Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > iOS Blog Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 18, 2012, 08:31 AM   #26
Intarweb
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by M-O View Post
they plan to reinvent the television. it will be out about 4-6 months after Apple announces their big plans.
Right after Apple 'reinvents' it?
Intarweb is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 08:46 AM   #27
Yujenisis
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2002
Send a message via AIM to Yujenisis
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
Meh - hardly a zing since Samsung's been producing TVs for years and Apple hasn't produced any (yet).
Then you missed the joke. Here's the joke: Samsung copies Apple.

I doubt you will find it funny given your post history shows someone who is very much in the Pro-Google camp, which lends itself to not finding poking fun at their partners.
Yujenisis is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 08:53 AM   #28
dBeats
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
This is the judge making sure there is no appeal and retrial. I think she's doing a good job. Just deny everyone anything at this point and get the judgement finalized already. Samsung, pay up and shut up. Apple, get out of the patent war trenches and just keep doing what you're doing, making products that 6 months later seem so obvious and intuitive that people think they shouldn't be patented - even though no one ever thought of it before.

Meanwhile, Apple's holding it's own against Android, while Samsung swallows up Android competition. Maybe Google should focus on the Frankenstein monster it helped create. I wouldn't be the surprised in the least if Samsung end up biting the hand that feeds in, again, with Google....
dBeats is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 08:56 AM   #29
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yujenisis View Post
Then you missed the joke. Here's the joke: Samsung copies Apple.

I doubt you will find it funny given your post history shows someone who is very much in the Pro-Google camp, which lends itself to not finding poking fun at their partners.
If you say so. I understood the context perfectly. For something to be funny (at least to me) it has to either surprise or clever. Since Samsung copies Apple has turned into cliche and hyperbole - I just didn't it find it particularly funny.

To each their own.

p.s. about 80 percent of the personal tech I own is Apple. That doesn't mean I can't criticize it. In fact, I think it gives me even more right given that I am a customer. I'm pro-technology. It just so happens that there seems to be a lot of true hate for Samsung (which is not Google) and also Google which is based on b.s. So when I post to clarify where people are incorrect - that doesn't MEAN I am pro-google. It means I am pro-TRUTH or getting to the fact.

But believe what you want
samcraig is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 08:57 AM   #30
mrxak
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Drifting through space in a broken escape pod
I'm surprised this isn't on the front page where it can get the most trolls and thus the most ad hits. I'm sure they'll find this story anyway, though...

Nothing surprising about this ruling though.
__________________
Phones Will Kill You
mrxak is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 08:59 AM   #31
Kaibelf
macrumors 6502a
 
Kaibelf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Quote:
Originally Posted by H2SO4 View Post
Seriously, even if Apple turn out as the victor again the judge should make a new decision or at the least have a retrial at Apples expense if it can be shown that Apple knew about this conflict of interest.
So in addition to Apple doing Samsung's R&D, they are supposed to do the work that Samsung's legal team are PAID to do? Give me a break.
Kaibelf is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 09:01 AM   #32
arashb
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
"The motion was denied because Apple was not harmed by Samsung infringing on the patents"

Stupidest thing I've ever heard. You can let someone copy your product, and the trial will establish that it's infringing on patents, but they won't do anything because you can't prove that it's hurting your sales?
arashb is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 09:02 AM   #33
Kaibelf
macrumors 6502a
 
Kaibelf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
Meh - hardly a zing since Samsung's been producing TVs for years and Apple hasn't produced any (yet).
That's like saying RIM had nothing to worry about since they made phones for years before the iPhone came along. Even then, people used the same argument: "why would they do phones when people already make them?"
Kaibelf is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 09:04 AM   #34
gnasher729
macrumors G5
 
gnasher729's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by arashb View Post
"The motion was denied because Apple was not harmed by Samsung infringing on the patents"

Stupidest thing I've ever heard. You can let someone copy your product, and the trial will establish that it's infringing on patents, but they won't do anything because you can't prove that it's hurting your sales?
Stupidest thing because that's not what it says. The motion is denied because there is no _irreparable harm_. That is no harm that can't be fixed for example by paying huge sums of money.
gnasher729 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 09:09 AM   #35
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by arashb View Post
"The motion was denied because Apple was not harmed by Samsung infringing on the patents"

Stupidest thing I've ever heard. You can let someone copy your product, and the trial will establish that it's infringing on patents, but they won't do anything because you can't prove that it's hurting your sales?
Since that was Apple's assertion - I guess so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaibelf View Post
That's like saying RIM had nothing to worry about since they made phones for years before the iPhone came along. Even then, people used the same argument: "why would they do phones when people already make them?"
I never said anything about the marketshare being threatened or shaken up. I merely commented that Samsung has been in the TV market for years. It's not like they are following Apple into the TV market.

