Apple found in infringement of University of Wisconsin CPU patent, faces $862M in damages

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 91
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CraigAppleW View Post



    I had to post before the inevitable Mac cult members showed up to predictably defend Apple and attack the other party...in this case the university.



    How dare the University merely not donate it's research and technology to Apple. The gall of anyone to think they shouldn't cede all their ideas, material possessions and soul to the Apple mother ship.



    I love Apple...own almost all the major products they've ever shipped since 1985. But I love them less all the time. And I'm really fed up with the always-on 24/7 Apple apologists, including the sold out "journalists" and blogosphere types.

     

    The only person here that sounds like they're from a cult is you, with your foaming-at-the-mouth hatred, extremism, assumptions, and the fact that you're pre-emptively shitting on future posts that didn't even happen. 

     

    "Sold out journalists"? Why don't you provide us with a shred of evidence of bloggers and journalists being paid off by Apple? Shouldn't be tough, for such a large and scrutinized company, right? Or is that your automatic, lying response to a positive review of an Apple product? To people like you, anyone who doesn't constantly shit on Apple, no matter what they do, is an "apologist", "cult member", etc. What a rational human being you are. 

     

    Gotta love the classic "I love Apple, but they actually suck" troll meme in your post. So tell us, when did you start "loving them less all the time"? Last week? Last month? Last year? After SJ died? Nope, much before that:

     

    From October 2010:

    Quote:

     Over the past few years I have gone from Apple fan boy to someone who isn't far from hating the company. Their ethics in a vast array of arenas is going to hell.


     

    Try not to be such a blatant liar. Anyone can look at your post history and see that's the case. You first started posting in 2010, and every single one of your posts shits on Apple. One of your first gems:

     

    Quote:

    Steve Jobs is placing Apple's agenda above the interests of the people. It's that simple. Clearly Apple could, if it wished, make Flash run superbly on the Mac, as it does on the PC. But Jobs would rather penalize Apple users to achieve corporate business aims. God forbid Apple look to the interests of the user and assist the playback of ubiquitous Flash content. Democrats like Jobs are the biggest business hypocrites of all time. Actually democrats are becoming...


     

    Nice, democrat and Jobs bashing in one line. Your next post..

     

    Quote:

     It's simple. Because you don't expect Jack shit from a cel phone when it comes to browsing. But that's going to change. And if you haven't already heard about the mass of customers returning their ipads--you soon will. Half the web won't cut it with a tablet. I've bought over 10 apple computers...but I am questioning my ongoing loyalty. I say it's time to "Think Different."


     

    Mass of customers returning iPads? Grotesque, blatant lie. Moving on..

     

    Quote:

     As a developer I use ANY tool that does the job. The reality is that HTML 5 is 10 years behind Flash when it comes to building anything immersive or significant. I've seen the HTML 5 demos and all I can do is laugh. Why do you think all the big web sites use Flash?


     

    So, you're a hateful Flash syncophant who is enraged at Apple for killing this horrid technology and moving the industry forward. Now it makes sense. 

     

    Quote:

     I'm embarrassed I ever believed Apple when it said, "Think Different." Steve Jobs is a joke.


     

    But I thought Apple has become a joke after the death of Jobs? I thought Cook was driving Apple into the ground? Now, Steve Jobs was the joke too? So when did Apple become a joke? A couple decades ago? It goes on, and on, and on. Then your latest gem:

     

    Quote:

     I see the legion of puppets have rolled in to post...eager to defend the biggest world in the company... from any possible disparagement... from all possible source...from each unpleasant factual reality.


     

    I'm assuming you meant "biggest company in the world, but I can see how one can become tongue tied with so much trolling and lying.

     

    Not one positive post in your entire posting history. Yet, you "love" Apple. You've also called people on this forum names like dweeb, mental case, nimrod, etc. Not to mention constantly use words like "worship", "cult", fanboys", etc. Not a single one of your contributions contains a shred of insight, or fact. I can only assume you're a enraged flash developer, that has not taken the time or effort to expand their knowledge and adapt. 

