Not always. Apple has managed to get appeals heard and decided in several months in this trial.
Those are interlocutory appeals, which are a different animal and heard far more rapidly.
Any injunctions that now may be ordered will have a rapid appeal process as well. But the appeal of the actual jury verdict and various other decisions by the judge at trial will take, at minimum, a year. Federal courts are not as bad as state courts, but they are clogged as well, and that is simply the minimum amount of time it takes to fully brief all issues, schedule oral argument, and get a decision. 18 months, give to take, is probably more likely.
Then, if there is any portion of the case that is overturned on appeal, depending on the ruling, it may have to be remanded back to the district court for further proceedings. This, then, opens up the door to winding up before the court of appeals again.
Trust me, this could go on for quite a long time. Just a few weeks ago I was researching an april 2012 district court opinion from a case that began in 1998, and that case is still not done either! Obviously that is an extreme example, but my point is that you simply never know, especially when a billion dollars is on the line.
You meant ALL 150+ 4G LTE patents it got off Nortel? Armed only with these, Apple is indeed screwed. Thankfully, Apple has Qualcomm on its side for the so-called "patent exhaustion" defense, since Apple is using Qualcomm's chip. That being said, any 4G LTE patents outside of Qualcomm's reach, literally thousands of them by numerous parties [Nokia, Samsung, Sony, Ericsson, Panasonic, Interdigital, LG, Motorola,...], will be Apple's nightmare. Since Apple is in aggressive and offensive modes in its "thermonuclear" patent war, you can be sure those companies inside the bracket will be on similar modes as well.
So, Apple has decided to go "thermonuclear", and this will be its ensuing radioactive cloud entrapping Apple thoroughly in it.
So the patents will be pooled for the standard, licensed under FRAND, Apple's contribution of "150+ patents" is more than enough to get them in the club.
Apple also has cross licensing agreements with Nokia, who stand to do quite well out of todays win, seeing as how they never took the Android bait and so avoided the trap.
Total FRAND fail, akin to sitting on your own H-Bomb and pushing the button.
"It only takes one bullet to kill" said Samsung's lawyers, who are also Google's lawyers (via Motorola) and HTC's lawyers.
Quinn Emmanuel's reputation is plummeting after all these losses, they better be making good money now because who would choose a bunch of losers to represent them.
So is that $1 billion total or $333 million x 3 for wilful infringement? Remember, wilfully infringing means the damages are tripled. So is Samsung paying $1 billion or will it be changed to $3 billion to reflect the wilful part?
It looks like it could be changed to over $3b if the judge decides to do this:
"A jury in San Jose, California awarded $1.049 billion to the US tech giant, according to court documents. But analysts said the damages could be tripled because jurors found Samsung "willfully" infringed on patents.
Judge Lucy Koh "now has the discretion to triple Apple's damages award, which is already a monstrous and unprecedented" sum."
Samsung releasing rejected evidence to the public during the trial might be one of the worst decisions they made.
It is so rare that justice is done that when it finally is my reaction is sheer delight.
Samsung and the Android folk are in a severe reality-distortion field where they are feel free to copy whatever and to somehow justify it to themselves as competition. They have brainwashed themselves with this nonsense and they cannot back out of it without their entire self-image collapsing.
I'm not a massive Apple fanboy - I actually own more Microsoft stuff than I do Apple - but I myself am full of utter glee that Apple has pretty much won this case! I knew Samsung was in trouble when I saw the Galaxy Tab 10.1 sitting next to a Black iPad 2 in Currys one day. I was with my dad picking out a new stereo for him and he pointed to the sammy and went "that new iPad looks nice!" - I went "oh yeah it is", I then had to double take when I realised he was pointing at the Samsung because at first glance from two feet away I thought it was an iPad 2 with a different wallpaper (it was open on the app drawer).
Seeing the pictures on the internet is one thing, seeing them side by side on full display in a shop was just scary.
I do respect that the theft of intellectual property is unlawful and wrong, but the sheer scale of the lawsuit and amount of money involved is not the way forward to aid future innovation.
