It's a political joke regarding a certain incident that occurred. Rather than go into detail about it here, I've sent you a wiki link, I'd be surprised if you have never heard about it.
It's just a defensive move by Apple. Will it pay off? Who knows.
It's just strange how some patents fall into FRAND but not rounded angles or bounce back for that matter.
BTW. Who the f...rack needs bounce back?
I imagine there are no design patents and very few utility/SW patents relating directly to user experience that can in any way be deemed "standards essential."
Thus it's very unlikely they would be licensed under FRAND terms.
what anti-American sentiment? (can you spell "projection"?)
I don't know.. How many times has Samsung gotten in trouble for bribing US officials? Let me also ask, while at it, do you know how many former VP's or other politically influential figures / officers serve on board of directors of Samsung?
and do you know that samsung is (AFAIK) the most corrupt company of the world?
It's just strange how some patents fall into FRAND but not rounded angles or bounce back for that matter.
Samsung has those FRAND patents cause they agreed to them being FRAND. What everyone gets is one standard instead of dozens and samsung gets royalties that are fair to the buyer.
This story is a non issue anyways, an ITC judge already said Samsung is not misusing or abusing any of their FRAND patents (ITC Administrative Law Judge Rejects Apple's FRAND Arguments Against Samsung http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121007194355579 )
A summary of the link is the following:
1) Samsung is allowed to use FRAND patents to block the sale of Apple products.
2) Samsung's offer was not expensive or high.
3) The patents are valid even tho Apple bought some chips from Intel (were Intel and Samsung have a cross license deal) The ITC judge goes on to say the jury in the court case in san jose were idiots cause the jury said (a) no payments are needed for those patents cause of the Intel-Samsung deal but then also say (b) 'What patents?", Apple isnt using any of Samsung's patents.
^ Look, we have a new troll. First off, that ruling you linked is only about one specific aspect of a case and does not mean Samsung is cleared of ALL FRAND abuses going on, despite your (and Groklaw's) pathetic attempts to imply such.
The FTC isn't going to want to hear about this case as it doesn't apply. They're investigating other cases. Just like the EU is.
Get off our site...Take your Korean TVs and electronics with you. We don't need them in the US. If you don't want Apple products, don't buy it.
If you dont like Korean TV's and "dont buy it".
You've just contradicted your own statements.
How crazy is that?
The issue at hand: Seems like you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
^ Look, we have a new troll. First off, that ruling you linked is only about one specific aspect of a case and does not mean Samsung is cleared of ALL FRAND abuses going on, despite your (and Groklaw's) pathetic attempts to imply such.
Because you know more about patent laws than the patent lawyers themselves.
He was imitating a moronic Fandroid, because that's exactly the type of comments that they make, hence the quotes.
If you look at what is posted on here, the site doesn't get a lot of Android fans. I'm not sure how many are really that hard core about it anyway. The site mainly sees people with some kind of interest in Apple, even if they only like or take interest in a portion of Apple's overall product line. Tallest is a bit extreme in that he interjects idiotic arguments on the part of a theoretical Android fanatic, yet I don't think we need those kinds of comments. He could at least make up a real counter point argument rather than something so half baked. If someone genuinely posted such a thing, it would be obvious that they have no real interest in the thing they're commenting on. Otherwise they would have paid enough attention to the product to offer actual insight on what they dislike about it. Just my thoughts...
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
I don't follow -- care to elaborate?
It's a political joke regarding a certain incident that occurred. Rather than go into detail about it here, I've sent you a wiki link, I'd be surprised if you have never heard about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathillien
It's just a defensive move by Apple. Will it pay off? Who knows.
It's just strange how some patents fall into FRAND but not rounded angles or bounce back for that matter.
BTW. Who the f...rack needs bounce back?
I imagine there are no design patents and very few utility/SW patents relating directly to user experience that can in any way be deemed "standards essential."
Thus it's very unlikely they would be licensed under FRAND terms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
"You can't trust the Department of Justice! They're based in the US, just like Apple!"
Get off our site...Take your Korean TVs and electronics with you. We don't need them in the US. If you don't want Apple products, don't buy it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsdofny
Get off our site
"Our site"?
That's not how Steve Jobs would have handled it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk
what anti-American sentiment? (can you spell "projection"?)
I don't know.. How many times has Samsung gotten in trouble for bribing US officials? Let me also ask, while at it, do you know how many former VP's or other politically influential figures / officers serve on board of directors of Samsung?
and do you know that samsung is (AFAIK) the most corrupt company of the world?
Originally Posted by Chris_CA
"Our site"?
That's not how Steve Jobs would have handled it...
"My site."
Because, you know, he took credit for everything¡
So quiet in this thread and the other ITC/Samsung thread.
I guess some news just can't be spun by the haters so they steer clear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathillien
It's just strange how some patents fall into FRAND but not rounded angles or bounce back for that matter.
Samsung has those FRAND patents cause they agreed to them being FRAND. What everyone gets is one standard instead of dozens and samsung gets royalties that are fair to the buyer.
This story is a non issue anyways, an ITC judge already said Samsung is not misusing or abusing any of their FRAND patents (ITC Administrative Law Judge Rejects Apple's FRAND Arguments Against Samsung http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121007194355579 )
A summary of the link is the following:
1) Samsung is allowed to use FRAND patents to block the sale of Apple products.
2) Samsung's offer was not expensive or high.
3) The patents are valid even tho Apple bought some chips from Intel (were Intel and Samsung have a cross license deal) The ITC judge goes on to say the jury in the court case in san jose were idiots cause the jury said (a) no payments are needed for those patents cause of the Intel-Samsung deal but then also say (b) 'What patents?", Apple isnt using any of Samsung's patents.
The FTC isn't going to want to hear about this case as it doesn't apply. They're investigating other cases. Just like the EU is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsdofny
Get off our site...Take your Korean TVs and electronics with you. We don't need them in the US. If you don't want Apple products, don't buy it.
If you dont like Korean TV's and "dont buy it".
You've just contradicted your own statements.
How crazy is that?
The issue at hand: Seems like you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
^ Look, we have a new troll. First off, that ruling you linked is only about one specific aspect of a case and does not mean Samsung is cleared of ALL FRAND abuses going on, despite your (and Groklaw's) pathetic attempts to imply such.
Because you know more about patent laws than the patent lawyers themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Of course it's not true.
He was imitating a moronic Fandroid, because that's exactly the type of comments that they make, hence the quotes.
If you look at what is posted on here, the site doesn't get a lot of Android fans. I'm not sure how many are really that hard core about it anyway. The site mainly sees people with some kind of interest in Apple, even if they only like or take interest in a portion of Apple's overall product line. Tallest is a bit extreme in that he interjects idiotic arguments on the part of a theoretical Android fanatic, yet I don't think we need those kinds of comments. He could at least make up a real counter point argument rather than something so half baked. If someone genuinely posted such a thing, it would be obvious that they have no real interest in the thing they're commenting on. Otherwise they would have paid enough attention to the product to offer actual insight on what they dislike about it. Just my thoughts...