I'm sorry if your trolling attempts to get some negative attention didn't work out but it was pretty weak, and very scatterbrained. Perhaps you could edit your post so you're attacks don't just make us roll our eyes and feel sorry for you.
Then again, from what I recall, Apple merely told the court in Australia that it preferred the status quo (i.e. no sales of the Galaxy) to an outcome where the Galaxy is sold but Samsung pays royalties in accordance with their proposed settlement. Perhaps the Australian court didn't ask Apple to go into as much detail as Judge Koh did. . .
Apple can reasonably argue that Samsung shouldn't be allowed to steal sales from Apple by improperly using Apple's IP, while at the same time saying that even if Samsung doesn't actually steal sales from Apple, it should still not be allowed to sell a product that relies upon the stolen IP.
To quote from MacRumors, "the fact that Apple has been willing to license the feature (scrolling) to other companies for monetary compensation also undermines its argument that it is being irreparably harmed by Samsung's alleged infringement. In Koh's view, if Apple could be adequately compensated for the infringement through a license by Samsung, Apple could be made whole at a later date without the need for a preliminary injunction at this point in the trial."
Hmm, Samsung is a Korean chaebol. Koh is an American District Court judge of direct Korean descent. Seems the 'Apple' doesn't fall very far from her tree.
I wonder how all of this will affect Samsung sales in the US, across all their product lines.
I, for one, will not be buying any more Samsung products going forward. All the legalize aside, it is clear to me that Samsung has targeted Apple products and design. The Samsung TV on the wall of my family room will be my last.
I hope Apple puts a knife into their business. First by moving all of their component business away. Second, by launching iTV which sucks all of the remaining profit out of the TV business
Ditto. Samsung has seen it's last TV purchase from me. (Sharp has a better picture anyway, so that's probably going to be my next one unless Apple put out something just as good).
Hmm, Samsung is a Korean chaebol. Koh is an American District Court judge of direct Korean descent. Seems the 'Apple' doesn't fall very far from her tree.
Whoa. There are still people who would put all Japanese-born Americans in camps as during the war... amazing. Please, please go back to your cave, mate with other cavemen. Avoid cavewomen, the world doesn't need your racist kids.
What a stupid argument. Who are "Apple's customers?" Does that mean that certain, large groups of people will only consider Apple, and others will only consider Samsung? The market is not finite...Apple can get new customers, as it is doing. The real question is how many customers would Apple lose because the copyist's (love that term) product is available.
Some of you seem confused so I'm going to try to clarify things. This case was NOT whether Samsung infringed on Apple patent(s) but an attempt of Apple to get a ban on Samsung to sell devices until the patent trial is settled. The burden of proof is on Apple that their business is being irreparably harmed by the sale of Samsungs product. The evidence did not prove that and no judge would've awarded an injunction that would without a doubt irreparably hurt Samsungs business.
Please stop posting since you obviously don't know what you're talking about.
To win the injunction, Apple had to prove that they were likely to win at trial AND to show that they would suffer irreparable harm. The judge did not rule on whether Apple was likely win at trial, but did rule that they would not suffer irreparable harm since Samsung could afford to pay any reasonable penalties.
There was no decision on the merits of the case.
It's especially bizarre given that this was the judge who pulled the stunt of asking a Samsung attorney to tell her which tablet was which - and the attorney was unable to do so.
when did i say the entire decision is on the merits?
I even qualified my statement by marking that it is not a simple inverse.
Also go read the actual ruling before making assumptions.
(and if you did that already, I seriously doubt your understanding of the process.)
The reason why Samsung could win the preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 was more related to the invalidity of the iPad-related design patents.
(sure, Samsung could try irreparable harm and prevail the motion as a shortcut, but this was a better move because it actually weakened the value of the patent.)
Whereas, you are right, the iPhone 4 v. Galaxy Smartphones are based on irreparable harm arguments. But did I really have to explain in this detail?
It is right for me to point out that she might be biased, and rule in favor of Samsung. Koreans are best customers of products made by Korean companies. Most Koreans I know here in Orange County California only drive Korean made cars. They buy only Korean cosmetics, electronics, food, etc. They are more nationalistic than Japanese. And they are more racist than Mississipi.