That's a cop out. If Microsoft and Palm could come up with complete moble OS's without infringing, Samsung could have too. They flat out copied and directly intended to ride off the success of Apple by deliberately copying the exact look and feel of Apple's design.
Go read through the jury questions and their responses. They are very specific, not vague like you are insisting.
They were also called out for willfully infringing. You don't get WILLFUL from vagueness either.
Not a forum to bash-the-iOS-fan-who-isn't-scared-to-openly-like-Android-too forum.
Stop trying to deflect. This has nothing to do with you, your likes, dislikes or even being adventurous (please!). Samsung blatantly copied and tried to leverage brand confusion to gain sales. That's illegal, they were called out for it by Apple and the jury agreed.
That all the sycophants and apologists are falling over themselves to give Samsung the slightest benefit of the doubt is hilarious. This was a SLAM DUNK verdict - there is NO ROOM for interpretation, weaseling or reading between the lines. Yet, here you are! On your second post, no less
Sweet, sweet justice. Finally it is "upheld" that Android is a blatant ripoff of iOS, not that there was any real doubt. This might however be the last real massive patent dispute in the US that has such global ramifications ~ Samsung has not been held culpable in most of outside the US.
*sigh* and I got skinned like a cat for being "racist" in my China comments. Where's all the indignant posters now?
That said, I have had to report your comment.
Maybe it was not as direct. Maybe it is because it only posted 2 hours ago when most of AI's readers are sleeping. Or maybe most AI readers are not checking up on tech news because it's a Saturday.
It is a racist comment but it also comes across as a very weak insult. Perhaps your racism is forceful and direct thus allowing for a more forceful and direct reply from others.
That's a cop out. If Microsoft and Palm could come up with complete moble OS's without infringing, Samsung could have too. They flat out copied and directly intended to ride off the success of Apple by deliberately copying the exact look and feel of Apple's design.
First off, I really like Windows Phone, my wife has a lumia 800 and it's really different and very nice to use....but....
It has a slide to unlock, pinch-to-zoom in the pictures library and a bouncy effect when you scroll a list too far...
Anyone who has ever created anything from anywhere on the planet should be happy for this.
Samsung is not affecting you as consumers because you are 100% free of chose the product you want…
That's not how this works. Ignoring Samsung while letting them do whatever they want absolutely affects everyone else.
…I love Android because it provides me a freedom that IOS doesn't give me.
The freedom to install malware and have your phone behave like a Windows PC! Ah, apologies; just a little jab.
In the other hand, maybe some of you can say that you are happy because Apple is 100% american and that is good for your economy, but Google and Motorola are also American and you hate their products too.
So that probably isn't it, is it? It's a case of innovator vs. copyist, as with most of Apple's lawsuits. Apple creates and legally protects, others steal, Apple punishes.
…I don't like IOS because their antisharing policies and their lack of customization…
What do either of these things really mean? Do you want the native ability (because you can do it) to replace your OS' gorgeous icons with hideous junk?
If you reply to my message, please remember that i was friendly, so I as a fan of Android expect the same from you.
Why, when the rest of your ilk are so pathetically deluded and vitriolic? I don't mean to impugn what you've done here—in fact I appreciate it greatly over the latter.