     

    Mods, please explain how this bottom of the barrel troll, that has done nothing but bash Apple and everyone on this forum, and lies incessantly, can retain posting privileges for the past 5 years? You'll have to excuse me, once in a blue moon I have a need to expose these trolls for the liars that they are. 

  • Reply 22 of 91
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,917member
    May be someone needs to invalidate '752 patent as same work must be done by IBM and other computer companies who design their processors for decades. Branch predictions is not new and such circuit was architected, designed and embedded into processors many years before 1998. Apple needs to fight it out.
  • Reply 23 of 91
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,381member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

     

     

    The only person here that sounds like they're from a cult is you, with your foaming-at-the-mouth hatred, extremism, assumptions, and the fact that you're pre-emptively shitting on future posts that didn't even happen. 

     

    "Sold out journalists"? Why don't you provide us with evidence of bloggers and journalists being paid off by Apple? Or is that your automatic response to a positive review of an Apple product? To people like you, anyone who doesn't constantly shit on Apple, no matter what they do, is an "apologist", "cult member", etc. What a rational human being you are. 

     

    Gotta love the classic "I love Apple, but they actually suck" troll meme in your post. So tell us, when did you start "loving them less all the time"? Last week? Last month? Last year? After SJ died? Nope, much before that:

     

    From October 2010:

     

    Try not to be such a blatant liar. Anyone can look at your post history and see that's the case. You first started posting in 2010, and every single one of your posts shits on Apple. One of your first gems:

     

     

    Nice, democrat and Jobs bashing in one line. Your next post..

     

     

    Mass of customers returning iPads? Grotesque, blatant lie. Moving on..

     

     

    So, you're a hateful Flash syncophant who is enraged at Apple for killing this horrid technology and moving the industry forward. Now it makes sense. 

     

     

    But I thought Apple has become a joke after the dath of Jobs? Now, Steve Jobs was a joke too? It goes on, and on, and on. Then your latest gem:

     

     

    Not one positive post in your entire posting history. Yet, you "love" Apple. You've also called people on this forum names like dweeb, mental case, nimrod, etc. Not to mention constantly use words like "worship", "cult", fanboys", etc. Not a single one of your contributions contains a shred of insight, or fact. I can only assume you're a enraged flash developer, that has not taken the time or effort to expand their knowledge and adapt. 

     

    Mods, please explain how this bottom of the barrel troll, that has done nothing but bash Apple and everyone on this forum, and lies incessantly, can retain posting privileges for the past 5 years?


    Thank you for pulling up his history. He's just a troll, with all the "concern" trimmings to make him think that he's thoughtful.

  • Reply 24 of 91
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member

    There's no fucking way theyll pay this. This will be litigated till the cows come home and then theyll be a settlement for peanuts.

     

    Just to tell you how insane this thing is, Samsung who F**** Apple all kind of ways.... Were fined to pay less.

     

    I still can't beleive such things go to a clueless jury

  • Reply 25 of 91
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,100member
    tmay wrote: »
    Thank you for pulling up his history. He's just a troll, with all the "concern" trimmings to make him think that he's thoughtful.

    In which that miscreant troll will simply scurry away, and the mods will do the one thing they're good at doing... Nothing.

    Because web clicks are more important than a decent forum.
  • Reply 26 of 91
    I know what Superfast Matt would say to this lawsuit. :)
  • Reply 27 of 91
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,398member
    bulk001 wrote: »
    Your mistake is in thinking that most people here are anything but apologists for the largest company in the world.

    Worlds largest company, ICBC?
  • Reply 28 of 91
    normmnormm Posts: 653member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post





    Welcome to the Block List, Mr concern troll.







    Intel settled with Wisconsin over this exact same patent. Apple very likely infringes it, since it's been said that the A7 (and subsequent processors) have more in common with Intel desktop processors than they do with ARM mobile processors. This looks like one of those cases where engineers come up with a similar solution and end up infringing a previous patent.



    Apple should just take a license like Intel did, though I'm not sure Wisconsin deserves almost a billion dollars for a single patent on something as ridiculously complex as a processor.

