loptimist
About
- Username
- loptimist
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- -
- Roles
- member
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 113
Reactions
Comments
-
ericthehalfbee wrote: » ^ You keep spewing that same BS based on a couple decisions when the MAJORITY of rulings DO NOT agree . Most courts, judges, government, organizations, academics and major tech companies DO NOT agree. So stop with your u…
-
and you know pto (an agency) invalidation does not mean the federal courts (article III courts) should follow.
-
you realize many of samsung's patents are being invalidated too, right? and the reasons for invalidating apple's patents are not because they are inferior to samsung's patents, right?
-
Quote: Originally Posted by JoshKar426 - Software isn't meaningless, but patenting general algorithms is abhorable. Did you even read the patent application. It basically says that Apple patented the algorithm for making the green…
-
First of all, high tech patents are so different from life science, pharmaceutical ones. For instance, even in an LCD there are a ton of patents, and for a smartphone, you guess. However, only a few patents are probably embodied in a medicine pi…
-
joshkar426 wrote: » I think many people don't understand that there's a difference between Apple and Samsung's patents. Apple's patents are mainly broad, generic designs that take $0 in R&D costs. Samsung's patents deal with REAL technolog…
-
Agreement is one element. The other element is to do what? And if it were a price fixing then per se or RoR if Leegin applies. Both are issues. APPLE does not raises issues with the second element because it is done deal as publishers already s…
-
pendergast wrote: » None of this applies to Apple, it applies to the PUBLISHER(S). Apple is being accused of being part of the publishers alleged conspiracy. The principles of Leegin would apply to the publishers, as the agency model is in …
-
pendergast wrote: » None of this applies to Apple, it applies to the PUBLISHER(S). Apple is being accused of being part of the publishers alleged conspiracy. The principles of Leegin would apply to the publishers, as the agency model is in …
-
freerange wrote: » The trolls sweep in quickly! Samsung is not banned after willingly, knowingly, purposefully copying nearly every single aspect of the iPhone and iPad and doesn't get immediately banned, and Apple is accused of using standard ess…
-
lol. Not bad ITC. Impressed to overcome the pressures.
-
pendergast wrote: » Interesting, but I would say it is applicable in that RPM is no longer always illegal, and the principles apply in this case, since the publishers are essentially manufacturers. EDIT: Also, none of this needs to be applicabl…
-
pendergast wrote: » http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2003767332_retail29.html Leegin is minimum price fixing to control intrabrand competition to foster interbrand competition. Not applicable to Apple. Apple allegedly controlle…
-
pendergast wrote: » You fixed it wrong. Individually, a manufacturer has the right to set the price, and force the retailer to sell at that price. Not illegal. What can be illegal is collusion. The reason being is it can effectively creat…
-
gatorguy wrote: » Because - my - links - don't - relate - to - what - you - said - other - than - subject - matter ??? I'm sorry but that makes no sense. Does it matter when it's the DoJ or FTC bringing the suit? If there's not a basis for an a…
-
pendergast wrote: » The manufacturer's ability to set the price that the retailer sells it at (price fixing) is [...] illegal [if it unreasonably restraints the trade]. That's not the issue here, either. It's all about collusion. [THE LAW DO…
-
gatorguy wrote: » How so? What agencies would normally raise anti-trust concerns? The DoJ is one, and the FTC another. http://www.steptoe.com/assets/attachments/30.pdf Because your link does not relate to what I said other than the subject mat…
-
gatorguy wrote: » http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/157817/apple-heads-to-court-in-unusual-antitrust-trial-over-e-book-prices/40#post_2338015 This is what the DoJ says might constitute anti-competitive practices in violation of the anti-trust prov…
-
I hope people here to at least read the standards/rules for antitrust violations before mixing up some terms and think they make any sense. Even with my limited knowledge, I know that section one violation does not require the consipirator to posse…
-
A few things. First, you cannot compel an agency to enforce, period. Second, eBook prices falling after the fact does not matter. The question is whether Apple conspired to price fix. Third, conspiring to set minimum price at Apple's price is …