<span style="line-height:1.231;">Personally, I think that injunctions should be off the table for all software patents, FRAND or not. </span>
Of course that's what one of our chief Google/Samsung apologists would say.
Samsung blatantly and intentionally infringed Apple's IP even with the risk of an injunction. If you took away that risk, what would stop them from getting even worse in the future?
The amicus curiae brief of Scott McNealy Sun founder and Brian Sutphin former executive Vice President of Sun.
It encapsulates nicely exactly why Alsup's ruling was wrong.
That's why I like FOSS. People complain he's biased but he digs up a lot of relevant documents. The first I heard of this brief was also at FOSS.
Remember when Oracle tried to bring up Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz saying he told them they could use Java? This was seen as a "blow" to Oracles case. Now we have the actual founders and creators of Java (instead of Schwartz named the worlds worst CEO for screwing up Sun) siding with Oracle.
Why didn't they appear for Oracle in court in the first place? I honestly think they thought Oracle would win and didn't believe it necessary. Now that the shock of an Oracle loss has sunk in they're adding their support.
Companies that ignore patents not only disadvantage the patent owner, but the other companies in the market that have respected the patent. I can see they need protection too for their honesty - almost invisible victims.
Companies who infringe on patents are not only harming the patent holder, but also all the other companies that are being honest and respecting the patent. They are invisible victims and I can see why they are also upset.
Can someone show me any other company filing an amicus brief or throwing their support behind Google or Samsung? Anyone?
Verizon, T-Mobile and Sprint all have filed amicus curae briefs opposing the idea of Apple getting an injunction on Samsung devices.
Remember, there are four requirements for a US court(*) to grant a patent related injunction:
The patent holder must have suffered irreparable harm.
Other remedies, such as monetary damages, must be inadequate compensation.
The balance of hardships that the infringer will suffer must be considered.
The public interest should not be harmed by the injunction.
The carriers filed because of the public interest leg. They had a lot of time and money invested in phone specs, testing, and LTE network infrastructure.
Apple themselves have listed royalty prices for their IP, which worked against them to claim that there's no adequate compensation.
(*) the US ITC is outside the court system, and its administrative judges can, and do, decide in favor of injunctions because of any patent, FRAND or not.
Can someone show me any other company filing an amicus brief or throwing their support behind Google or Samsung? Anyone?
Qualcomm sided with Google's (Motorola) position rather than Apple a couple weeks ago. Today it was reported that Nokia too has submitted a brief in support of Google's Motorola in it's appeal of their dismissed case against Apple.
Comments
Of course that's what one of our chief Google/Samsung apologists would say.
Samsung blatantly and intentionally infringed Apple's IP even with the risk of an injunction. If you took away that risk, what would stop them from getting even worse in the future?
Remember when Oracle tried to bring up Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz saying he told them they could use Java? This was seen as a "blow" to Oracles case. Now we have the actual founders and creators of Java (instead of Schwartz named the worlds worst CEO for screwing up Sun) siding with Oracle.
Why didn't they appear for Oracle in court in the first place? I honestly think they thought Oracle would win and didn't believe it necessary. Now that the shock of an Oracle loss has sunk in they're adding their support.
Companies who infringe on patents are not only harming the patent holder, but also all the other companies that are being honest and respecting the patent. They are invisible victims and I can see why they are also upset.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
Can someone show me any other company filing an amicus brief or throwing their support behind Google or Samsung? Anyone?
Verizon, T-Mobile and Sprint all have filed amicus curae briefs opposing the idea of Apple getting an injunction on Samsung devices.
Remember, there are four requirements for a US court(*) to grant a patent related injunction:
The patent holder must have suffered irreparable harm.
Other remedies, such as monetary damages, must be inadequate compensation.
The balance of hardships that the infringer will suffer must be considered.
The public interest should not be harmed by the injunction.
The carriers filed because of the public interest leg. They had a lot of time and money invested in phone specs, testing, and LTE network infrastructure.
Apple themselves have listed royalty prices for their IP, which worked against them to claim that there's no adequate compensation.
(*) the US ITC is outside the court system, and its administrative judges can, and do, decide in favor of injunctions because of any patent, FRAND or not.
Qualcomm sided with Google's (Motorola) position rather than Apple a couple weeks ago. Today it was reported that Nokia too has submitted a brief in support of Google's Motorola in it's appeal of their dismissed case against Apple.