Have you been to South Korea and seen for yourself what it's really like? LA's Koreatown is not a microcosm of South Korea. In South Korea, kids and adults love playing COD Modern Warfare and BattleField 3 on their PCs, XBOX 360s or PS3s. If you're a teenager who can't play Blizzard's Warcraft or Starcraft, you won't have much to talk about with your peers in high school. And the hottest smartphone in South Korea is the iPhone 4S. Go to one of the hundreds of Starbucks in South Korea and you'll see people typing on their macbook airs or macbook pros. If Koreans are so nationalistic how did Apple rack up $2 billion in sales in South Korea last year? You think South Koreans adore Samsung? You really don't know anything about the country. Maybe you know a lot about Korean-Americans but your statements about Koreans in general are grossly misleading. By the way, if a South Korean can afford it, he or she will drive a BMW or Audi rather than a Hyundai. You don't know how status conscious South Koreans are, do you? After a visit to South Korea, Paul Kennedy wrote in the NY times that "I don’t think I have seen so many Bentleys in any one place." (Why South Korea Isn't Asia's Switzerland, August 27, 2010)
Some of you seem confused so I'm going to try to clarify things. This case was NOT whether Samsung infringed on Apple patent(s) but an attempt of Apple to get a ban on Samsung to sell devices until the patent trial is settled. The burden of proof is on Apple that their business is being irreparably harmed by the sale of Samsungs product. The evidence did not prove that and no judge would've awarded an injunction that would without a doubt irreparably hurt Samsungs business.
That's a GREAT distinction - and I think entirely accurate.
This case again is about STOPPING a product from shipping -- which means proving harm. Since Apple will not likely be harmed, the injunction does not go forward.
It has ZERO to do with infringement.
>> But I find it funny that Samsung "won" the case because their prospects are dim.
I wonder how all of this will affect Samsung sales in the US, across all their product lines.
I, for one, will not be buying any more Samsung products going forward. All the legalize aside, it is clear to me that Samsung has targeted Apple products and design. The Samsung TV on the wall of my family room will be my last.
I hope Apple puts a knife into their business. First by moving all of their component business away. Second, by launching iTV which sucks all of the remaining profit out of the TV business
Some Koreans are also shunning Samsung products but for different reasons. Samsung gets away with too many shennigans just like Wall Street firms.
Have you been to South Korea and seen for yourself what it's really like? LA's Koreatown is not a microcosm of South Korea. In South Korea, kids and adults love playing COD Modern Warfare and BattleField 3 on their PCs, XBOX 360s or PS3s. If you're a teenager who can't play Blizzard's Warcraft or Starcraft, you won't have much to talk about with your peers in high school. And the hottest smartphone in South Korea is the iPhone 4S. Go to one of the hundreds of Starbucks in South Korea and you'll see people typing on their macbook airs or macbook pros. If Koreans are so nationalistic how did Apple rack up $2 billion in sales in South Korea last year? You think South Koreans adore Samsung? You really don't know anything about the country. Maybe you know a lot about Korean-Americans but your statements about Koreans in general are grossly misleading. By the way, if a South Korean can afford it, he or she will drive a BMW or Audi rather than a Hyundai. You don't know how status conscious South Koreans are, do you? After a visit to South Korea, Paul Kennedy wrote in the NY times that "I don?t think I have seen so many Bentleys in any one place." (Why South Korea Isn't Asia's Switzerland, August 27, 2010)
So you do know a lot about the country? You're actually saying that Korea has fundamentally changed in terms of buying almost exclusively their own cars now? Really? I'd say you might want to open your eyes a bit more the next time you cross a street in Seoul, Pusan, Daegu, etc. I remember not too many years ago when they'd vandalize American or Japanese cars and it seems their 'buy only local cars' nationalism hasn't subsided much at all.
Hmm, Samsung is a Korean chaebol. Koh is an American District Court judge of direct Korean descent. Seems the 'Apple' doesn't fall very far from her tree.
you MIGHT be right -- then again you might not.
I think it's best to give people the benefit of the doubt. In this case, I think the Judge's decision was the correct one based on;
1) Apple is not likely to be financially harmed.
2) The "copying" Samsung HAS DONE can be paid for later by licensing.
