Hahaha..... I don't understand how you Apple fans still using an Iphone. Why dont you open your eyes and at least check comparations on youtube. Here it is one that you should see:
Given the certitude in the jury, it's interesting that Judge Koh, on the other hand, was framing this as an equally risky proposition for both sides, in urging Apple to settle.
Either she was clueless in reading the jury, or...... (hypothesis?)
Anyway, I am predicting that she does not treble damages nor go with the injunction. I hope I am wrong.
All judges encourage parties to settle. I heard a judge tell both parties one time that, if they choose not to settle then there was a good chance neither side would be happy with the final outcome. This lack of satisfaction is often the definition of a fair outcome.
Settlements allow a final resolution of a case to the satisfaction of both parties. Failure to settle usually means the case will live on for years.
I don't think your prediction about damages or injunctions is going to turn out to be correct. The jury actually held that the infringement was willful. It's hard to see how Judge Koh, without deciding that this factual finding is not supported by the evidence, could not rule according to the jury's findings.
The auto industry is a poor example here. There haven't been any original or new designs for cars since about 1934 or so.
If by "design" you mean aesthetics and appearance, then yes, there are new designs every year. If you mean design in the sense that the iPhone is a new product design, then there haven't been any "new" car designs for many decades. At least none that have caught on, or sold or been designed by any of the mainstream car companies.
The new electric cars (and the hybrids, but they are a dead end really), are pretty much the only things that could be called "new designs" and they really only replace the powerplant with a different source and are thus a long way from anything revolutionary or new.
You're suggesting that a revolutionary car will not require a powerplant? Exactly how would the car move? Fairy magic?
Hahaha..... I don't understand how you Apple fans still using an Iphone. Why dont you open your eyes and at least check comparations on youtube. Here it is one that you should see:
Why should we give a frick about any of this? What's your reason for being here if you don't like Apple products?
Originally Posted by focher
You're suggesting that a revolutionary car will not require a powerplant? Exactly how would the car move? Fairy magic?
Theoretically we should be able to make solar panels efficient enough to power a car while it's in use.
Let's not disrespect the hard work other companies and individuals are doing (including Samsung) to make the remaining parts of all these magical devices possible. The iPhone for example does use some innovative components from Samsung.
I agree with you fully that competition is good and forcing companies to innovate brings us these wonderful devices we have and should accelerate the advances that make this industry so interesting to follow. In this respect, this verdict is good for the industry. However I have a feeling that there be dangers in this verdict too. Time will tell. Makes life even more interesting....
In all of these areas, Apple has been a huge innovator as well. For example:
"The company was founded as Advanced RISC Machines, ARM, a joint venture between Acorn Computers, Apple Computer (now Apple Inc.) and VLSI Technology."
Apple has been at the forefront of developing codecs, processors, network technology and other components used in the high tech industry. Your post reads as if Apple is a simple consumer of other companies technology and that is far far from the truth.
Perhaps other OEM's like Nokia and HTC are privately pleased with this outcome. They've been impacted by Samsung as much if not more so than the iPhone.
And let's face it all the love for Samsung from the fandroids and anti-Apple brigade is not down to superior product (I'm sure many if they were honest would rate One X more highly than Galaxy S III) but the fact that Samsung has set their sights on one company: Apple.
I expect that you'll hear announcements of licensing deals in the next few weeks. Apple has indicated that they're willing to license some of their technology, just not the appearance. With this convincing win, Apple will have much more leverage to go after the others - and many of them will be willing to license rather than fight in court now that there's a legal precedent.
Hahaha..... I don't understand how you Apple fans still using an Iphone. Why dont you open your eyes and at least check comparations on youtube. Here it is one that you should see:
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Part 4:
Part 5:
So because they both do the same things differently Android must therefore be better because the person in the video says so?
A Made in China and a Made in South Korea products are the same...they are all cheap imitations, counterfeits or knock-offs!