Where was any "worry" in my post. Where did I suggest Apple shouldn't enter the market?

Or are you intentionally arguing with straw man tactics?
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 09:20 AM   #36
Yujenisis
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2002
Send a message via AIM to Yujenisis
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
To each their own..
Exactly. Your post questioning why someone would find something funny strikes me as unnecessary and odd. You clearly do not appreciate the joke, but concede humor is in the eye of the beholder.

Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
I'm pro-technology. It just so happens that there seems to be a lot of true hate for Samsung (which is not Google) and also Google which is based on b.s.
There are plenty of valid critiques of Google and their partners like Samsung, and I'll agree people here push the B.S critiques more often than they should. Likewise, there are plenty of valid critiques against Apple, and unfortunately much of the ones found in MR headlines forum are offered by anti-Apple trolls.

Last edited by Yujenisis; Dec 18, 2012 at 09:22 AM. Reason: Broke me some fancy-pants quotes.
Yujenisis is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 09:29 AM   #37
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yujenisis View Post
Exactly. Your post questioning why someone would find something funny strikes me as unnecessary and odd. You clearly do not appreciate the joke, but concede humor is in the eye of the beholder.



There are plenty of valid critiques of Google and their partners like Samsung, and I'll agree people here push the B.S critiques more often than they should. Likewise, there are plenty of valid critiques against Apple, and unfortunately much of the ones found in MR headlines forum are offered by anti-Apple trolls.
For one - I didn't question why someone else would find it funny. I stated that I didn't find it funny.

Second - your use of troll, in my opinion, is hyperbole. A lot of people who are deemed trolls are nothing of the sort.
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 10:23 AM   #38
JAT
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mpls, MN
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
If you say so. I understood the context perfectly. For something to be funny (at least to me) it has to either surprise or clever. Since Samsung copies Apple has turned into cliche and hyperbole - I just didn't it find it particularly funny.
Seriously, Sam. You will have to find at least one thing on the internet funny before you should start commenting on jokes. It's ok to not have a sense of humor, but stop trying to force it on others.
__________________
-- Spiky
JAT is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 10:40 AM   #39
Rocketman
macrumors 603
 
Rocketman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Claremont, CA
Now that the judgment has been upheld over the objection of Samsung, Apple and the court are now free to determine the amount of the damages after the date the judgment accounted for in the $1.1B. I have heard estimates that figure could be another $500m or so making the total amount to be paid increase to about $1.6B.

Rocketman
__________________
Think Different-ly!
All 357 R or D House jobs bills over 4 years died in the D Senate, ordered by the D President. Buy a model rocket here: http://v-serv.com/usr/instaship-visual.htm Thanks.
Rocketman is online now   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 10:49 AM   #40
camnchar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SLC, Utah
Send a message via AIM to camnchar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocketman View Post
Now that the judgment has been upheld over the objection of Samsung, Apple and the court are now free to determine the amount of the damages after the date the judgment accounted for in the $1.1B. I have heard estimates that figure could be another $500m or so making the total amount to be paid increase to about $1.6B.

Rocketman
I doubt the $1.1B figure will hold, given that a patent or two has been invalidated in the meantime.
__________________
Apple //c, 1 MHz, 128k RAM, 5.25" floppy drive, 1-button mouse
camnchar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 11:05 AM   #41
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by camnchar View Post
I doubt the $1.1B figure will hold, given that a patent or two has been invalidated in the meantime.
Not yet.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/24/3...tent-rejection
BaldiMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 11:07 AM   #42
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAT View Post
Seriously, Sam. You will have to find at least one thing on the internet funny before you should start commenting on jokes. It's ok to not have a sense of humor, but stop trying to force it on others.
Yeaahhh ok

Here are some things I found funny on the internet. So I guess I am now "Approved by JAT" to post commentary...