>> Stopping a company from shipping a product is a drastic measure and does not occur based on "theft of IP or copyright" -- it only happens when the Plaintiff can be harmed.
In this case, Samsung is guilty, but not going to harm Apple.
Not every Korean or American makes decisions based on a Nationalist agenda -- and it's better to err on the side of IGNORING people's motives unless you have proof, or unless they happen to be part of a group with a history of prejudice.
So you do know a lot about the country? You're actually saying that Korea has fundamentally changed in terms of buying almost exclusively their own cars now? Really? I'd say you might want to open your eyes a bit more the next time you cross a street in Seoul, Pusan, Daegu, etc. I remember not too many years ago when they'd vandalize American or Japanese cars and it seems their 'buy only local cars' nationalism hasn't subsided much at all.
Chevrolet is the third largest car brand in South Korea. And BMW is closing in on making $1 billion in annual profits in South Korea this year although they sell much fewer cars than Hyundai and Kia. That article you cite seems to have been written by some amateur who was too lazy to analyze the sales figures. Apple has a small share of the global mobile phone market but they take the lion's share of the profits, right? So a well-written article would have included data on profits too, wouldn't you agree?
Chevrolet is the third largest car brand in South Korea. And BMW is closing in on making $1 billion in annual profits in South Korea this year although they sell much fewer cars than Hyundai and Kia. That article you cite seems to have been written by some amateur who was too lazy to analyze those sales figures. Can you even call that reporting?
But you fail to mention what a very very DISTANT third place that is. Let me help you.
"Hyundai Motor Company, the top-selling automobile brand in Korea
Apr.04, 2011 in Hyundai cars, Hyundai Sales Reports
Hyundai-Kia Automotive Group enjoy brisk sales in Korea; takes 81 percent of the new automobile market share in March 2011!
According to latest reports from South Korea, Hyundai Motor Company, together with Kia Motors, enjoyed strong sales gains in the local market with their combined domestic sales totaling at 108.113 units! The carmaker’s joint market share stood at 81,1 percent" [and that's actually UP from 78% of the domestic market share last year].
Korea JoongAng Daily - With Korea’s economic recovery, sales of imported cars surged last year.
"Competition is expected to become fiercer this year as domestic and foreign automobiles introduce more models in Korea as revealed during the current 2011 Seoul Motor Show.
Foreign car brands are expected to achieve a market share of more than 10 percent this year for the first time as customers are attracted by greater variety of more affordable models."
"More than 10%" means that even in 2011 Koreans buy about 90% of their cars from Korean manufacturers such as Kia, Hyundai, etc. But anyone who's ever actually been there for more than one hour already knows this. Perhaps Americans should also be so patriotic?
Korea JoongAng Daily - With Korea’s economic recovery, sales of imported cars surged last year.
Foreign car brands are expected to achieve a market share of more than 10 percent this year for the first time as customers are attracted by greater variety of more affordable models."
"More than 10%" means that even in 2011 Koreans buy about 90% of their cars from Korean manufacturers such as Kia, Hyundai, etc. But anyone who's ever actually been there for more than one hour already knows this. Perhaps Americans should also be so patriotic?
Again, you make some good, valid points but you're ignoring the fact that Chevrolet is categorized as a domestic manufacturer in South Korea. And where is the market trending? Some import brands are seeing their sales increase 300% in a single year. I hate to repeat myself but if a South Korean can afford a BMW, he'll buy it rather than buy a Hyundai. With Hyundai you get affordability, not prestige or status. Patriotism? Well, maybe folks who lived through the Korean War still make purchases based on patriotic values. But not the rest of us. On a side note, did you notice that Samsung is not suing Apple in Korean courts? Because Samsung is seen by many South Koreans as being in collusion with the Korean gov't, Samsung would not dare to apply for an injunction in its own country lest it anger South Korean consumers due to the likelihood that the court will side with Samsung and thus deny consumers the ability to buy an iPhone.
Whoa. There are still people who would put all Japanese-born Americans in camps as during the war... amazing. Please, please go back to your cave, mate with other cavemen. Avoid cavewomen, the world doesn't need your racist kids.
