Details, man... Details! Do you REALLY think some Fandroid is going to CARE about the details while ranting about why everyone doesn't know jack?!
(sarcasm end)
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Jury Foreman in Apple vs. Samsung Case Speaks to Rationale for Verdict
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Details, man... Details! Do you REALLY think some Fandroid is going to CARE about the details while ranting about why everyone doesn't know jack?!
(sarcasm end)
You be sure to get back to me when you have conclusive proof (fact) that this ruling stifles innovation.
All this comment does is make you look like the uninformed one. You want "uninformed" people in your jury because you want as clean of a slate as possible. Gives the least bias and the least knowledge of the issues at hand, therefore the only things that come into consideration by the jury will be the evidence presented and nothing else.
And as for the issue of "competition"...give me a break. The cell phone market was very competitive before Apple entered, and will continue to be. Competition does not mean clones. It means each company has their own unique product, and whoever has the best idea wins. Not, whoever has the best idea shares it with everyone else so they can all "compete" with the same ideas. Apples patents are far from being an essential standard. They may be the benchmark, but not essential.
I think this really speaks a testament to just HOW GOOD the iPhones inventions were. Just 5 years later and the public is already taking for granted all of these inventions. There's an old quote from an inventor I forget his name, "The most creative inventions always seem the most obvious in hindsight." Take the wheel. One of the most brilliant ideas in mankind, and yet anyone today would consider it something that's just there and always existed, rather than a person at some point in time came up with this great idea.
5 years ago, the things people criticized the iPhone for, have now all become "obvious common functionality." Lol, it's amazing how short people's memory can be.
It's also worth mentioning that the whole idea of a patent is to give the inventor a temporary monopoly on their idea. Samsungs rhetoric kind of makes me sick. If you don't like it, invent your own design, Nokia and most other manufacturers did. If its so obvious, then you would have had these phones years before Apple did, considering the fact that they were making phones much longer than Apple.
Last edited:
I'm not entirely convinced that's a great point. Samsung presented it's own findings which stated that people were in fact confusing their phones with iPhones.
----------
This verdict actually helps HTC.
Yeah, that wouldnt work. They would end up taking a year to make the decision, because they would be completely clueless as to what the case is about. Try teaching a 40yr old whose never used a computer how to use one, its painfully slow!!!
Samsung copied. Simple. They got pimp smacked by Apple for it. Now pay up! Dem's da rules.
Now, the judge gonna come along and TRIPLE CHARGE YOUR BUTT!
Dem's da rules.Now, the judge gonna come along and TRIPLE CHARGE YOUR BUTT!
What kind of crazy legal system allows jurors to speak publicly?
Madness. Insanity.
Jurors should remain anonymous, and the media should be barred from interviewing them.
Anything else is contempt of court.
No wonder the US legal system is broken. You have even turned your court system into infotainment ...
Madness. Insanity.
Jurors should remain anonymous, and the media should be barred from interviewing them.
Anything else is contempt of court.
No wonder the US legal system is broken. You have even turned your court system into infotainment ...
Took my mom, whose never used a computer in her life, a week just to learn to control the cursor and not lose it....lol
----------
I would reread your post and the post you quoted if I were you.
Just sayin'
lol, you got me, totally missed the "not," looks like im the illiterate one over here.
Doesn't Samsung also have to pay Apple's attorneys fees as well? Curious to the amount that would be.
Ya. Me too. I asked yesterday in one of the many threads and all I got was the typical non answer answer..
But I think Samsung has to pay the fees .
The Casey Anthony attorney recently wrote a book admitting that his client lied to the jury and he could not believe the jury went for it. Of course in his case, he did it to make money off a book.
I don't wish to subscribe to the WSJ to read the article. Does it answer my question or does it just go on about Samsung appealing the verdict?
Some of the phones Apple wants banned are sold on networks that don't have the iPhone, so Apple wouldn't have made sales there anyway. Did the jury take that into account?
Didn't come up as subscriber for me. But here is part of the article
At the same time, since the jury found that Samsung had "willfully" infringed Apple patents, Judge Koh has the power to triple the damage award, and order to Samsung to pay court costs and Apple's attorneys fees, said Alan M. Fisch, an intellectual-property with Kaye Scholer LLP who isn't involved in the case.
So the power is there - but it's not automatic that Samsung is responsible for Apple's court fees.
----------
I asked that earlier. My guess is NO.
You really don't see what's going on here do you?
Apple could give two shats about samsung... this is a prelude to going after Android as a whole. Mark my words.
Apple isn't interested in smashing Samsung... hell, they are partners in other parts of their businesses. Apple is VERY interested in slapping around the Android OS. This is a "stepping stone" if you will toward the larger goal.