     

    It seems like Apple's patents don't really give them much protection, while other's patents are a giant headache.  This is true regardless of the merits of the various challenges they face, just because there are so many.  The issues are complex and expensive to litigate, and the criterion for invalidity due to obviousness (at the time the patent was written) is that an engineer who knew the state of the art, given the problem, would have seen that solution.  How can you reliably convince a non technical jury of that??

  • Reply 29 of 91
    I would love to see some experts opinion on this, as branch predictions are here since the caches were introduced.

    And in multi-processors caches need to be optimized to be used the best.

    This seems to me like a theoretical, and obvious patent in the hope that someday that technology becomes real and you could sue everyone.
  • Reply 30 of 91
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    I had to post before the inevitable Mac cult members showed up to predictably defend Apple and attack the other party...in this case the university.

    How dare the University merely not donate it's research and technology to Apple. The gall of anyone to think they shouldn't cede all their ideas, material possessions and soul to the Apple mother ship.

    I love Apple...own almost all the major products they've ever shipped since 1985. But I love them less all the time. And I'm really fed up with the always-on 24/7 Apple apologists, including the sold out "journalists" and blogosphere types.
    800
  • Reply 31 of 91
    ktappektappe Posts: 824member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

     



    You are assuming Apple is actually guilty. 


     

    And you are assuming they are innocent. Those of us assuming guilt have a jury verdict on our side.

     

    Oh, by the way:

     

    >Apple...cited the property in its own patent filings. Further, the lawsuit claims Apple refused WARF's requests to license the IP.

     

    That is a very difficult double-whammy to explain away. It shows Apple knew it was infringing but proceeded anyway. It also shows Apple refused to pay once they knew about the infringement. 

     

    But yes, go ahead and explain how the jury who saw all the evidence, and these two very damning facts are all worthy of being discarded in favor of you saying that somehow *we* are the ones who are "assuming" things with our statements.

  • Reply 32 of 91
    ktappektappe Posts: 824member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NormM View Post

     

     

    How can you reliably convince a non technical jury of that??


     

    OK, wait. You're blatantly ignoring legal facts here so you can concentrate on alleged jury techno-ignorance.

     

    Apple itself cited the Wisconsin patent in its filing. Once they knew they were infringing, they were in the wrong, PERIOD. If they felt the Wisconsin patent was invalid, the proper path forward was to file with the USPTO to invalidate the patent. It is blatant bad-faith for them to produce a product that infringes and then later claim innocence.

     

    It is dismaying to me the dozens of posts here from people who do not understand basic jurisprudence who are then making fun of those of us who seem to have a modicum of such understanding. The A.I. comment area is getting nearly as bad as YouTube's. You should all be ashamed. Seriously.

  • Reply 33 of 91
    bluefire1bluefire1 Posts: 1,304member
    Do I hear the word "appeal?"
  • Reply 34 of 91

    There was a time when Apple users were known to THINK DIFFERENT. Sadly now Apple has become a lot more like Microsoft and so many of it's users exercise only their crocodile brain...in reflexive defensive twitch mode. They don't think for themselves at all.

  • Reply 35 of 91
    ecatsecats Posts: 272member
    The most amusing thing is reading the irrelevant comments that detail some kind of double standard from Apple favouring commenters, as if 800-900M in damages is both reasonable or affordable. Judging from similar cases I expect that this figure is reduced to a fraction of a percent or invalidated entirely.
  • Reply 36 of 91
    adamcadamc Posts: 583member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ktappe View Post

     

     

    And you are assuming they are innocent. Those of us assuming guilt have a jury verdict on our side.

     

    Oh, by the way:

     

    >Apple...cited the property in its own patent filings. Further, the lawsuit claims Apple refused WARF's requests to license the IP.

     

    That is a very difficult double-whammy to explain away. It shows Apple knew it was infringing but proceeded anyway. It also shows Apple refused to pay once they knew about the infringement. 

