You're describing TS when he was a mod, but unfortunately we're down to just Marvin. No offense to Marvin.
There are at least 4 mods left - me, Mr. H, melgross and hmurchison. Flag inappropriate posts and they'll be sorted. I know it's difficult sometimes but trying to avoid responding would help too so that 50 or so comments don't also have to be removed.
There are at least 4 mods left - me, Mr. H, melgross and hmurchison. Flag inappropriate posts and they'll be sorted. I know it's difficult sometimes but trying to avoid responding would help too so that 50 or so comments don't also have to be removed.
Hi Marvin,
Pls do?t be to harsh on TS.
We all know he's quite outspoken (his 'vomit' remark is case in point) but we can all live with it
Please do not get started on personal comments again. That's what wasted this thread before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by harharhar
Good. Apple doesn't deserve a dime.
The particular legal action the article is referring to, is not about monetary rewards.
It's about getting an injunction. The offending devices are no longer sold, but that's not the point. Simplified, what Apple wants is to get the regular court system to lower the bar for injunctions. That is, to decide that monetary compensation is not usually enough if a patent is infringed.
(There have been decisions like that, but they were under different circumstances.)
The trouble is, I think this push could easily backfire on Apple in the future. For example, the ITC.. which operates under their own rules... uses injunctions instead of monetary awards, and they banned older Apple devices that infringed on a Samsung patent, and Apple didn't like that at all.
Sometimes you wonder if one hand at Apple's law firms knows what the other hand is doing.
Please do not get started on personal comments again. That's what wasted this thread before.
The particular legal action the article is referring to, is not about monetary rewards.
It's about getting an injunction. The offending devices are no longer sold, but that's not the point. Simplified, what Apple wants is to get the regular court system to lower the bar for injunctions. That is, to decide that monetary compensation is not usually enough if a patent is infringed.
(There have been decisions like that, but they were under different circumstances.)
The trouble is, I think this push could easily backfire on Apple in the future. For example, the ITC.. which operates under their own rules... uses injunctions instead of monetary awards, and they banned older Apple devices that infringed on a Samsung patent, and Apple didn't like that at all.
Sometimes you wonder if one hand at Apple's law firms knows what the other hand is doing.
Is Apple asking for injunctions based on SEP violations? Because that's what they're protesting at the ITC.
There are at least 4 mods left - me, Mr. H, melgross and hmurchison. Flag inappropriate posts and they'll be sorted. I know it's difficult sometimes but trying to avoid responding would help too so that 50 or so comments don't also have to be removed.
Yet you're pretty much the only visible one.
And I do try to flag inappropriate posts. I just understand it's a tall order for a somewhat undermanned mod squad. I didn't mean any offense.
Personally, I not interested in who wins this court battle as I would rather see less battles in court and more battles in the market place through innovation, invention and creativity. Imagine what you could create if you diverted all the money Apple or Samsung has spent on litigation into product research and development. Hope this does not offend anyone.
Personally, I not interested in who wins this court battle as I would rather see less battles in court and more battles in the market place through innovation, invention and creativity. Imagine what you could create if you diverted all the money Apple or Samsung has spent on litigation into product research and development. Hope this does not offend anyone.
The amount they're spending on legal battles is a drop in the bucket compared to the money both companies rake in, and is in no way taking away from the R&D budget.
Apple and Samsung have almost limitless capital resources. I think Apple "suffers" from a lack of engineering manpower, but that may be intentional as Apple has proven how successful a "small" focused company can be.
[QUOTE]I agree there should be protection for invention and innovation. But some of the stuff Apple has patented they didnt really invent. One example: Magsafe. This was feature on most electric appliances in the far east, particularly kettles, design to prevent small children from pulling the cord and scalding themselves. The person or persons who made this didnt patent it so Apple borrowed it for their laptops and patented it and now get the credit. If you dont believe me, watch this:
I [B]don't[/B] believe it. Apple's patent is valid.
Your video is a pile of sheer stupid, by the way. Absolute effing nonsense.
Your video is a pile of sheer stupid, by the way. Absolute effing nonsense.
Excuse me but i didnt say Apple's patent wasnt valid. In fact it is valid and legit. I merely pointed out that the idea was already around just not used in computers and for the record, i did not create the video nor did i star in it. I found it on you tube. If you want to tell the people who did the video of your views then feel free.
Excuse me but i didnt say Apple's patent wasnt valid. In fact it is valid and legit. I merely pointed out that the idea was already around just not used in computers and for the record, i did not create the video nor did i star in it. I found it on you tube. If you want to tell the people who did the video of your views then feel free.
And therefore Apple's use of said idea... IN computers... was somehow not invented by them.
So all magnets, used anywhere to affix anything to anything, are just stolen from the original use thereof?
And therefore Apple's use of said idea... IN computers... was somehow not invented by them.
So all magnets, used anywhere to affix anything to anything, are just stolen from the original use thereof?
Oh for the love of all things holy. Apple used the idea of a magnetically sealed charging connection on a laptop. The principles are exactly the same just the product you use to power or charge is different. The "invention" is a cable which powers/charges a device is magnetically connected to the appliance.
Comments
One that goes around physically assaulting people no less, but it would explain the avatar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
You're comparing TS to a good looking teenage girl?
