So when Google Motorola can't innovate, they litigate and yet another case of Google mimicking Apple (i.e. the thermonuclear patent litigation strategy)
Yeah, how dare they legally protect their intellectual property.
Just when I wonder if Tallest Skil's pre-emptive postings at the beginning of a thread are a little excessive, we have a fresh bunch of trolls taking a piss here. And I'm quoting TS rather than the poster he quoted since I don't want to mess up people's block lists.
I've decided I'd rather read TS posts in the beginning. That at least stops these newbie trolls and only the veterens come out to show us how wrong we are.
I hope Google wins and get most of Apple products ban from the US. Karma is a b. I wonder how Apple will defend themselves?
How does it feel having it turn against you now Apple?!
Originally Posted by Van Lustre
…Apple's really ridicules patent such as: rectangle with rounded corners, swipe to unlock, tried to patent multi-touch which was already invented by Diamond Touch and…
Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.
What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment?
Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.
What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment?
No, I think the official list puts that one just after "Apple stole the GUI from Xerox".
Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.
What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment?
LOL! you know it!
I laughed at your comment almost as hard as when i laughed when Tim Cook claimed Apple innovates and everyone else copies. Then brings out a phone with 4G TWO YEARS LATER THAN EVERYONE ELSE
But your comment was pretty funny too, i ROFL'd, LOL! Good one! You crack me up.
You know what, i bet they BINGED IT!!! HAHAA. Oh man, Good stuff Skil.
Of all the patents, the only one that seems remotely valid is '580, as the others are either way too obvious or way too ambiguous. That said, I hope all of these companies take their patent litigation to the very end and get each other's devices banned. It is also interesting to see Google ask for so many devices to be banned based on a few patents while at the same time trying to argue that the Samsung Galaxy Nexus shouldn't be banned precisely on the same grounds.
I laughed at your comment almost as hard as when i laughed when Tim Cook claimed Apple innovates and everyone else copies. Then brings out a phone with 4G TWO YEARS LATER THAN EVERYONE ELSE
But your comment was pretty funny too, i ROFL'd, LOL! Good one! You crack me up.
You know what, i bet they BINGED IT!!! HAHAA. Oh man, Good stuff Skil.
You're on ludicrously thin ice as it is. Do you really want to have to create a sleepy4 (which will be banned immediately)?
I hope Google wins and get most of Apple products ban from the US. Karma is a b. I wonder how Apple will defend themselves?
How does it feel having it turn against you now Apple?!
An injunction is appropriate when consumer confusion is at stake. It makes sense because Apple claims (whether or not you agree) that Samsung's product on the market is causing them to lose sales due to confusion. Apple posts a bond in case they lose. If Apple loses, they pay to make up lost sales to Samsung.
Motorola is not claiming consumer confusion. So why, in the heck would you think it's appropriate for Google should get an injunction against Apple's products. They're not losing sales of their own products due to consumer confusion. If Motorola wins, Apple will pay them licensing fees retroactively.
This isn't junior high. Google will not get an injunction against Apple just because Apple got an injunction against an Android maker. There are actual reasons for injunctions.
An injunction is appropriate when consumer confusion is at stake. It makes sense because Apple claims (whether or not you agree) that Samsung's product on the market is causing them to lose sales due to confusion. Apple posts a bond in case they lose. If Apple loses, they pay to make up lost sales to Samsung.
Motorola is not claiming consumer confusion. So why, in the heck would you think it's appropriate for Google should get an injunction against Apple's products. They're not losing sales of their own products due to consumer confusion. If Motorola wins, Apple will pay them licensing fees retroactively.
This isn't junior high. Google will not get an injunction against Apple just because Apple got an injunction against an Android maker. There are actual reasons for injunctions.
"Consumer confusion" is hardly a requirement for an injunction. Do you have any sources to back up this claim?
An injunction is appropriate when consumer confusion is at stake. It makes sense because Apple claims (whether or not you agree) that Samsung's product on the market is causing them to lose sales due to confusion. Apple posts a bond in case they lose. If Apple loses, they pay to make up lost sales to Samsung.