<div class="quote-container"> <div class="quote-block"> Originally Posted by <strong>anonimo</strong> <a href="/t/152115/samsung-guilty-of-patent-infringement-apple-awarded-nearly-1-05b-u/360#post_2175544"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /> Why you Americans are happy of this?</div></div><p> </p><p> Anyone who has ever created anything from anywhere on the planet should be happy for this.</p><p> </p><div class="quote-container"> <div class="quote-block"> <div> Samsung is not affecting you as consumers because you are 100% free of chose the product you want…</div> </div></div><p> </p><p> That's not how this works. Ignoring Samsung while letting them do whatever they want absolutely affects everyone else.</p><p> </p><div class="quote-container"> <div class="quote-block"> <div> …I love Android because it provides me a freedom that IOS doesn't give me.</div> </div></div><p> </p><p> The freedom to install malware and have your <em>phone</em> behave like a Windows PC! Ah, apologies; just a little jab.</p><p> </p><div class="quote-container"> <div class="quote-block"> <div> In the other hand, maybe some of you can say that you are happy because Apple is 100% american and that is good for your economy, but Google and Motorola are also American and you hate their products too.</div> </div></div><p> </p><p> So that probably isn't it, is it? It's a case of innovator vs. copyist, as with most of Apple's lawsuits. Apple creates and legally protects, others steal, Apple punishes.</p><p> </p><div class="quote-container"> <div class="quote-block"> <div> …I don't like IOS because their antisharing policies and their lack of customization…</div> </div></div><p> </p><p> What do either of these things really mean? Do you <em>want</em> the native ability (because you <strong>can</strong> do it) to replace your OS' gorgeous icons with hideous junk?</p><p> </p><div class="quote-container"> <div class="quote-block"> If you reply to my message, please remember that i was friendly, so I as a fan of Android expect the same from you.</div></div><p> </p><p> Why, when the rest of your ilk are so pathetically deluded and vitriolic? I don't mean to impugn what you've done here—in fact I appreciate it greatly over the latter.</p>
I dont think the lawsuit here is about ios and android. Its about how samsung phones look like iphone.
And i dont understand the freedom you are talking about. I use both android and iphone at the same time. I think there are things the iphone is good at and android better at. Samsung can always go the htc way. They are not being sued because they look like iphones.
I dont think the lawsuit here is about ios and android. Its about how samsung phones look like iphone.
That's not entirely true. Apple won a number of utility patent claims for things like bounce-back and pinch-to-zoom. Those are part of iOS and any of those patented technologies that are in Android could lead to a lawsuit against Google.
And i dont understand the freedom you are talking about. I use both android and iphone at the same time. I think there are things the iphone is good at and android better at. Samsung can always go the htc way. They are not being sued because they look like iphones.
Actually, they were. The largest amount of damages was for Samsung's infringement of Apple's design patents. So, to an extent, they were sued because their products looked like iPhones - at least in the details that were covered in the design patents.
It also appears that you're contradicting yourself. First you claim:
"I dont think the lawsuit here is about ios and android. Its about how samsung phones look like iphone."
Then you claim:
"They are not being sued because they look like iphones."
To those of you wondering if this thread is likely to become the longest on AI: it isn't. Not by a long shot. The accolade of longest thread currently goes to the "Blu-ray vs. HD DVD (2007)" thread, which is 4651 posts long.
Oh yeah, sweet memories. Sony fanboys trolled me for saying that streaming will bury any winner of the media format war. 4 years later my Panasonic collects the dust, BR media migrates to public library and LG used only for streaming Netflix, amazon prime, Hulu and Pandora.
Maybe it was not as direct. Maybe it is because it only posted 2 hours ago when most of AI's readers are sleeping. Or maybe most AI readers are not checking up on tech news because it's a Saturday.
It is a racist comment but it also comes across as a very weak insult. Perhaps your racism is forceful and direct thus allowing for a more forceful and direct reply from others.
What's racist about saying Koreans eat dogs? It's true and it's disgusting. I'd say they same about any other "race" that eats dogs. They don't get a pass cause it's their culture. It's a grotesque part of their culture and deserves all the derision that can be heaped on it. I think it says a lot about any culture or people that would eat man's best friend.
BTW the Swiss do it too and it's just as disgusting, inhumane and deserving of derision that they do.
With many respect. Why you Americans are happy of this? Samsung is not affecting you as consumers because you are 100% free of chose the product you want, so if you don't like Samsung, just ignore it. Personally I like Samsung because it is the best manofacturer with the best hardware for Android, and I love Android because it provides me a freedom that IOS doesn't give me. In the other hand, maybe some of you can say that you are happy because Apple is 100% american and that is good for your economy, but Google and Motorola are also American and you hate their products too.
Personally and with a huge respect to the Apple community I can say that I dont like IOS because their antisharing policies and their lack of customization and for that reason I think Android is superior.
I also think that getting happy because of this is a like be happy of to have less choises to select.
