Author Topic: Apple v Samsung Verdict is in (Read 89,698 times)

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #75 on:** August 31, 2012, 02:44 PM »

LOL if only it were true ;-)

40hz · « **Reply #76 on:** August 31, 2012, 07:45 PM »

This just posted over at Tom's Hardware:

Quote

Japan Court Rules in Favor of Samsung in Apple Lawsuit
1:20 PM - August 31, 2012 by Jane McEntegart - source: Reuters

Samsung wins in Japan after heavy blow of US loss.

Samsung may have just suffered a massive blow in its battle against Apple, but the company was today handed a win by the Japanese courts. According to Reuters, Tokyo District Court Judge Tamotsu Shoji today ruled that Samsung's devices did not violate an Apple-owned patent involved in synching mobile devices and computers. The news outlet cites the judge as saying Samsung's products don't infringe on Apple's technological scope.

Looks like "East is East and West is West..." as the old song goes.

rgdot · « **Reply #77 on:** August 31, 2012, 08:04 PM »

There should be a judge exchange program

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #78 on:** August 31, 2012, 11:41 PM »

wraith808 · « **Reply #79 on:** August 31, 2012, 11:46 PM »

^ Haven't we seen this twice before in this thread? LOL ... never too much?

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #80 on:** August 31, 2012, 11:52 PM »

Quote from: wraith808 on August 31, 2012, 11:46 PM

^ Haven't we seen this twice before in this thread? LOL ... never too much?

* Stephen66515 gave up caring about Apple vs Samsung, its a futile effort, so doesn't read topics, instead he just posts random things just for the hell of it

Renegade · « **Reply #81 on:** September 01, 2012, 02:54 AM »

Quote from: Stephen66515 on August 31, 2012, 11:52 PM

Quote from: wraith808 on August 31, 2012, 11:46 PM
^ Haven't we seen this twice before in this thread? LOL ... never too much?
* Stephen66515 gave up caring about Apple vs Samsung, its a futile effort, so doesn't read topics, instead he just posts random things just for the hell of it

Why? It's very entertaining~!

It's just adults behaving like (poorly raised/behaved) elementary school kids.

barney · « **Reply #82 on:** September 01, 2012, 03:05 AM »

Quote from: Renegade on September 01, 2012, 02:54 AM

It's just adults behaving like (poorly raised/behaved) elementary school kids.

Uh-h-h-h ... ya wanna maybe make that pre-school

?!?

Renegade · « **Reply #83 on:** September 01, 2012, 03:31 AM »

Quote from: barney on September 01, 2012, 03:05 AM

Quote from: Renegade on September 01, 2012, 02:54 AM
It's just adults behaving like (poorly raised/behaved) elementary school kids.

Uh-h-h-h ... ya wanna maybe make that pre-school ?!?

Hahahaha~! Yeah - pretty much.

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #84 on:** September 01, 2012, 06:34 AM »

Quote from: Mark0 on August 31, 2012, 01:45 PM

Surely not a real ad. They don't get this good!

A long dormant project idea (of which I have too many!) I've had is "user-OptIn" ads, where the page screams "go here if you want to view an ad". Then all the ads go thrash themselves to their heart's content on the Ad Page. You make it a "cult in joke" page to view. Instead of the current model of blanketing 400 words with 7 inches of ads, just let the ads live by themselves on the Ad Page. So by clicking there the user declares he is not even trying to read any article, and is expressly saying he wants to look at ads. So then let the ads thrash each other!

Renegade · « **Reply #85 on:** September 01, 2012, 07:53 AM »

Quote from: Mark0 on August 29, 2012, 06:09 PM

Oh my... :facepalm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9cnQcTC2JY

FINALLY got around to watching this...

About the patents...

Quote

We didn't look at any singular aspect that closely...

Huh? Wasn't a part of this about patent validity? How can you not look at the patents closely?

Sounds like they just wanted to get the hell out of there. (Not that I blame them though - I don't think I'd like to do jury duty.)

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #86 on:** September 01, 2012, 09:45 AM »

Jury Duty is pretty miserable. (Disclosure, I got denied when I was called up.)

Lawyers make like 200-700 an hour talking at the jury, and the jury makes like $20 a day listening to it. Basically no one in their right mind would take any job in the First World for $20 a day. So with that kind of disparity, it's amazing that the legal system has held up this well.