The only difference is that, a Made in China knock-off product retains the original brand name (e.g. original Prada bag Made in Paris has a counterpart cheap, knock-off Prada bag that is Made in China), whereas a Made in South Korea imitation/knock-off/counterfeit product is rebranded as a Samsung...or a Kia....or a Hyundai....etc., etc., etc.!!
in other words:SOUTH KOREA IS A PROFESSIONAL PLAGIARIST!
Given the certitude in the jury, it's interesting that Judge Koh, on the other hand, was framing this as an equally risky proposition for both sides, in urging Apple to settle.
Either she was clueless in reading the jury, or...... (hypothesis?)
Anyway, I am predicting that she does not treble damages nor go with the injunction. I hope I am wrong.
She was correct. It was very risky for both sides. I attended a session on patent law by Cooper Woodring (a well regarded patent expert) at an IDSA national conference a few years ago. And he contended that, especially with design patents, juries were very unpredictable. He presented an example to the attendees (all of them in the design profession, so not exactly ignorant) and then had them vote on it. The result was a very split response to what he considered a very clear case, and an illustration of his contention.
I expect that you'll hear announcements of licensing deals in the next few weeks. Apple has indicated that they're willing to license some of their technology, just not the appearance. With this convincing win, Apple will have much more leverage to go after the others - and many of them will be willing to license rather than fight in court now that there's a legal precedent.
As long as they're willing to license, then that will be good for consumers. More choice, more competition, more innovation.
If Jobs was still around, I'm not so sure that would be the case. You know, the whole thermalnuclear thing.
i just don't want any monopolies: whether that be MS, Intel, or Apple.
PS: Apple needs to turn up the OSX heat with the trainwreck coming called Win8.
As far as I'm concerned, the trial was over after the Samsung before and after photo. In addition to being guilty, they made themselves look like morons. Most people caught in a lie will make themselves look like idiots trying to admonish their guilt.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
If you believe in Karma, you might as well avoid black cats as well and throw salt over your shoulder when you spill it.
You have absolutely no clue about what karma means, do you?
Here's a hint: the meaning of the word, in Sanskrit (and in Hinduism), is 'action.'
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Part 4:
Part 5:
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Given the certitude in the jury, it's interesting that Judge Koh, on the other hand, was framing this as an equally risky proposition for both sides, in urging Apple to settle.
Either she was clueless in reading the jury, or...... (hypothesis?)
Anyway, I am predicting that she does not treble damages nor go with the injunction. I hope I am wrong.
All judges encourage parties to settle. I heard a judge tell both parties one time that, if they choose not to settle then there was a good chance neither side would be happy with the final outcome. This lack of satisfaction is often the definition of a fair outcome.
Settlements allow a final resolution of a case to the satisfaction of both parties. Failure to settle usually means the case will live on for years.
I don't think your prediction about damages or injunctions is going to turn out to be correct. The jury actually held that the infringement was willful. It's hard to see how Judge Koh, without deciding that this factual finding is not supported by the evidence, could not rule according to the jury's findings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
The auto industry is a poor example here. There haven't been any original or new designs for cars since about 1934 or so.
If by "design" you mean aesthetics and appearance, then yes, there are new designs every year. If you mean design in the sense that the iPhone is a new product design, then there haven't been any "new" car designs for many decades. At least none that have caught on, or sold or been designed by any of the mainstream car companies.
The new electric cars (and the hybrids, but they are a dead end really), are pretty much the only things that could be called "new designs" and they really only replace the powerplant with a different source and are thus a long way from anything revolutionary or new.
You're suggesting that a revolutionary car will not require a powerplant? Exactly how would the car move? Fairy magic?
Originally Posted by anonimo
Hahaha..... I don't understand how you Apple fans still using an Iphone. Why dont you open your eyes and at least check comparations on youtube. Here it is one that you should see:
Why should we give a frick about any of this? What's your reason for being here if you don't like Apple products?
