Apple asks for US preliminary injunction of Samsung's Android 4.0 Galaxy Nexus

17810121323

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Since you are the one ignoring him, not the other way around, he can read your posts. Follow me so far?



    So why would you make a post that he can read just to ask others to relate to him the words he can read? Why not just say "Hey anonymouse, I have you on ignore so responding directly to me is useless."



    But it's not, is it, since you made your comment right after he responded directly to you and before someone else quoted him. Clearly you read his comment.



    or I can see the fact that he posted and decided to comment assuming he quoted me at least one of thost times....also I made that comment in an offhanded manner for rhetorical effect. I know full well he can read my comments.
  • Reply 182 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    We all talk about the patent system needing to be reformed but I hear very little talk about what needs to be changed, and even less about what it needed to be changed to.



    Personally I think code should be patentable. However, I think that it also has a lot in common with copyrighted material and therefore needs it's own system -or- it's own set of rules within the patent system. Beyond that I have no opinion stupid or otherwise about what this should be or how this should be enacted.



    You write code (at least I do), so it should be copyright protected.

    Patenting algorithms (ideas) is laughable and should never be allowed.

    So an algorithm isn't patentable but it's incarnation is copyright protected.

    In a broader sense: ideas can never be patented but their incarnation (in the form of parts of devices or blueprints) can be protected bij patents (and copyright).

    It's easy in fact.



    Edit:

    If an implementation of an idea is patented it should be an actual (working) device not some drawing or skech.

    It should also be properly researched for prior art and be open for public inspection (on a website) for a year or so to make sure no one easily contests the patent. After that, it should only be valid for a few years (2 or 3) and not for a decade or so. And if someone does find prior art even after the public inspection the patent is declared void.

    Also, patent application shouldn't cost a lot of money and shouldn't have renewal costs. So a few thousand dollars (2 or 3) should be the max. This will ensure that true inventors even outside large corporations can protect their work.



    J.
  • Reply 183 of 448
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,088member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    so no one can answer the question and point to examples...instead I get diversion after diversion...nice.



    I don't even recall the regulars speaking bad when Apple tried to sue that Spanish tablet maker.



    I think I recall Solipsism commenting that it looked bad, and I'm sure there were others. That wasn't one of their brighter moments and I'd be surprised to see it repeated.
  • Reply 184 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    I think I recall Solipsism commenting that it looked bad, and I'm sure there were others.



    well he's a diamond in the rough. I like him.
  • Reply 185 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    I know full well he can read my comments.



    So then what's with the immature, passive-aggressive response?



    PS: I seem to recall many "regulars" not agreeing with Apple going after the Spanish tablet maker.
  • Reply 186 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    So then what's with the immature, passive-aggressive response?



    PS: I seem to recall many "regulars" not agreeing with Apple going after the Spanish tablet maker.



    I intended to be immature and passive-aggressive....lol



    and perhaps...I'll have to revisit the thread.
  • Reply 187 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    yes...I've seen a shitload of Android criticism on Android sites...from the writers, the commenters...hell even on the forums on the Verge...criticism...



    Yet aside from "they should've kept the old icon" I never see any criticism from Apple supporters towards Apple.



    No matter what.



    MMS non existent? who cares, you don't need it!!



    Copy Paste? who cares...you don't need it!!



    Multitasking? who cares...you don't need it!!



    Old Badge notifications? who cares...the way it is is perfect!! (this I've heard complaints from, but I've also heard an uncanny number of supporters who now sing praises for the Android style notifications)



    Same old song and dance. and it's shocking...



    they can never be wrong, or going overboard, or a bane to the progress of an entire industry...or anything...they must be right..100% of the time for 100% of the things.



    It's truly a marvelous thing to watch...what CAN Apple do wrong?







    Just as soon as apple does something wring, anything, THEN you'll hear about it here. Until then, there is nothing to say.
  • Reply 188 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    So then what's with the immature, passive-aggressive response?



    Pay no attention, he wouldn't be the first troll to lie about putting someone on their ignore list. It's a convenient fiction that allows them to not respond to criticism of their posts when they have no defense. That's why they like to constantly remind everyone that some person is on their ignore list, so no one thinks they have no effective response. These people are really so transparent.
  • Reply 189 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    And I could probably keep going on with circumstantial point after circumstantial point, all of which point to the same conclusion. You can accept or reject that the evidence supports the conclusion, but my instinct is that it isn't just coincidence that all the signs on GG point in the same direction, that there's a reason they do, and that reason is that the conclusion they support is in fact the truth about him: he's a paid shill.