Motorola is not claiming consumer confusion. So why, in the heck would you think it's appropriate for Google should get an injunction against Apple's products. They're not losing sales of their own products due to consumer confusion. If Motorola wins, Apple will pay them licensing fees retroactively.
This isn't junior high. Google will not get an injunction against Apple just because Apple got an injunction against an Android maker. There are actual reasons for injunctions.
That argument just doesn't make sense, if Apple can lose sales to confusion, then it is possible that sales could be lost due to features included in in iPhones etc which are allegedly in breach of these patents. After all Siri was a major selling point, an injunction should be judged on the likely hood of upholding the claims, but I don't know what the criteria are.
Why do you say that? The one I noted (673) was issued in the year 2000. Apple was not at all in the phone scene at that time. As I recall Motorola had some unique and functional voice recognition software on their phones at the time. Why shouldn't they patent it?
I has nothing to do with the time the 'patent' is issued.
Software patents should never be allowed.
They stifle innovation and prevent independent software makers from writing great software.
With software patents you can only write software if you are protected by a large corporation.
Software - and thereby the investment in it - is already protected by copyright and that is sufficient.
I am not at all impressed from what I read from the patent you mention.
"Freedom of speech"? What a cry baby. Please don't go, we need your informed opinion to counter our fanaticism.
Yeah, so what of it? Why don't you try to attack my argument instead of me? What you just did is called Ad Hominem, an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
Dude, I'm not saying I completely disagree with you...but your candor does nothing to further discussion...
And yes...the same bill of rights that allows you to say whatever you want as wantonly as possible allows me the same freedoms.
=D If you want to debate I'm up for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn
So when Google Motorola can't innovate, they litigate and yet another case of Google mimicking Apple (i.e. the thermonuclear patent litigation strategy)
Motorola is the first one to create wireless communication device called Cell Phone. They were also the first to innovate their first large phone into a more portable device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.
What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment?
Your the same as PatchyThePirate. Since your a GM, I'm going to say.... No Comment
P.S. I had to come back since I find it very entertaining. Call me hypocrite if you want.
Well, no.. US Constitution Bill of Rights state that I have freedom of speech. I'll say what ever I want if it does not violate the terms, rules and condition of this forum but this will probably be my last post.
If you look at some of Apple's really ridicules patent such as: rectangle with rounded corners, swipe to unlock, tried to patent multi-touch which was already invented by Diamond Touch and
comparing to Google's patents you'll see that Apple isn't all that great. I seriously don't get why Apple Fans keep backing up Apple even if they make a ridicules lawsuit against other company.
The bill of rights says you have freedom of speech. It does not grant you that right to come on to private property (eg a forum) and do whatever pleases you. If the moderators decide to delete posts that they disagree with, that's with their rights too.
That said, most forums I've been to that weren't populated only by trolls, don't moderate things until someone crosses a legal line, and at that point it's more dangerous to allow the activity to continue. The android fans are more than welcome to come and defend their side of a debate, but do note the forum is part of "Apple Insider" and is not exactly a neutral playground. Are there even notable android fan sites?
This filing is by Quinn Emanuel, the same law firm that we've been watching represent Samsung against Apple in California. The mighty John Quinn's law firm, in other words
Is that the same "mighty" firm that has been sanctioned 4 times by the judge in just one trial and who keeps violating direct judicial orders? And the one who managed their time so badly that Apple had hours to present the final evidence in the case without any rebuttal from Samsung? And the one where they voluntarily provided the evidence Apple needed to demonstrate that consumers were being confused?
I'm not at all impressed with this "mighty" law firm.
Not to mention, of course that their facts are all wrong. They claim that Apple started this by going thermonuclear on Google. In reality, Apple has NEVER filed suit against Google. Even the Motorola suits were started by Motorola, not Apple.
Not to mention, of course that their facts are all wrong. They claim that Apple started this by going thermonuclear on Google. In reality, Apple has NEVER filed suit against Google. Even the Motorola suits were started by Motorola, not Apple.
So much for 'don't be evil'.