If you reply to my message, please remember that i was friendly, so I as a fan of Android expect the same from you.
Regards...
Because to the casual observer, this is outright theft. Nobody likes a thief or wants that thief to go unpunished. I don't understand your point of view, which equates to, "thievery is okay as long as I personally benefit from it." (your benefit in this case is that it gives you the freedom and choice that you desire) I hope this reply is respectful as you requested, I haven't called you any names, I just explained my point of view.
What's racist about saying Koreans eat dogs? It's true and it's disgusting. I'd say they same about any other "race" that eats dogs.
Sure, but you wouldn't describe Americans as "Corn* Eaters" or "Grease Gobblers"… It's a poor way to describe a group and only serves to introduce derision.
*Corn there being the derogatory term for HFCS and all manner of other corn-related crap in foods.
What's racist about saying Koreans eat dogs? It's true and it's disgusting. I'd say they same about any other "race" that eats dogs. They don't get a pass cause it's their culture. It's a grotesque part of their culture and deserves all the derision that can be heaped on it. I think it says a lot about any culture or people that would eat man's best friend.
BTW the Swiss do it too and it's just as disgusting, inhumane and deserving of derision that they do.
1) South Koreans aren't a "race".
2) The derogatory usage is for Asians in general, which is widely considered a "race".
3) Pointing out something as facile and a cultural choice of food to define a "race" in a derogatory way is racist. You can't get a better example of racism.
4) I think it's more gross to eat insects but that's just because I grew up in the US where we don't consume insects (at least not directly) as a part of our culture. Same goes with most Western cultures. That doesn't mean that those cultures, or if you prefer "races", that do are in any way the inferior and horrible aberrations of god that you've implied.
5) Let me guess, you think Barack Obama is some grotesque less-than-human creature that deserves your derision... and yet you don't think that's racist.
6) I'm more concern with the treatment of the animal prior to slaughter rather than what animal is consumed by a human being to sustain life. Chickens, pigs and cows being tortured should bother you a lot more than some dog that was breed specifically for eating. Where does it end? Does the world stop eating beef because Hndus worship the cows? Does the world stop eating pork because of Muslims -or- because pigs are vastly smarter than dogs in most tasks? So we start only eating bugs because they are considerably less intelligent (by any measure we have) than mammals? There are certainly a lot of them, they grow fast and they are more energy efficient for farming.
PS: One thing racists of have never been accused of: being rational.
2) The derogatory usage is for Asians in general, which is widely considered a "race".
3) Pointing out something as facile and a cultural choice of food to define a "race" in a derogatory way is racist. You can't get a better example of racism.
4) I think it's more gross to eat insects but that's just because I grew up in the US where we don't consume insects (at least not directly) as a part of our culture. Same goes with most Western cultures. That doesn't mean that those cultures, or if you prefer "races", that do are in any way the inferior and horrible aberrations of god that you've implied.
5) Let me guess, you think Barack Obama is some grotesque less-than-human creature that deserves your derision... and yet you don't think that's racist.
6) One thing racists of have never been accused of: being rational.
Pointing out something as facile and a cultural choice of food to define a "race" in a derogatory way is racist. You can't get a better example of racism.
You don't know what racism means. It has nothing to do with their race. We also denigrate cultures that espouse honor killings and other actions we think are outside the bounds of our values and beliefs. We don't give them a pass because it's a cultural thing or ignore it cause we're scared to be deemed racists.
Comments
Looks like the jury ruled for Samsung on the iPad infringement claim.
I guess that makes it something like:
Apple-15 Samsung-1
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Not always. Apple has managed to get appeals heard and decided in several months in this trial.
Those are interlocutory appeals, which are a different animal and heard far more rapidly.
Any injunctions that now may be ordered will have a rapid appeal process as well. But the appeal of the actual jury verdict and various other decisions by the judge at trial will take, at minimum, a year. Federal courts are not as bad as state courts, but they are clogged as well, and that is simply the minimum amount of time it takes to fully brief all issues, schedule oral argument, and get a decision. 18 months, give to take, is probably more likely.