Well this is certainly off the topic of the Samsung/Apple decision but seeing as you want to go there, why not? I have no beef with the current generation of Japanese but if you're going to make historical analogies you picked a really, really bad one. The policy of interning Japanese-Americans during WW2 was undoubtedly wrong but it paled mightily in comparison with the Japanese Imperial Army's treatment of Anglo-Saxons, Blacks, Chinese, Russians, Koreans, you name it in their POW camps. Torture, rape, slavery, starvation and beheadings were par for the course. Or does your version of history choose, like pretty much every Japanese school textbook published since 1946 (or like every Chinese textbook's 'special version' of Tibetan history published today), to gloss over those facts? The American and Canadian governments have long since apologized for their actions during that time. Guess who hasn't?
Your ignorance of both basic history and denial of current uber-nationalism in countries other than America (yes, Korea, yes China) suggest a typical reverse-racist mindset. Whitey has never had a monopoly on racism or empire-building and you'd be incredibly foolish to believe otherwise.
If you have a commanding market share of the tablet market, why are you after the rest of the others?
Based on frivolous "design patents" are ridiculous.
More often than not, the US justice system looks at the overall picture which includes the market place, rather than strict rules of what is said on the patent system.
Again, you make some good, valid points but you're ignoring the fact that Chevrolet is categorized as a Korean manufacturer. And where is the market trending? Some import brands are seeing their sales increase 300% in a single year.
Have you ever been there? As I said, if you have you'll already know that all it takes is a quick glance at the cars passing by to see that "market trending" or nay 'Made-in (and by) Korea 'continues to hold, as does a Korean "buy local" mindset. Did you simply ignore the figures I just posted (that the Kia-Hyundai market share actually increased in Korea from 78% in 2010 to 81% in 2011. The Korean media and auto manufacturers acknowledge this, so are you now saying their figures are wrong too? That some (unnamed) foreign brand has increased sales there by 300% might seem like an impressive jump, but when your starting market share is only .002% to begin with, or something equally insignificant, it doesn't mean much at all when total Korean-owned brands are continuing to climb too.
Comments
did i mention,
you morons need to get a life...
I'm sorry if your trolling attempts to get some negative attention didn't work out but it was pretty weak, and very scatterbrained. Perhaps you could edit your post so you're attacks don't just make us roll our eyes and feel sorry for you.
Then again, from what I recall, Apple merely told the court in Australia that it preferred the status quo (i.e. no sales of the Galaxy) to an outcome where the Galaxy is sold but Samsung pays royalties in accordance with their proposed settlement. Perhaps the Australian court didn't ask Apple to go into as much detail as Judge Koh did. . .
Apple can reasonably argue that Samsung shouldn't be allowed to steal sales from Apple by improperly using Apple's IP, while at the same time saying that even if Samsung doesn't actually steal sales from Apple, it should still not be allowed to sell a product that relies upon the stolen IP.
To quote from MacRumors, "the fact that Apple has been willing to license the feature (scrolling) to other companies for monetary compensation also undermines its argument that it is being irreparably harmed by Samsung's alleged infringement. In Koh's view, if Apple could be adequately compensated for the infringement through a license by Samsung, Apple could be made whole at a later date without the need for a preliminary injunction at this point in the trial."
I wonder how all of this will affect Samsung sales in the US, across all their product lines.
I, for one, will not be buying any more Samsung products going forward. All the legalize aside, it is clear to me that Samsung has targeted Apple products and design. The Samsung TV on the wall of my family room will be my last.
I hope Apple puts a knife into their business. First by moving all of their component business away. Second, by launching iTV which sucks all of the remaining profit out of the TV business
Ditto. Samsung has seen it's last TV purchase from me. (Sharp has a better picture anyway, so that's probably going to be my next one unless Apple put out something just as good).
Hmm, Samsung is a Korean chaebol. Koh is an American District Court judge of direct Korean descent. Seems the 'Apple' doesn't fall very far from her tree.
Whoa. There are still people who would put all Japanese-born Americans in camps as during the war... amazing. Please, please go back to your cave, mate with other cavemen. Avoid cavewomen, the world doesn't need your racist kids.
Please stop posting since you obviously don't know what you're talking about.
To win the injunction, Apple had to prove that they were likely to win at trial AND to show that they would suffer irreparable harm. The judge did not rule on whether Apple was likely win at trial, but did rule that they would not suffer irreparable harm since Samsung could afford to pay any reasonable penalties.