Yeah, Apple has never filed suit against Google. Even you know that they're trying to rack up wins prior to engaging Google so they have something to show in court.
Apple started the patent wars. This is their fault. The patent system is a joke, a broken mess at best, and this is what comes of it.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van Lustre
I hope Google wins and get most of Apple products ban from the US. Karma is a b. I wonder how Apple will defend themselves?
How does it feel having it turn against you now Apple?!
Probably in the same way that they have been defending themselves against Motorola's attacks ever since MOTOROLA STARTED THIS BY SUING APPLE FIRST.
So when Google Motorola can't innovate, they litigate and yet another case of Google mimicking Apple (i.e. the thermonuclear patent litigation strategy)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Yeah, how dare they legally protect their intellectual property.
Just when I wonder if Tallest Skil's pre-emptive postings at the beginning of a thread are a little excessive, we have a fresh bunch of trolls taking a piss here. And I'm quoting TS rather than the poster he quoted since I don't want to mess up people's block lists.
I've decided I'd rather read TS posts in the beginning. That at least stops these newbie trolls and only the veterens come out to show us how wrong we are.
Hmmm, that's interesting.
I thought Apple were the 'innovator for the world?'
That's what Cook said right? Someone correct me if i'm wrong
Originally Posted by Van Lustre
I hope Google wins and get most of Apple products ban from the US. Karma is a b. I wonder how Apple will defend themselves?
How does it feel having it turn against you now Apple?!
Originally Posted by Van Lustre
…Apple's really ridicules patent such as: rectangle with rounded corners, swipe to unlock, tried to patent multi-touch which was already invented by Diamond Touch and…
Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.
What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment?
No, I think the official list puts that one just after "Apple stole the GUI from Xerox".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.
What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment?
LOL! you know it!
I laughed at your comment almost as hard as when i laughed when Tim Cook claimed Apple innovates and everyone else copies. Then brings out a phone with 4G TWO YEARS LATER THAN EVERYONE ELSE
But your comment was pretty funny too, i ROFL'd, LOL! Good one! You crack me up.
You know what, i bet they BINGED IT!!! HAHAA. Oh man, Good stuff Skil.
Originally Posted by sleepy3
LOL! you know it!
I laughed at your comment almost as hard as when i laughed when Tim Cook claimed Apple innovates and everyone else copies. Then brings out a phone with 4G TWO YEARS LATER THAN EVERYONE ELSE
But your comment was pretty funny too, i ROFL'd, LOL! Good one! You crack me up.
You know what, i bet they BINGED IT!!! HAHAA. Oh man, Good stuff Skil.
You're on ludicrously thin ice as it is. Do you really want to have to create a sleepy4 (which will be banned immediately)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You're on ludicrously thin ice as it is. Do you really want to have to create a sleepy4 (which will be banned immediately)?
What did I do? I just said your joke was funny? Geeeshhh, can't take a compliment.
You can dish it, but you sure can't take it, lol.
By the way, it started at sleepy3. There is no connection to sleepy1 through 2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van Lustre
I hope Google wins and get most of Apple products ban from the US. Karma is a b. I wonder how Apple will defend themselves?
How does it feel having it turn against you now Apple?!
An injunction is appropriate when consumer confusion is at stake. It makes sense because Apple claims (whether or not you agree) that Samsung's product on the market is causing them to lose sales due to confusion. Apple posts a bond in case they lose. If Apple loses, they pay to make up lost sales to Samsung.
Motorola is not claiming consumer confusion. So why, in the heck would you think it's appropriate for Google should get an injunction against Apple's products. They're not losing sales of their own products due to consumer confusion. If Motorola wins, Apple will pay them licensing fees retroactively.
This isn't junior high. Google will not get an injunction against Apple just because Apple got an injunction against an Android maker. There are actual reasons for injunctions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav
An injunction is appropriate when consumer confusion is at stake. It makes sense because Apple claims (whether or not you agree) that Samsung's product on the market is causing them to lose sales due to confusion. Apple posts a bond in case they lose. If Apple loses, they pay to make up lost sales to Samsung.