Mark0 · « **Reply #87 on:** September 01, 2012, 10:33 AM »

That jury foreman also hold a patent for something like a TiVo. Obtained after the TiVo & similar thing was already in existance, obviously. :facepalm:
And the reasoning he used to discard all the prior art presented and "move on faster" is really preposterous.

40hz · « **Reply #88 on:** September 01, 2012, 11:20 AM »

Just goes to reaffirm the importance of your "jury selection strategy" in bringing about the "correct" outcome in a US trial.

It worked for OJ. It worked for Apple. And now, it can work for you! $:-\$

Mark0 · « **Reply #89 on:** September 01, 2012, 11:37 AM »

Blast from the past:

LinuxDevices.com - LG demonstrates wireless Linux Web pad at CeBIT
By Rick Lehrbaum 2001-03-23

Quote

The iPad is powered by a 206Mhz Intel SA-1110 system-on-chip processor and an in-built 64 SDRAM module. It offers some expandability with a slot for Flash memory cards and PCMCIA cards. To operate the devices, users are given a stylus and the pad provides handwriting recognition for both English and Korean.

How dare you, Apple!

Renegade · « **Reply #90 on:** September 01, 2012, 12:11 PM »

Quote from: Mark0 on September 01, 2012, 11:37 AM

Blast from the past:

LinuxDevices.com - LG demonstrates wireless Linux Web pad at CeBIT
By Rick Lehrbaum 2001-03-23
Quote
The iPad is powered by a 206Mhz Intel SA-1110 system-on-chip processor and an in-built 64 SDRAM module. It offers some expandability with a slot for Flash memory cards and PCMCIA cards. To operate the devices, users are given a stylus and the pad provides handwriting recognition for both English and Korean.

How dare you, Apple!

BWAHAHAHAHA~!

That is way too awesome! Thanks for posting it~!

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #91 on:** September 01, 2012, 11:04 PM »

Am I being naive and missing the point (easily done when you are as daft as me) but that must be a joke? Did MPEG4 exist in 2001 ?

Mark0 · « **Reply #92 on:** September 01, 2012, 11:08 PM »

Quote from: Carol Haynes on September 01, 2012, 11:04 PM

Did MPEG4 exist in 2001 ?

Oh, yes.
The LG iPAD probably never went to sale, or maybe just in Korea, but that demo was real.

Mark0 · « **Reply #93 on:** September 01, 2012, 11:16 PM »

Also from the Black Rectangles With Rounded Corners department, here's the LG Prada.

announced: December 12, 2006
images leaked: December 15, 2006
iPhone presentation: January, 2007

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #94 on:** September 02, 2012, 10:55 AM »

So why aren't LG having some fun in court!

Renegade · « **Reply #95 on:** September 02, 2012, 11:52 AM »

Quote from: Carol Haynes on September 02, 2012, 10:55 AM

So why aren't LG having some fun in court!

I was wondering the same...

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #96 on:** September 02, 2012, 11:54 AM »

You would have thought they could get government backing to finally stop the nonsense!

40hz · « **Reply #97 on:** September 02, 2012, 01:25 PM »

Maybe the idea is to let Apple clear the field first? Once Apple establishes everybody infringed on Apple all LG needs to do is show Apple infringed on LG and they'd have a clean sweep with minimal legal effort since if A=B and B=C then A=C.

Renegade · « **Reply #98 on:** September 02, 2012, 01:44 PM »

Quote from: 40hz on September 02, 2012, 01:25 PM

Maybe the idea is to let Apple clear the field first? Once Apple establishes everybody infringed on Apple all LG needs to do is show Apple infringed on LG and they'd have a clean sweep with minimal legal effort since if A=B and B=C then A=C.

That would be funny. Probably change-the-underwear-time funny even.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #99 on:** September 02, 2012, 03:31 PM »

Quote from: 40hz on September 02, 2012, 01:25 PM

Maybe the idea is to let Apple clear the field first? Once Apple establishes everybody infringed on Apple all LG needs to do is show Apple infringed on LG and they'd have a clean sweep with minimal legal effort since if A=B and B=C then A=C.

It's a sound strategy ... Low exposure/high gain, and everybody loses ... Especially us.