Originally Posted by focher
You're suggesting that a revolutionary car will not require a powerplant? Exactly how would the car move? Fairy magic?
Theoretically we should be able to make solar panels efficient enough to power a car while it's in use.
Because if i can change the mind of at least one person, I have done a lot. Check those videos... nothing to lose.
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Part 4:
Part 5:
Reminds me of Don Quixote!
LOL
Originally Posted by anonimo
Check those videos... nothing to lose.
They were good for a laugh, at least.
In all of these areas, Apple has been a huge innovator as well. For example:
"The company was founded as Advanced RISC Machines, ARM, a joint venture between Acorn Computers, Apple Computer (now Apple Inc.) and VLSI Technology."
Apple has been at the forefront of developing codecs, processors, network technology and other components used in the high tech industry. Your post reads as if Apple is a simple consumer of other companies technology and that is far far from the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
If you believe in Karma, you might as well avoid black cats as well and throw salt over your shoulder when you spill it.
You have absolutely no clue about what karma means, do you?
Here's a hint: the meaning of the word, in Sanskrit (and in Hinduism), is 'action.'
Or "deed" -- as when a person is measured or rewarded by what he does... (not what he says)
I expect that you'll hear announcements of licensing deals in the next few weeks. Apple has indicated that they're willing to license some of their technology, just not the appearance. With this convincing win, Apple will have much more leverage to go after the others - and many of them will be willing to license rather than fight in court now that there's a legal precedent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonimo
Hahaha..... I don't understand how you Apple fans still using an Iphone. Why dont you open your eyes and at least check comparations on youtube. Here it is one that you should see:
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Part 4:
Part 5:
So because they both do the same things differently Android must therefore be better because the person in the video says so?
HERE'S THE THING:
A Made in China and a Made in South Korea products are the same...they are all cheap imitations, counterfeits or knock-offs!
The only difference is that, a Made in China knock-off product retains the original brand name (e.g. original Prada bag Made in Paris has a counterpart cheap, knock-off Prada bag that is Made in China), whereas a Made in South Korea imitation/knock-off/counterfeit product is rebranded as a Samsung...or a Kia....or a Hyundai....etc., etc., etc.!!
in other words: SOUTH KOREA IS A PROFESSIONAL PLAGIARIST!
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Given the certitude in the jury, it's interesting that Judge Koh, on the other hand, was framing this as an equally risky proposition for both sides, in urging Apple to settle.
Either she was clueless in reading the jury, or...... (hypothesis?)
Anyway, I am predicting that she does not treble damages nor go with the injunction. I hope I am wrong.
She was correct. It was very risky for both sides. I attended a session on patent law by Cooper Woodring (a well regarded patent expert) at an IDSA national conference a few years ago. And he contended that, especially with design patents, juries were very unpredictable. He presented an example to the attendees (all of them in the design profession, so not exactly ignorant) and then had them vote on it. The result was a very split response to what he considered a very clear case, and an illustration of his contention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I find it hard to believe they marketed a portable phone as "brick". :D
It wasn't marketed as a "brick," but designers pretty universally adopted that term as the name for that particular phone form factor.
As long as they're willing to license, then that will be good for consumers. More choice, more competition, more innovation.
If Jobs was still around, I'm not so sure that would be the case. You know, the whole thermalnuclear thing.
i just don't want any monopolies: whether that be MS, Intel, or Apple.
PS: Apple needs to turn up the OSX heat with the trainwreck coming called Win8.
Originally Posted by MarquisMark
PS: Apple needs to turn up the OSX heat with the trainwreck coming called Win8.
I think they're just about to drop the ball with that, though…
But perhaps being on the scene with ambulances before the train even derails would raise too many questions.
As far as I'm concerned, the trial was over after the Samsung before and after photo. In addition to being guilty, they made themselves look like morons. Most people caught in a lie will make themselves look like idiots trying to admonish their guilt.