Then, if there is any portion of the case that is overturned on appeal, depending on the ruling, it may have to be remanded back to the district court for further proceedings. This, then, opens up the door to winding up before the court of appeals again.
Trust me, this could go on for quite a long time. Just a few weeks ago I was researching an april 2012 district court opinion from a case that began in 1998, and that case is still not done either! Obviously that is an extreme example, but my point is that you simply never know, especially when a billion dollars is on the line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs
You meant ALL 150+ 4G LTE patents it got off Nortel? Armed only with these, Apple is indeed screwed. Thankfully, Apple has Qualcomm on its side for the so-called "patent exhaustion" defense, since Apple is using Qualcomm's chip. That being said, any 4G LTE patents outside of Qualcomm's reach, literally thousands of them by numerous parties [Nokia, Samsung, Sony, Ericsson, Panasonic, Interdigital, LG, Motorola,...], will be Apple's nightmare. Since Apple is in aggressive and offensive modes in its "thermonuclear" patent war, you can be sure those companies inside the bracket will be on similar modes as well.
Check this out, for some additional readings:
- I-runway 4G LTE Patent Landscape Analysis
- Article One Partners: LTE Essential Patents Now...
- Network World's Watchout Apple...
- Techipm: Mobile/Wireless Patents In Litigation
- Seeking Alpha: Nokia's Patent Goldmine
So, Apple has decided to go "thermonuclear", and this will be its ensuing radioactive cloud entrapping Apple thoroughly in it.
So the patents will be pooled for the standard, licensed under FRAND, Apple's contribution of "150+ patents" is more than enough to get them in the club.
Apple also has cross licensing agreements with Nokia, who stand to do quite well out of todays win, seeing as how they never took the Android bait and so avoided the trap.
Total FRAND fail, akin to sitting on your own H-Bomb and pushing the button.
"It only takes one bullet to kill" said Samsung's lawyers, who are also Google's lawyers (via Motorola) and HTC's lawyers.
Quinn Emmanuel's reputation is plummeting after all these losses, they better be making good money now because who would choose a bunch of losers to represent them.
The Android "nukes" have been defused.
It looks like it could be changed to over $3b if the judge decides to do this:
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/apple-scores-huge-win-over-064804712.html
"A jury in San Jose, California awarded $1.049 billion to the US tech giant, according to court documents. But analysts said the damages could be tripled because jurors found Samsung "willfully" infringed on patents.
Judge Lucy Koh "now has the discretion to triple Apple's damages award, which is already a monstrous and unprecedented" sum."
Samsung releasing rejected evidence to the public during the trial might be one of the worst decisions they made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eluard
It is so rare that justice is done that when it finally is my reaction is sheer delight.
Samsung and the Android folk are in a severe reality-distortion field where they are feel free to copy whatever and to somehow justify it to themselves as competition. They have brainwashed themselves with this nonsense and they cannot back out of it without their entire self-image collapsing.
I'm not a massive Apple fanboy - I actually own more Microsoft stuff than I do Apple - but I myself am full of utter glee that Apple has pretty much won this case! I knew Samsung was in trouble when I saw the Galaxy Tab 10.1 sitting next to a Black iPad 2 in Currys one day. I was with my dad picking out a new stereo for him and he pointed to the sammy and went "that new iPad looks nice!" - I went "oh yeah it is", I then had to double take when I realised he was pointing at the Samsung because at first glance from two feet away I thought it was an iPad 2 with a different wallpaper (it was open on the app drawer).
Seeing the pictures on the internet is one thing, seeing them side by side on full display in a shop was just scary.
That's a cop out. If Microsoft and Palm could come up with complete moble OS's without infringing, Samsung could have too. They flat out copied and directly intended to ride off the success of Apple by deliberately copying the exact look and feel of Apple's design.
Go read through the jury questions and their responses. They are very specific, not vague like you are insisting.
They were also called out for willfully infringing. You don't get WILLFUL from vagueness either.
