US Courts Reject Apple...

[DanteMann]

How ironic for Apple to be rejected on their home soil.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/03/us-apple-samsung-ruling-idUSTRE7B206D20111203

 

[saving107]

FYI: Your title is mis-leading.

but Judge Lucy Koh noted that Apple had proven it's likely to succeed in proving that Samsung's product infringe its patents — the injunction wasn't granted because Apple didn't prove that leaving Samsung's products on the market would cause irreparable harm. If Apple ultimately wins, Samsung will just have to pay damages on whatever infringing products it sold in the meantime.

http://www.theverge.com/2011/12/3/2...-apple-preliminary-request-ban-samsung-galaxy

 

[M Quick]

I think it's good that they get rejected, what they do is not OK. Monopoly is not something the usual customer want companies to achieve, competition on the other hand is what consumers love!

Those who does not is pretty obvious on who they might be...

Oh well.. you can read the article in many ways too i guess..

 

[macingman]

How ironic for Apple to be rejected on their home soil.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/03/us-apple-samsung-ruling-idUSTRE7B206D20111203

I don't understand how it is ironic? The judge should make a fair decision based on facts and evidence presented by the two parties involved in the case not make a bias decision based on where people or companies are from.