http://www.damnyouautocorrect.com/
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/3f0...r-black-people
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bt9zSfinwFA
http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6648229/siri-argument
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_S_1...layer_embedded
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 11:28 AM   #43
VulchR
macrumors 68000
 
VulchR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scotland
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
I'm pretty sure that's why Samsung filed the motion. Because they believed the foreman had too much power/didn't conduct themselves appropriately....]
The judge appeared to disagree. Thankfully. Companies should not be allowed to appeal successfully simply because they disagree with a jury's verdict. It's not that I favour Apple over Samsung, it's just that juries are the last place an average person can have an impact.
__________________
My first was a Mac+. Now I own an iPhone with 3.5x the pixels, a colour display, WiFi, 512x the RAM, >1500x the data storage, and 100x the speed. And it fits in the palm of my hand.
VulchR is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 11:31 AM   #44
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by VulchR View Post
The judge appeared to disagree. Thankfully. Companies should not be allowed to appeal successfully simply because they disagree with a jury's verdict. It's not that I favour Apple over Samsung, it's just that juries are the last place an average person can have an impact.
I don't disagree.
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 11:40 AM   #45
Smoothie
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: California
Of the two rulings, the far more significant one is the denial of the injunction in favor of Samsung. Yet MacRumors headlines the juror misconduct issue. Way to distinguish yourself from every other "news" site.
Smoothie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 12:09 PM   #46
pacalis
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by M-O View Post
they plan to reinvent the television. it will be out about 4-6 months after Apple announces their big plans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yujenisis View Post
Then you missed the joke. Here's the joke: Samsung copies Apple.
The real joke is that you guys don't realize that Samsung's been reinventing televisions since the 1970s.


,,

Last edited by pacalis; Dec 18, 2012 at 12:18 PM. Reason: ...
pacalis is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 12:10 PM   #47
wonderspark
macrumors 68030
 
wonderspark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Oregon
I do find it annoying that news is not evenly distributed here. MacRumors is like the Fox News of Apple, focusing on only pro-Apple news, and either "missing" or burying any news that looks bad for Apple.

I think Apple either pays MR or donates Apple gear to the website to keep the news positive for Apple. It doesn't matter, though. All the real news is covered by real news agencies worldwide, so this effort here just looks bad to those that pay attention.
__________________
Wait a second... So you're telling me anything that happens in the sky is legal, and there's a giant crime-blimp flying around this place? I don't know how I missed that.
wonderspark is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 12:13 PM   #48
Intarweb
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by pacalis View Post
The real joke is that you guys don't realize that Samsung's been reinventing televisions since the 1970s.
My post was a dig at Apple, and the person that made the post I replied to, not Samsung.
Intarweb is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 12:17 PM   #49
pacalis
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intarweb View Post
My post was a dig at Apple, and the person that made the post I replied to, not Samsung.
My error and corrected. I was blinded by the nonsense.
pacalis is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 12:49 PM   #50
darkplanets
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMay View Post
It is legally settled. Samsung didn't do due diligence when the juror noted that he had worked for Seagate, which Samsung owns.

Please note the original post:

"Prior to the verdict, Samsung could have discovered Mr. Hogan's litigation with Seagate, had Samsung acted with reasonable diligence based on information Samsung acquired through voir dire, namely that Mr. Hogan stated during voir dire that he had worked for Seagate."

Whatever Apple knew or didn't know, and I doubt that Apple would risk that, is forever irrelevant.
This is spot on. Samsung could have denied the juror upon screening, but didn't. It's no ones fault but their own. As per acting improperly... again, doubtful. How would you prove such a notion? Someone is always elected to represent the jury, and people always have varying levels of opinions despite the best attempts at getting a neutral jury.
darkplanets is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > iOS Blog Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nebraska again: Judge denies 16 year old girl abortion AhmedFaisal Politics, Religion, Social Issues 126 Oct 28, 2013 12:00 PM
UK Judge Who Chastised Apple Over Samsung 'Apology' Now Consulting as Patent Expert for Samsung MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 253 Mar 9, 2013 08:25 AM
Judge Koh Rules That Samsung Did Not Willfully Infringe Apple Patents MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 67 Jan 31, 2013 01:12 AM
UK Judge Is Forcing Apple To Publish On Its Website That Samsung Didn't Copy Apple Phokus iPad 1 Jul 18, 2012 05:05 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:04 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC