applemagic

gatorguy said:

applemagic said:

As per Florian Mueller over at fosspatents.com, the decision by the ITC is actually a setback to Qualcomm, not progress. He outlines the reasons here: http://www.fosspatents.com/2018/12/itc-decides-to-review-initial.html

I really wish AI would make use of such resources to provide more nuanced reporting instead of parroting the mainstream media's slant on the issue.

It couldn't be considered a setback as they're not in a worse position than they were.

So by now, there's only one patent in the case, and Apple has four different chances to avoid an import ban, and needs to prevail on just one while Qualcomm must overcome all four hurdles:

1. infringement (a matter of claim construction, and the Commission is interested in claim construction arguments),

2. validity (the Commission appears particularly interested in one prior art reference, but also in a second one that might be relevant to an obviousness analysis),

3. domestic industry (here, claim construction also comes into play), and

4. the public interest in thwarting a market monopolization campaign.

I really wish AI would make use of such resources to provide more nuanced reporting instead of parroting the mainstream media's slant on the issue.

canukstorm said:

aaronsullivan said:

canukstorm said:

osmartormenajr said:

... It is unclear if TRAI's app was approved because it uses the framework and follows App Store policies, or if Apple ultimately gave in to demands.

At this day and age, I fear it's the latter. No matter your nationality, ideology, or education (I'm an engineer BTW), if you can remember high school history, you can recognize that we are frogs in a warming pot. We are just letting too much slide...

No one is above the law.  You want to play in someone else's backyard, you play by their rules or don't play at all.

I think that is part of the point, though, right? The eroding of privacy and rights as businesses succumb to the laws of countries that don't respect them. At least that's the way I was reading it.

If Apple is a strong advocate of privacy and rights, as Tim Cook has always said, then given the current situation in India, they shouldn't do business there, period. 

genovelle said:

rcfa said:

“Family friendly”

Sorry, but don’t be in the world of being profitable, unless you’re trying to sell a gay CEO to evangelists, with family friendly content. You might as well buy the Disney Channel.

Most people are sexually suppressed, frustrated, and they seek sex and violence/power to compensate for what’s missing in their life.

Apple: get used to it, you’re a channel, not a guardian. Leave the latter to the police...

It’s sad that people are so lost that the very concept of having a channel that the whole family can watch together is stupid. Wow, just wow!

rcfa said:

Apple e.g. refuses to even look at my MacBook Air for repair because it has “a dangerous third party battery” in it. Nothing about that battery is dangerous, the battery that’s dangerous was the Apple supplied original, that with only 32 cycles became so bloated one couldn’t close the lid properly anymore, necessitating the emergency repair with a third party battery (which was all that was available within a useful time period).