Motorola is not claiming consumer confusion. So why, in the heck would you think it's appropriate for Google should get an injunction against Apple's products. They're not losing sales of their own products due to consumer confusion. If Motorola wins, Apple will pay them licensing fees retroactively.
This isn't junior high. Google will not get an injunction against Apple just because Apple got an injunction against an Android maker. There are actual reasons for injunctions.
"Consumer confusion" is hardly a requirement for an injunction. Do you have any sources to back up this claim?
That argument just doesn't make sense, if Apple can lose sales to confusion, then it is possible that sales could be lost due to features included in in iPhones etc which are allegedly in breach of these patents. After all Siri was a major selling point, an injunction should be judged on the likely hood of upholding the claims, but I don't know what the criteria are.
J
I has nothing to do with the time the 'patent' is issued.
Software patents should never be allowed.
They stifle innovation and prevent independent software makers from writing great software.
With software patents you can only write software if you are protected by a large corporation.
Software - and thereby the investment in it - is already protected by copyright and that is sufficient.
I am not at all impressed from what I read from the patent you mention.
J.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatchyThePirate
"Freedom of speech"? What a cry baby. Please don't go, we need your informed opinion to counter our fanaticism.
Yeah, so what of it? Why don't you try to attack my argument instead of me? What you just did is called Ad Hominem, an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
Dude, I'm not saying I completely disagree with you...but your candor does nothing to further discussion...
And yes...the same bill of rights that allows you to say whatever you want as wantonly as possible allows me the same freedoms.
=D If you want to debate I'm up for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn
So when Google Motorola can't innovate, they litigate and yet another case of Google mimicking Apple (i.e. the thermonuclear patent litigation strategy)
Motorola is the first one to create wireless communication device called Cell Phone. They were also the first to innovate their first large phone into a more portable device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Wow, the new trolls are dumb, aren't they? I mean, absolutely no thought put into it. It's like they're Googling for "anti-Apple arguments" and just setting the date between January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2010.
What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment?
Your the same as PatchyThePirate. Since your a GM, I'm going to say.... No Comment
P.S. I had to come back since I find it very entertaining. Call me hypocrite if you want.
The bill of rights says you have freedom of speech. It does not grant you that right to come on to private property (eg a forum) and do whatever pleases you. If the moderators decide to delete posts that they disagree with, that's with their rights too.
That said, most forums I've been to that weren't populated only by trolls, don't moderate things until someone crosses a legal line, and at that point it's more dangerous to allow the activity to continue. The android fans are more than welcome to come and defend their side of a debate, but do note the forum is part of "Apple Insider" and is not exactly a neutral playground. Are there even notable android fan sites?
Originally Posted by Misa
Are there even notable android fan sites?
A few. And you'll notice there are zero Apple trolls on any of them. And barely any posts that say good things about Apple at all.
Wow is all I have to say at this point. It looks like Google has revealed their hand. I'm eager to see how Apple responds.
I have to laugh, though.
Is that the same "mighty" firm that has been sanctioned 4 times by the judge in just one trial and who keeps violating direct judicial orders? And the one who managed their time so badly that Apple had hours to present the final evidence in the case without any rebuttal from Samsung? And the one where they voluntarily provided the evidence Apple needed to demonstrate that consumers were being confused?
I'm not at all impressed with this "mighty" law firm.
Not to mention, of course that their facts are all wrong. They claim that Apple started this by going thermonuclear on Google. In reality, Apple has NEVER filed suit against Google. Even the Motorola suits were started by Motorola, not Apple.
So much for 'don't be evil'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Not to mention, of course that their facts are all wrong. They claim that Apple started this by going thermonuclear on Google. In reality, Apple has NEVER filed suit against Google. Even the Motorola suits were started by Motorola, not Apple.
So much for 'don't be evil'.
Yeah, Apple has never filed suit against Google. Even you know that they're trying to rack up wins prior to engaging Google so they have something to show in court.
Apple started the patent wars. This is their fault. The patent system is a joke, a broken mess at best, and this is what comes of it.