There was no decision on the merits of the case.
It's especially bizarre given that this was the judge who pulled the stunt of asking a Samsung attorney to tell her which tablet was which - and the attorney was unable to do so.
when did i say the entire decision is on the merits?
I even qualified my statement by marking that it is not a simple inverse.
Also go read the actual ruling before making assumptions.
(and if you did that already, I seriously doubt your understanding of the process.)
The reason why Samsung could win the preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 was more related to the invalidity of the iPad-related design patents.
(sure, Samsung could try irreparable harm and prevail the motion as a shortcut, but this was a better move because it actually weakened the value of the patent.)
Whereas, you are right, the iPhone 4 v. Galaxy Smartphones are based on irreparable harm arguments. But did I really have to explain in this detail?
Funny, and don't tell me not to post anymore.
Lucy Koh is of Korean decent.
It is right for me to point out that she might be biased, and rule in favor of Samsung. Koreans are best customers of products made by Korean companies. Most Koreans I know here in Orange County California only drive Korean made cars. They buy only Korean cosmetics, electronics, food, etc. They are more nationalistic than Japanese. And they are more racist than Mississipi.
Have you been to South Korea and seen for yourself what it's really like? LA's Koreatown is not a microcosm of South Korea. In South Korea, kids and adults love playing COD Modern Warfare and BattleField 3 on their PCs, XBOX 360s or PS3s. If you're a teenager who can't play Blizzard's Warcraft or Starcraft, you won't have much to talk about with your peers in high school. And the hottest smartphone in South Korea is the iPhone 4S. Go to one of the hundreds of Starbucks in South Korea and you'll see people typing on their macbook airs or macbook pros. If Koreans are so nationalistic how did Apple rack up $2 billion in sales in South Korea last year? You think South Koreans adore Samsung? You really don't know anything about the country. Maybe you know a lot about Korean-Americans but your statements about Koreans in general are grossly misleading. By the way, if a South Korean can afford it, he or she will drive a BMW or Audi rather than a Hyundai. You don't know how status conscious South Koreans are, do you? After a visit to South Korea, Paul Kennedy wrote in the NY times that "I don’t think I have seen so many Bentleys in any one place." (Why South Korea Isn't Asia's Switzerland, August 27, 2010)
Koh used Apple's own studies (submitted by Apple themselves I presume
Samsung gets off NOT because they weren't infringing, but because they are not good enough to pose a threat.
Of course, for the Apple haters, this will be PROOF that there wasn't any infringement....
... oh well. It's just a company; I just prefer Apple products. Samsung needs to innovate or it isn't lawsuits they have to worry about.
Hopefully we will be talking about more interesting things in the near future.
Some of you seem confused so I'm going to try to clarify things. This case was NOT whether Samsung infringed on Apple patent(s) but an attempt of Apple to get a ban on Samsung to sell devices until the patent trial is settled. The burden of proof is on Apple that their business is being irreparably harmed by the sale of Samsungs product. The evidence did not prove that and no judge would've awarded an injunction that would without a doubt irreparably hurt Samsungs business.
That's a GREAT distinction - and I think entirely accurate.
This case again is about STOPPING a product from shipping -- which means proving harm. Since Apple will not likely be harmed, the injunction does not go forward.
It has ZERO to do with infringement.
>> But I find it funny that Samsung "won" the case because their prospects are dim.
I wonder how all of this will affect Samsung sales in the US, across all their product lines.
I, for one, will not be buying any more Samsung products going forward. All the legalize aside, it is clear to me that Samsung has targeted Apple products and design. The Samsung TV on the wall of my family room will be my last.
I hope Apple puts a knife into their business. First by moving all of their component business away. Second, by launching iTV which sucks all of the remaining profit out of the TV business
Some Koreans are also shunning Samsung products but for different reasons. Samsung gets away with too many shennigans just like Wall Street firms.