I'm surprised it took this long for someone to come back with that angle, though I didn't intend it that way.
(Quinney expressed it far more succinctly: "You know they live for that, don't you?")
There are at least 4 mods left - me, Mr. H, melgross and hmurchison. Flag inappropriate posts and they'll be sorted. I know it's difficult sometimes but trying to avoid responding would help too so that 50 or so comments don't also have to be removed.
Hi Marvin,
Pls do?t be to harsh on TS.
We all know he's quite outspoken (his 'vomit' remark is case in point) but we can all live with it
C
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1
Hi
Hi Marvin,
Pls do?t be to harsh on TS.
We all know he's quite outspoken (his 'vomit' remark is case in point) but we can all live with it
C
Personally, I didn't mind much about TS's remark. After-all, I was (playfully) yanking his chain.
Please do not get started on personal comments again. That's what wasted this thread before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by harharhar
Good. Apple doesn't deserve a dime.
The particular legal action the article is referring to, is not about monetary rewards.
It's about getting an injunction. The offending devices are no longer sold, but that's not the point. Simplified, what Apple wants is to get the regular court system to lower the bar for injunctions. That is, to decide that monetary compensation is not usually enough if a patent is infringed.
(There have been decisions like that, but they were under different circumstances.)
The trouble is, I think this push could easily backfire on Apple in the future. For example, the ITC.. which operates under their own rules... uses injunctions instead of monetary awards, and they banned older Apple devices that infringed on a Samsung patent, and Apple didn't like that at all.
Sometimes you wonder if one hand at Apple's law firms knows what the other hand is doing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Please do not get started on personal comments again. That's what wasted this thread before.
The particular legal action the article is referring to, is not about monetary rewards.
It's about getting an injunction. The offending devices are no longer sold, but that's not the point. Simplified, what Apple wants is to get the regular court system to lower the bar for injunctions. That is, to decide that monetary compensation is not usually enough if a patent is infringed.
(There have been decisions like that, but they were under different circumstances.)
The trouble is, I think this push could easily backfire on Apple in the future. For example, the ITC.. which operates under their own rules... uses injunctions instead of monetary awards, and they banned older Apple devices that infringed on a Samsung patent, and Apple didn't like that at all.
Sometimes you wonder if one hand at Apple's law firms knows what the other hand is doing.
Is Apple asking for injunctions based on SEP violations? Because that's what they're protesting at the ITC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
There are at least 4 mods left - me, Mr. H, melgross and hmurchison. Flag inappropriate posts and they'll be sorted. I know it's difficult sometimes but trying to avoid responding would help too so that 50 or so comments don't also have to be removed.
Yet you're pretty much the only visible one.
And I do try to flag inappropriate posts. I just understand it's a tall order for a somewhat undermanned mod squad. I didn't mean any offense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stike vomit
Personally, I didn't mind much about TS's remark. After-all, I was (playfully) yanking his chain.
I think we all are.
I wish it weren't that easy
(the emoticon is to feel how it is being in his shoes)
Well, I know now: they smell
Personally, I not interested in who wins this court battle as I would rather see less battles in court and more battles in the market place through innovation, invention and creativity. Imagine what you could create if you diverted all the money Apple or Samsung has spent on litigation into product research and development. Hope this does not offend anyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondm16
Personally, I not interested in who wins this court battle as I would rather see less battles in court and more battles in the market place through innovation, invention and creativity. Imagine what you could create if you diverted all the money Apple or Samsung has spent on litigation into product research and development. Hope this does not offend anyone.
The amount they're spending on legal battles is a drop in the bucket compared to the money both companies rake in, and is in no way taking away from the R&D budget.
Apple and Samsung have almost limitless capital resources. I think Apple "suffers" from a lack of engineering manpower, but that may be intentional as Apple has proven how successful a "small" focused company can be.
Blah blah blah. Enough of this tired argument.
Imagine what no one would create if there was no legal protection for what you created in the first place and anyone could steal anything from anyone.
Ok, I said what i thought. Sorry if i was going over old stuff.
I [B]don't[/B] believe it. Apple's patent is valid.
Your video is a pile of sheer stupid, by the way. Absolute effing nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I don't believe it. Apple's patent is valid.
Your video is a pile of sheer stupid, by the way. Absolute effing nonsense.
Excuse me but i didnt say Apple's patent wasnt valid. In fact it is valid and legit. I merely pointed out that the idea was already around just not used in computers and for the record, i did not create the video nor did i star in it. I found it on you tube. If you want to tell the people who did the video of your views then feel free.
And therefore Apple's use of said idea... IN computers... was somehow not invented by them.
So all magnets, used anywhere to affix anything to anything, are just stolen from the original use thereof?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And therefore Apple's use of said idea... IN computers... was somehow not invented by them.
So all magnets, used anywhere to affix anything to anything, are just stolen from the original use thereof?
Oh for the love of all things holy. Apple used the idea of a magnetically sealed charging connection on a laptop. The principles are exactly the same just the product you use to power or charge is different. The "invention" is a cable which powers/charges a device is magnetically connected to the appliance.
So the video is entirely a crock, then.
Whatever you say sir.
Good; I'm glad you agree. No one could disagree; it's just utter crap.