There's an article detailing today's testimony from Bederson as well as Adam Bogue, the more interesting witness in my view.
Yes but only in your view. Interesting, maybe. Helpful to their case, not at all. I looked at what the "evidence" and frankly Samsung is grasping at straws. The evidence shown was not even similar to the Apple patents. It wasn't even close. Sad.
I say let the devices in the trial. Apple is GOING to win this one, and then they'll just use the result to sue Samsung in every other country, anyway.
Don't want to burst your bubble, but US court decisions mean diddly squat in court cases in other countries, as the recent UK case showed. Believe it or not, the rest of the world is capable of having legal systems that are perfectly capable of judging law on their own merits, not those of the US.
Don't want to burst your bubble, but US court decisions mean diddly squat in court cases in other countries, as the recent UK case showed. Believe it or not, the rest of the world is capable of having legal systems that are perfectly capable of judging law on their own merits, not those of the US.
Also, do the apple patents in question have world/local equivalents?
Also, do the apple patents in question have world/local equivalents?
The rubber-banding/bounce-back one definitely does, but hasn't been found to be valid in either of the two courts cases where Apple has asserted it. Imagine Apple filed for touchscreen actions as well in several countries.
I say let the devices in the trial. Apple is GOING to win this one, and then they'll just use the result to sue Samsung in every other country, anyway.
Don't want to burst your bubble, but US court decisions mean diddly squat in court cases in other countries, as the recent UK case showed. Believe it or not, the rest of the world is capable of having legal systems that are perfectly capable of judging law on their own merits, not those of the US.
Yeah, logic doesn't prevail in the UK courts either. The prior art for slide to unlock was not really related. This is a problem in every country that has judges trying to understand technology and not the law. Also, this action in the UK invalidated Apple's patent. Now the company that was cited as prior art (I believe was based in the UK), can go sue all of the companies doing a gesture to unlock the device. Sounds more like revenue generation for the UK than it does upholding the law.
Then enlighten me. Show me how those devices hardware wise look like an iPhone. I'm not talking Touch Wiz, I've already admitted it very much looks like iOS.
Then enlighten me. Show me how those devices hardware wise look like an iPhone. I'm not talking Touch Wiz, I've already admitted it very much looks like iOS.
I have as much chance of convincing you as you are of convincing me otherwise. I'm afraid you're stuck with parroting for non-apple products for the rest of your life. I do thank you for doing your part in keeping this site going.
I'm afraid you're stuck with parroting for non-apple products for the rest of you life.
Or until he's banned.
"Oh no! I used the word 'banned'! Moderator overstepping his bounds! Threatening perfectly normal-and-totally-not-trolls-at-all users! YOU'RE OFF THE CASE, CALLAHAN!"
I have as much chance of convincing you as you are of convincing me otherwise. I'm afraid you're stuck with parroting for non-apple products for the rest of your life. I do thank you for doing your part in keeping this site going.
You're totally wrong. I'm fully capable of seeing the side of a proper argument. I won't dodge any questions posed to me as many do here nor am I anti-Apple. I do own Apple devices as well as Android ones. I'm just a realist and see things for what they are. I will readily admit that Samsung indeed copied Apple and in other ways they didn't.
"Oh no! I used the word 'banned'! Moderator overstepping his bounds! Threatening perfectly normal-and-totally-not-trolls-at-all users! YOU'RE OFF THE CASE, CALLAHAN!"
How boring would this forum be without a few naysayers, which is very different from the guys that come on here to spew pure hatred.
Comments
Did we watch the same game? I saw an American player get outright leveled by a Canadian player and no foul was called.
You need glasses, mon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I say let the devices in the trial. Apple is GOING to win this one, and then they'll just use the result to sue Samsung in every other country, anyway.
Don't want to burst your bubble, but US court decisions mean diddly squat in court cases in other countries, as the recent UK case showed. Believe it or not, the rest of the world is capable of having legal systems that are perfectly capable of judging law on their own merits, not those of the US.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid
Don't want to burst your bubble, but US court decisions mean diddly squat in court cases in other countries, as the recent UK case showed. Believe it or not, the rest of the world is capable of having legal systems that are perfectly capable of judging law on their own merits, not those of the US.
Also, do the apple patents in question have world/local equivalents?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko
Also, do the apple patents in question have world/local equivalents?
The rubber-banding/bounce-back one definitely does, but hasn't been found to be valid in either of the two courts cases where Apple has asserted it. Imagine Apple filed for touchscreen actions as well in several countries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I say let the devices in the trial. Apple is GOING to win this one, and then they'll just use the result to sue Samsung in every other country, anyway.
Don't want to burst your bubble, but US court decisions mean diddly squat in court cases in other countries, as the recent UK case showed. Believe it or not, the rest of the world is capable of having legal systems that are perfectly capable of judging law on their own merits, not those of the US.
Yeah, logic doesn't prevail in the UK courts either. The prior art for slide to unlock was not really related. This is a problem in every country that has judges trying to understand technology and not the law. Also, this action in the UK invalidated Apple's patent. Now the company that was cited as prior art (I believe was based in the UK), can go sue all of the companies doing a gesture to unlock the device. Sounds more like revenue generation for the UK than it does upholding the law.
Then enlighten me. Show me how those devices hardware wise look like an iPhone. I'm not talking Touch Wiz, I've already admitted it very much looks like iOS.
I have as much chance of convincing you as you are of convincing me otherwise. I'm afraid you're stuck with parroting for non-apple products for the rest of your life. I do thank you for doing your part in keeping this site going.
Originally Posted by uguysrnuts
I'm afraid you're stuck with parroting for non-apple products for the rest of you life.
Or until he's banned.
"Oh no! I used the word 'banned'! Moderator overstepping his bounds! Threatening perfectly normal-and-totally-not-trolls-at-all users! YOU'RE OFF THE CASE, CALLAHAN!"
You're totally wrong. I'm fully capable of seeing the side of a proper argument. I won't dodge any questions posed to me as many do here nor am I anti-Apple. I do own Apple devices as well as Android ones. I'm just a realist and see things for what they are. I will readily admit that Samsung indeed copied Apple and in other ways they didn't.
How boring would this forum be without a few naysayers, which is very different from the guys that come on here to spew pure hatred.