Have you been to South Korea and seen for yourself what it's really like? LA's Koreatown is not a microcosm of South Korea. In South Korea, kids and adults love playing COD Modern Warfare and BattleField 3 on their PCs, XBOX 360s or PS3s. If you're a teenager who can't play Blizzard's Warcraft or Starcraft, you won't have much to talk about with your peers in high school. And the hottest smartphone in South Korea is the iPhone 4S. Go to one of the hundreds of Starbucks in South Korea and you'll see people typing on their macbook airs or macbook pros. If Koreans are so nationalistic how did Apple rack up $2 billion in sales in South Korea last year? You think South Koreans adore Samsung? You really don't know anything about the country. Maybe you know a lot about Korean-Americans but your statements about Koreans in general are grossly misleading. By the way, if a South Korean can afford it, he or she will drive a BMW or Audi rather than a Hyundai. You don't know how status conscious South Koreans are, do you? After a visit to South Korea, Paul Kennedy wrote in the NY times that "I don?t think I have seen so many Bentleys in any one place." (Why South Korea Isn't Asia's Switzerland, August 27, 2010)
So you do know a lot about the country? You're actually saying that Korea has fundamentally changed in terms of buying almost exclusively their own cars now? Really? I'd say you might want to open your eyes a bit more the next time you cross a street in Seoul, Pusan, Daegu, etc. I remember not too many years ago when they'd vandalize American or Japanese cars and it seems their 'buy only local cars' nationalism hasn't subsided much at all.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...-local-models/
Hmm, Samsung is a Korean chaebol. Koh is an American District Court judge of direct Korean descent. Seems the 'Apple' doesn't fall very far from her tree.
you MIGHT be right -- then again you might not.
I think it's best to give people the benefit of the doubt. In this case, I think the Judge's decision was the correct one based on;
1) Apple is not likely to be financially harmed.
2) The "copying" Samsung HAS DONE can be paid for later by licensing.
>> Stopping a company from shipping a product is a drastic measure and does not occur based on "theft of IP or copyright" -- it only happens when the Plaintiff can be harmed.
In this case, Samsung is guilty, but not going to harm Apple.
Not every Korean or American makes decisions based on a Nationalist agenda -- and it's better to err on the side of IGNORING people's motives unless you have proof, or unless they happen to be part of a group with a history of prejudice.
So you do know a lot about the country? You're actually saying that Korea has fundamentally changed in terms of buying almost exclusively their own cars now? Really? I'd say you might want to open your eyes a bit more the next time you cross a street in Seoul, Pusan, Daegu, etc. I remember not too many years ago when they'd vandalize American or Japanese cars and it seems their 'buy only local cars' nationalism hasn't subsided much at all.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...-local-models/
Chevrolet is the third largest car brand in South Korea. And BMW is closing in on making $1 billion in annual profits in South Korea this year although they sell much fewer cars than Hyundai and Kia. That article you cite seems to have been written by some amateur who was too lazy to analyze the sales figures. Apple has a small share of the global mobile phone market but they take the lion's share of the profits, right? So a well-written article would have included data on profits too, wouldn't you agree?
Chevrolet is the third largest car brand in South Korea. And BMW is closing in on making $1 billion in annual profits in South Korea this year although they sell much fewer cars than Hyundai and Kia. That article you cite seems to have been written by some amateur who was too lazy to analyze those sales figures. Can you even call that reporting?
But you fail to mention what a very very DISTANT third place that is. Let me help you.
http://www.hyundai-blog.com/index.ph...rand-in-korea/
"Hyundai Motor Company, the top-selling automobile brand in Korea
Apr.04, 2011 in Hyundai cars, Hyundai Sales Reports
Hyundai-Kia Automotive Group enjoy brisk sales in Korea; takes 81 percent of the new automobile market share in March 2011!
According to latest reports from South Korea, Hyundai Motor Company, together with Kia Motors, enjoyed strong sales gains in the local market with their combined domestic sales totaling at 108.113 units! The carmaker’s joint market share stood at 81,1 percent" [and that's actually UP from 78% of the domestic market share last year].
Did you even read the other link in my previous post? Here's another from the horses mouth (italics added). http://autonews.gasgoo.com/global-ne...s-110404.shtml
South Korea: Market share for foreign cars rises
From Korea JoongAng DailyApril 04, 2011
Korea JoongAng Daily - With Korea’s economic recovery, sales of imported cars surged last year.
"Competition is expected to become fiercer this year as domestic and foreign automobiles introduce more models in Korea as revealed during the current 2011 Seoul Motor Show.
