense. I call you out for lying on that.
Regarding the "shut up and stop lying". (sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander :-) )
I am not quite sure exactly what you are accusing me of with respect to lying, but I am sure you can be more precise on that if you chose to do so,
Regarding the Apple/Motorola FRAND dispute. The public record (ie, court transcripts, judgements and rulings, and submissions/affadavits of the parties) shows that Apple is not disputing using Motorola FRAND patents without paying. They are not arguing about the usage of the FRAND Patents. They are simply refusing to (a) pay what Motorola suggested (2.5%) (b) enter into negotiations to find a mutually acceptable alternative.
Instead, they immediately sued in Wisconsin, trying to get the court to set license fees, and got their claim tossed. That had already happened in Judge Posner's court, albeit with different reasoning, but the same result ... dismissed with prejudice.
Among other problems you seem to have is a steadfast refusal or perhaps simply the inability to distinguish between assertions/claims in a litigation, and Facts.
In general a party to litigation will naturally attempt to present their case in the best possible light. The opposing party will do the same. The whole point of a court is to adjudicate and to determine (a) the FACTS and (b) what to do in the context of the claims and the facts.
For example: Elswhere you say "Apple KNEW" that Samsung was stealing their IP/Design. Apple didn't "Know". Apple ASSERTED something, which is absolutely not necessarily true or a "Fact", and presented some evidence to support their assertion. With respect to the registered design (in the EU), their claims were rejected in the final instance by the court. In other words, the court found that Apple's claims were false and not supported by the evidence.
As far as I am aware, the UK case is the ONLY case that has actually reached final judgement anywhere in the world with respect to Apple's "thermonuclear war". In all other jurisdictions in the US and EU, the cases are still either in the preliminary phase (prior to the initial judgement), or pending appeal. As they say, the show is not over till the fat lady sings.
So to present any of the assertions of either party as if they are "FACTS" is simply nonsense ... or if you want to put it in a less polite way, "lies".
Returning to the "shut up" part: It may be that it is uncomfortable to you to be confronted with views and opinions that do not match your personal agenda.
It may also be the case that my view of what is "Just" or my ethical values do not correspond to yours. That would not surprise many people. For one thing, it appears that you are an American, and you seem to have a personal agenda. I am more interested in seeing justice done and ethical values maintained, and I am not an american. In fact I am an expat Kiwi living in Germany. (not that that is relevant except to emphasize the point that I probably do not share your cultural values. It is abundantly clear that I don't share your ethical values).
I do have a personal agenda : If I feel that either justice is not being done, or if ethical values are being violated, I will call it out, whether you like it or not. It has nothing to do with cool toys or a particular large company. (I work for a large multinational in its EU HQ and I could tell you a thing or two about the machinations of large concerns.)