Apple, Google appeal dismissal of Apple v. Motorola suit

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 48
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,349member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post



    Speaking of GatorGuy, I'm wondering why he's avoided the thread about Google thinking patents should become "de facto" standards if they become commonly used.

    I bet even he's trying to find some way to put a spin that favors Google, and since he can't come up with anything he's simply avoiding the issue altogether.


    What's to say that hasn't been said? I don't normally post something just to post.


     


    EDIT: I realized you may be sincerely curious about my view on what Google had to say. I assume you know I don't represent Google in any way, nor even normally advocate for them. (The only positives I can think of are some recent comments about Google Voice and the Nexus 7, both deserving of positive mentions IMO). In any case, let me finish pressure-washing the house and later today I'll try to put some thoughts together on how I personally see it.


     


    Link the thread you want me to comment in if you don't mind.

  • Reply 42 of 48
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    What's to say that hasn't been said? I don't normally post something just to post.

    I'd like to know your position on it. I don't always usually agree with you but you usually always create solid counterarguments that make me, at least, look at the situation a little differently than I had previously.
  • Reply 43 of 48
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Chairman Page, Supreme Ruler of The People's Republic of Googlestan, issued the following statement:


     


    Googlestan Information Minister Schmidt also released a statement:



     


    All hail the People's Republic of Googlestan!


     


    image

  • Reply 44 of 48
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post





    While that is apropos and rather truthful it is sad that Knowing the Facts died well before this.

    The woman didn't sue because the coffee was hot. She sued because it was scalding and well over a safe drinking temp. McDonald's even admitted to brewing their coffee that hot on purpose so it would stay hot longer and create more smell.

    Common Sense would agree that brewing a liquid at a temp so high it can cause 2nd degree burns whether in your lap or down your throat is worthy of being sued and both publicly and legally called out over it


     


    Maybe so, but it was still the silly woman who not only managed to spill it on herself, but then failed to accept responsibility for doing so.


     


    Sometimes bad things happen in life. We need to accept them when they do, learn from them, and stop implementing a system where an exchange of money is deemed to right all wrongs.

  • Reply 45 of 48
    From the article:

     

    Quote:

    *This issue is separate from what is presented to a court in a patent case. Lawsuits are governed by existing law as interpreted by the Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which has (under the Supreme Court) exclusive jurisdiction of appeals in patent cases.

     

    It seems to me Judge Posner is saying that he is not an expert on patent policy, with no comment on his ability to adjudicate under the law described above.

    I’ve read criticism of the Federal Circuit’s law of damages, that the court has oversimplified or insufficiently understood economic principles in some of its decisions. Judge Posner may have sounder economic understanding, but the Federal Circuit has the final say (practically speaking). Will the Federal Circuit be less unforgiving?
  • Reply 46 of 48
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Vadania View Post





    For some reason Google suing Apple conjures up images of the burglar who sues the homeowner for slipping down the stairs and hurting himself while carrying the homeowners large screen TV.

    Just my humble opinion...




    It tells a lot about the legal system of such a country.

  • Reply 47 of 48
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GTR View Post


     


    Maybe so, but it was still the silly woman who not only managed to spill it on herself, but then failed to accept responsibility for doing so.


     


    Sometimes bad things happen in life. We need to accept them when they do, learn from them, and stop implementing a system where an exchange of money is deemed to right all wrongs.





    The "problem" lies with the liberal nature of the USA.


     


    Whether or not said nature is good/bad is not the topic, but what I mean is, in a liberal system, people can/should sue companies for damages and over when gotten in trouble by wrongful company policy. Here, wrongful McDonald's policy (not "woman silliness", which btw sounds very sexist) caused the lady to drop the scalding coffee on herself and get burnt.


     


    In a less-liberal system, the woman would sue for damages (exclusively), and the public ministry would sue for more money, which would go to the government for the purpose of punishing the company, as well as for the purpose of "righting the wrongs caused to Society".


     


    In a communistic/socialist system, the State would sue/decide to send McDo execs to the Gulag.


     


    Pick your choice.

  • Reply 48 of 48
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,349member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    I'd like to know your position on it. I don't always usually agree with you but you usually always create solid counterarguments that make me, at least, look at the situation a little differently than I had previously.


    Done.


    http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/151423/google-argues-popular-apple-patents-are-de-facto-standards-essential/240#post_2152408

Sign In or Register to comment.