Foreign car brands are expected to achieve a market share of more than 10 percent this year for the first time as customers are attracted by greater variety of more affordable models."
"More than 10%" means that even in 2011 Koreans buy about 90% of their cars from Korean manufacturers such as Kia, Hyundai, etc. But anyone who's ever actually been there for more than one hour already knows this. Perhaps Americans should also be so patriotic?
But you fail to mention what a very very DISTANT third place that is. Let me help you.
Did you even read the other link in my previous post? Here's another from the horses mouth (italics added). http://autonews.gasgoo.com/global-ne...s-110404.shtml
South Korea: Market share for foreign cars rises
From Korea JoongAng DailyApril 04, 2011
Korea JoongAng Daily - With Korea’s economic recovery, sales of imported cars surged last year.
Foreign car brands are expected to achieve a market share of more than 10 percent this year for the first time as customers are attracted by greater variety of more affordable models."
"More than 10%" means that even in 2011 Koreans buy about 90% of their cars from Korean manufacturers such as Kia, Hyundai, etc. But anyone who's ever actually been there for more than one hour already knows this. Perhaps Americans should also be so patriotic?
Again, you make some good, valid points but you're ignoring the fact that Chevrolet is categorized as a domestic manufacturer in South Korea. And where is the market trending? Some import brands are seeing their sales increase 300% in a single year. I hate to repeat myself but if a South Korean can afford a BMW, he'll buy it rather than buy a Hyundai. With Hyundai you get affordability, not prestige or status. Patriotism? Well, maybe folks who lived through the Korean War still make purchases based on patriotic values. But not the rest of us. On a side note, did you notice that Samsung is not suing Apple in Korean courts? Because Samsung is seen by many South Koreans as being in collusion with the Korean gov't, Samsung would not dare to apply for an injunction in its own country lest it anger South Korean consumers due to the likelihood that the court will side with Samsung and thus deny consumers the ability to buy an iPhone.
Whoa. There are still people who would put all Japanese-born Americans in camps as during the war... amazing. Please, please go back to your cave, mate with other cavemen. Avoid cavewomen, the world doesn't need your racist kids.
Well this is certainly off the topic of the Samsung/Apple decision but seeing as you want to go there, why not? I have no beef with the current generation of Japanese but if you're going to make historical analogies you picked a really, really bad one. The policy of interning Japanese-Americans during WW2 was undoubtedly wrong but it paled mightily in comparison with the Japanese Imperial Army's treatment of Anglo-Saxons, Blacks, Chinese, Russians, Koreans, you name it in their POW camps. Torture, rape, slavery, starvation and beheadings were par for the course. Or does your version of history choose, like pretty much every Japanese school textbook published since 1946 (or like every Chinese textbook's 'special version' of Tibetan history published today), to gloss over those facts? The American and Canadian governments have long since apologized for their actions during that time. Guess who hasn't?
Your ignorance of both basic history and denial of current uber-nationalism in countries other than America (yes, Korea, yes China) suggest a typical reverse-racist mindset. Whitey has never had a monopoly on racism or empire-building and you'd be incredibly foolish to believe otherwise.
If you have a commanding market share of the tablet market, why are you after the rest of the others?
Based on frivolous "design patents" are ridiculous.
More often than not, the US justice system looks at the overall picture which includes the market place, rather than strict rules of what is said on the patent system.
Again, you make some good, valid points but you're ignoring the fact that Chevrolet is categorized as a Korean manufacturer. And where is the market trending? Some import brands are seeing their sales increase 300% in a single year.
Have you ever been there? As I said, if you have you'll already know that all it takes is a quick glance at the cars passing by to see that "market trending" or nay 'Made-in (and by) Korea 'continues to hold, as does a Korean "buy local" mindset. Did you simply ignore the figures I just posted (that the Kia-Hyundai market share actually increased in Korea from 78% in 2010 to 81% in 2011. The Korean media and auto manufacturers acknowledge this, so are you now saying their figures are wrong too? That some (unnamed) foreign brand has increased sales there by 300% might seem like an impressive jump, but when your starting market share is only .002% to begin with, or something equally insignificant, it doesn't mean much at all when total Korean-owned brands are continuing to climb too.