Stop trying to deflect. This has nothing to do with you, your likes, dislikes or even being adventurous (please!). Samsung blatantly copied and tried to leverage brand confusion to gain sales. That's illegal, they were called out for it by Apple and the jury agreed.
That all the sycophants and apologists are falling over themselves to give Samsung the slightest benefit of the doubt is hilarious. This was a SLAM DUNK verdict - there is NO ROOM for interpretation, weaseling or reading between the lines. Yet, here you are! On your second post, no less
*sigh* and I got skinned like a cat for being "racist" in my China comments. Where's all the indignant posters now?
That said, I have had to report your comment.
Maybe it was not as direct. Maybe it is because it only posted 2 hours ago when most of AI's readers are sleeping. Or maybe most AI readers are not checking up on tech news because it's a Saturday.
It is a racist comment but it also comes across as a very weak insult. Perhaps your racism is forceful and direct thus allowing for a more forceful and direct reply from others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
That's a cop out. If Microsoft and Palm could come up with complete moble OS's without infringing, Samsung could have too. They flat out copied and directly intended to ride off the success of Apple by deliberately copying the exact look and feel of Apple's design.
First off, I really like Windows Phone, my wife has a lumia 800 and it's really different and very nice to use....but....
It has a slide to unlock, pinch-to-zoom in the pictures library and a bouncy effect when you scroll a list too far...
Originally Posted by anonimo
Why you Americans are happy of this?
Anyone who has ever created anything from anywhere on the planet should be happy for this.
Samsung is not affecting you as consumers because you are 100% free of chose the product you want…
That's not how this works. Ignoring Samsung while letting them do whatever they want absolutely affects everyone else.
…I love Android because it provides me a freedom that IOS doesn't give me.
The freedom to install malware and have your phone behave like a Windows PC! Ah, apologies; just a little jab.
In the other hand, maybe some of you can say that you are happy because Apple is 100% american and that is good for your economy, but Google and Motorola are also American and you hate their products too.
So that probably isn't it, is it? It's a case of innovator vs. copyist, as with most of Apple's lawsuits. Apple creates and legally protects, others steal, Apple punishes.
…I don't like IOS because their antisharing policies and their lack of customization…
What do either of these things really mean? Do you want the native ability (because you can do it) to replace your OS' gorgeous icons with hideous junk?
If you reply to my message, please remember that i was friendly, so I as a fan of Android expect the same from you.
Why, when the rest of your ilk are so pathetically deluded and vitriolic? I don't mean to impugn what you've done here—in fact I appreciate it greatly over the latter.
I dont think the lawsuit here is about ios and android. Its about how samsung phones look like iphone.
And i dont understand the freedom you are talking about. I use both android and iphone at the same time. I think there are things the iphone is good at and android better at. Samsung can always go the htc way. They are not being sued because they look like iphones.
That's not entirely true. Apple won a number of utility patent claims for things like bounce-back and pinch-to-zoom. Those are part of iOS and any of those patented technologies that are in Android could lead to a lawsuit against Google.
Actually, they were. The largest amount of damages was for Samsung's infringement of Apple's design patents. So, to an extent, they were sued because their products looked like iPhones - at least in the details that were covered in the design patents.
It also appears that you're contradicting yourself. First you claim:
"I dont think the lawsuit here is about ios and android. Its about how samsung phones look like iphone."
Then you claim:
"They are not being sued because they look like iphones."
So which is it?
Oh yeah, sweet memories. Sony fanboys trolled me for saying that streaming will bury any winner of the media format war. 4 years later my Panasonic collects the dust, BR media migrates to public library and LG used only for streaming Netflix, amazon prime, Hulu and Pandora.
Congratulations Apple. Justice prevailed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Maybe it was not as direct. Maybe it is because it only posted 2 hours ago when most of AI's readers are sleeping. Or maybe most AI readers are not checking up on tech news because it's a Saturday.
It is a racist comment but it also comes across as a very weak insult. Perhaps your racism is forceful and direct thus allowing for a more forceful and direct reply from others.