     

    But yes, go ahead and explain how the jury who saw all the evidence, and these two very damning facts are all worthy of being discarded in favor of you saying that somehow *we* are the ones who are "assuming" things with our statements.




    Let see what the appeal court says before your claim of the a Wisconsin jury's verdict which is in favour of a Wisconsin University's suit has the guilty verdict on your side.

     

    He who laughs last laughs best.

  • Reply 37 of 91
    boredumbboredumb Posts: 1,418member

    It just looks so generic...

    It's like drawing a stick figure to defend ownership of the human genome...

  • Reply 38 of 91
    jkichlinejkichline Posts: 1,369member

    I don't know the minute details of the patent, but from the look of it, it's a legitimate piece of intellectual property.  It's also quite possible that Apple infringed the patent without knowing it. In that case, this is how business works. If they've infringed, they may just pay the bill and the university research gets a great boost in the arm. However I'd expect Apple will counter and appeal as protocol to make sure the suit has been fully vetted.

  • Reply 39 of 91
    bobschlobbobschlob Posts: 1,074member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jkichline View Post

     

    I don't know the minute details of the patent, but from the look of it, it's a legitimate piece of intellectual property.  It's also quite possible that Apple infringed the patent without knowing it. In that case, this is how business works. If they've infringed, they may just pay the bill and the university research gets a great boost in the arm. However I'd expect Apple will counter and appeal as protocol to make sure the suit has been fully vetted.




    Stop talking reasonably!

    We don't take kindly to that kinda thing 'round heah! :smokey: 

  • Reply 40 of 91
    boltsfan17boltsfan17 Posts: 2,294member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

     

     

    The only person here that sounds like they're from a cult is you, with your foaming-at-the-mouth hatred, extremism, assumptions, and the fact that you're pre-emptively shitting on future posts that didn't even happen. 

     

    "Sold out journalists"? Why don't you provide us with a shred of evidence of bloggers and journalists being paid off by Apple? Shouldn't be tough, for such a large and scrutinized company, right? Or is that your automatic, lying response to a positive review of an Apple product? To people like you, anyone who doesn't constantly shit on Apple, no matter what they do, is an "apologist", "cult member", etc. What a rational human being you are. 

     

    Gotta love the classic "I love Apple, but they actually suck" troll meme in your post. So tell us, when did you start "loving them less all the time"? Last week? Last month? Last year? After SJ died? Nope, much before that:

     

    From October 2010:

     

    Try not to be such a blatant liar. Anyone can look at your post history and see that's the case. You first started posting in 2010, and every single one of your posts shits on Apple. One of your first gems:

     

     

    Nice, democrat and Jobs bashing in one line. Your next post..

     

     

    Mass of customers returning iPads? Grotesque, blatant lie. Moving on..

     

     

    So, you're a hateful Flash syncophant who is enraged at Apple for killing this horrid technology and moving the industry forward. Now it makes sense. 

     

     

    But I thought Apple has become a joke after the death of Jobs? I thought Cook was driving Apple into the ground? Now, Steve Jobs was the joke too? So when did Apple become a joke? A couple decades ago? It goes on, and on, and on. Then your latest gem:

     

     

    I'm assuming you meant "biggest company in the world, but I can see how one can become tongue tied with so much trolling and lying.

     

    Not one positive post in your entire posting history. Yet, you "love" Apple. You've also called people on this forum names like dweeb, mental case, nimrod, etc. Not to mention constantly use words like "worship", "cult", fanboys", etc. Not a single one of your contributions contains a shred of insight, or fact. I can only assume you're a enraged flash developer, that has not taken the time or effort to expand their knowledge and adapt. 

     

    Mods, please explain how this bottom of the barrel troll, that has done nothing but bash Apple and everyone on this forum, and lies incessantly, can retain posting privileges for the past 5 years? You'll have to excuse me, once in a blue moon I have a need to expose these trolls for the liars that they are. 




    Next up on the mic is CraigAppleW (crowd silence), CraigAppleW, you're up (crowd still silent). Has anyone seen CraigAppleW (crowd starts to boo)?

Sign In or Register to comment.