    But there's one crucial piece of evidence that you ignore:



    There do not exist any paid shills working for Google.
  • Reply 190 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Just as a mention, Google may have already patented a competing unlock method, filed in 2009 and published last year. IMO, this one doesn't appear to be bothered even by a broad interpretation of Apple's patent submission, which I personally don't expect anyway.



    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2011/0157029.html



    EDIT:@AbsoluteDesignz-

    Thanks for mentioning a possible notification patent. I had no idea they had filed one, but your comment sent me looking.

    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20090249247.pdf



    EDIT2: Could Google have applied for a patent on voice search on a smartphone prior to Siri? Certainly looks possible, and potentially problematic if so.

    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20100121636.pdf



    Whilst we're throwing patents around, Apple has this one filed on10/04/1995 for Search engine for phrase recognition based on prefix/body/suffix architecture

    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5832428.pdf



    Which has this as part of it's claim:



    Quote:

    System 100 may further include a sound processing device 125 for digitizing sound signals and transmitting such digitized signals to processor 102 or digital signal processor 108 via bus 101. In this manner, sound may be digitized and then recognized using processor 108 or 102. Sound processing device 125 is coupled to an audio transducer such as microphone 126. Sound processing device 125 typically includes an analog-to-digital (A/D) converter and can be implemented by known sound processing circuit. In addition, microphone 126 can be implemented by any known microphone or sound receiver.



  • Reply 191 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Those are bullshit questions. If you read you'll see nearly all posters have a pro and con attitude toward any company.





    What gives you a "con attitude" towards Apple?
  • Reply 192 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    But there's one crucial piece of evidence that you ignore:



    There do not exist any paid shills working for Google.



    Thanks for checking in tekstud.
  • Reply 193 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Every Apple fan I know of has admitted it when Apple made mistakes.



    Which mistakes have you admitted to? I don't remember a single one.
  • Reply 194 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jnjnjn View Post


    You write code (at least I do), so it should be copyright protected.

    Patenting algorithms (ideas) is laughable and should never be allowed.

    So an algorithm isnt patentable but it's incarnation is.

    In a broader sense: ideas can never be patented but their incarnation (in the form of parts of devices or blueprints) can be protected bij patents (and copyright).

    It's easy in fact.



    J.



    Technically an algorithm isn't an idea, it's an implementation/method of an idea. Implementations/methods is precisely what the patent system was created for.
  • Reply 195 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    lol I'm paid by Google?



    another thing...has there ever been one documented paid Google shill or are you inventing a category so you can place any undesirable in there so you do not have to deal with them?



    All the "evidence" points to it. Like Intelligent Design.
  • Reply 196 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Berp View Post


    "Has your sister ever been wrong before?" Of course not, and don't tell me otherwise to my nose...




    Apple is loved as dearly as a family member. Is that your point?
  • Reply 197 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post




    MMS non existent? who cares, you don't need it!!



    Copy Paste? who cares...you don't need it!!



    Multitasking? who cares...you don't need it!!



    Old Badge notifications? who cares



    See answer below - from an unimpeachable source.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    Inventing facts...



    Exaggeration..and you know that.



    Petard, meet hoist.
  • Reply 198 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Berp View Post


    "Has your bank manager ever been wrong before?" Of course, but on the whole he's been great... It is why he still is, is it not?



    "Has your friend ever been wrong before?" Of course, but on the whole he's great... That's why I swallow hard when he's not...



    "Has your sister ever been wrong before?" Of course not, and don't tell me otherwise to my nose...



    "Have I been ever wrong before?" Hadn't you been more than thrice, I would have had a house of crap to foreclose...





    Also...to answer your question...yes...yes...yes..and yes.



    I'm never afraid to tell someone when they are wrong or perceived to be wrong...are you saying you are?
  • Reply 199 of 448
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Do Apple fans even go to Android forums?



    No self-respecting Apple fan would. Only losers do, I imagine.



    (Incidentally, are there any Android forums?!)
  • Reply 200 of 448
    When is the decision on the preliminary injunction expected?



    Will the Ice Cream Sandwich melt before anybody has the chance to taste it?
Sign In or Register to comment.