but apple will no doubt have to pay for the ericson patents. and just recently were nailed by a patent troll- wft are these judges doing? apple has to pay nearly damn everything and yet when they want anyone to pay them this sh*t happens. i did not know that being a judge meant you could just shut out the world and use your prejudice to decide.
When are the courts going to grow some balls and slap this thieving company into submission? They thumb their nose at everyone's IP around the world as part of their ongoing business strategy. The fact is that they don't care because they never, ever, get slapped hard. The reality is that they stole BILLIONS of dollars of business from Apple as they converted themselves into the largest mobile phone manufacturer in the world, almost overnight, using Apple's IP, when previously they were back in the pack... an also-ran.
Things could potentially turn even more against Apple's current judgement v.Samsung. A recent SCOTUS ruling may end up as the basis for tossing even the design patent portion of the damages, forcing a re-hearing of the case. First time I'd seen this.
Things could potentially turn even more against Apple's current judgement against v.Samsung. A recent SCOTUS ruling may end up as the basis for tossing even the design patent portion of the damages, forcing a re-hearing of the case. First time I'd seen this.
In any jury trial, a jury is under no legal obligation to follow the instructions of the court, plus jurors can choose to ignore the law if they believe it is unjust. More jurors need to be informed of their power to affect change by fighting back against laws that are senseless and harmful.
Well for a start, Apple clearly hasn't licensed them to Samsung. Otherwise we wouldn't be having the discussion. How can someone that uses such sloppy thought and expression be a judge?
Generally Apple has licensed those patents as part of a licence exchange.
That exchange may have contained irreparable damage to Apple, but also provided essential benefits that justified that irreparable damage.
Since there are no essential benefits that Samsung can supply Apple with, that Apple doesn't already have a right to, then why should Apple sustain the irreparable damage.
Comments
Being told to pay up isn't 'agreeing'.
but apple will no doubt have to pay for the ericson patents. and just recently were nailed by a patent troll- wft are these judges doing? apple has to pay nearly damn everything and yet when they want anyone to pay them this sh*t happens. i did not know that being a judge meant you could just shut out the world and use your prejudice to decide.
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/03/03/teva-and-what-it-means-for-apple-v-samsung-and-design-patents/id=55333/
Oh, shut up.
www.fija.org
In any jury trial, a jury is under no legal obligation to follow the instructions of the court, plus jurors can choose to ignore the law if they believe it is unjust. More jurors need to be informed of their power to affect change by fighting back against laws that are senseless and harmful.
"You've licensed them to everyone...."
Well for a start, Apple clearly hasn't licensed them to Samsung. Otherwise we wouldn't be having the discussion. How can someone that uses such sloppy thought and expression be a judge?
Generally Apple has licensed those patents as part of a licence exchange.
That exchange may have contained irreparable damage to Apple, but also provided essential benefits that justified that irreparable damage.
Since there are no essential benefits that Samsung can supply Apple with, that Apple doesn't already have a right to, then why should Apple sustain the irreparable damage.