What's racist about saying Koreans eat dogs? It's true and it's disgusting. I'd say they same about any other "race" that eats dogs. They don't get a pass cause it's their culture. It's a grotesque part of their culture and deserves all the derision that can be heaped on it. I think it says a lot about any culture or people that would eat man's best friend.
BTW the Swiss do it too and it's just as disgusting, inhumane and deserving of derision that they do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonimo
With many respect. Why you Americans are happy of this? Samsung is not affecting you as consumers because you are 100% free of chose the product you want, so if you don't like Samsung, just ignore it. Personally I like Samsung because it is the best manofacturer with the best hardware for Android, and I love Android because it provides me a freedom that IOS doesn't give me. In the other hand, maybe some of you can say that you are happy because Apple is 100% american and that is good for your economy, but Google and Motorola are also American and you hate their products too.
Personally and with a huge respect to the Apple community I can say that I dont like IOS because their antisharing policies and their lack of customization and for that reason I think Android is superior.
I also think that getting happy because of this is a like be happy of to have less choises to select.
If you reply to my message, please remember that i was friendly, so I as a fan of Android expect the same from you.
Regards...
Because to the casual observer, this is outright theft. Nobody likes a thief or wants that thief to go unpunished. I don't understand your point of view, which equates to, "thievery is okay as long as I personally benefit from it." (your benefit in this case is that it gives you the freedom and choice that you desire) I hope this reply is respectful as you requested, I haven't called you any names, I just explained my point of view.
Originally Posted by GmanMac
What's racist about saying Koreans eat dogs? It's true and it's disgusting. I'd say they same about any other "race" that eats dogs.
Sure, but you wouldn't describe Americans as "Corn* Eaters" or "Grease Gobblers"… It's a poor way to describe a group and only serves to introduce derision.
*Corn there being the derogatory term for HFCS and all manner of other corn-related crap in foods.
The Swiss eat dogs? I've never heard that…
1) South Koreans aren't a "race".
2) The derogatory usage is for Asians in general, which is widely considered a "race".
3) Pointing out something as facile and a cultural choice of food to define a "race" in a derogatory way is racist. You can't get a better example of racism.
4) I think it's more gross to eat insects but that's just because I grew up in the US where we don't consume insects (at least not directly) as a part of our culture. Same goes with most Western cultures. That doesn't mean that those cultures, or if you prefer "races", that do are in any way the inferior and horrible aberrations of god that you've implied.
5) Let me guess, you think Barack Obama is some grotesque less-than-human creature that deserves your derision... and yet you don't think that's racist.
6) I'm more concern with the treatment of the animal prior to slaughter rather than what animal is consumed by a human being to sustain life. Chickens, pigs and cows being tortured should bother you a lot more than some dog that was breed specifically for eating. Where does it end? Does the world stop eating beef because Hndus worship the cows? Does the world stop eating pork because of Muslims -or- because pigs are vastly smarter than dogs in most tasks? So we start only eating bugs because they are considerably less intelligent (by any measure we have) than mammals? There are certainly a lot of them, they grow fast and they are more energy efficient for farming.
PS: One thing racists of have never been accused of: being rational.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
1) South Koreans aren't a "race".
2) The derogatory usage is for Asians in general, which is widely considered a "race".
3) Pointing out something as facile and a cultural choice of food to define a "race" in a derogatory way is racist. You can't get a better example of racism.
4) I think it's more gross to eat insects but that's just because I grew up in the US where we don't consume insects (at least not directly) as a part of our culture. Same goes with most Western cultures. That doesn't mean that those cultures, or if you prefer "races", that do are in any way the inferior and horrible aberrations of god that you've implied.
5) Let me guess, you think Barack Obama is some grotesque less-than-human creature that deserves your derision... and yet you don't think that's racist.
6) One thing racists of have never been accused of: being rational.
Pointing out something as facile and a cultural choice of food to define a "race" in a derogatory way is racist. You can't get a better example of racism.
You don't know what racism means. It has nothing to do with their race. We also denigrate cultures that espouse honor killings and other actions we think are outside the bounds of our values and beliefs. We don't give them a pass because it's a cultural thing or ignore it cause we're scared to be deemed racists.