|
|
|
| Authored by: nsomos on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 01:07 PM EDT |
If there appears a need for any corrections,
please post them in this thread.
A summary in the title can be nice.
s/Thnx/Thanks/[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 01:12 PM EDT |
PJ or someone else ought to make up a "legal reporters" list that only
has the specific people who are reporting on the trial.
Those were great from oragoogle.
P.S. by "list" I mean a twitter group or whatever it is called. Not
someone retweeting. That was nice, but the twitter lists were always ahead of
the retweeters :).[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 02:38 PM EDT |
Please make any links clickable.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 02:41 PM EDT |
| Please include a link to the referenced
article.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Keyboard Alert - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 05:31 PM EDT
- Court trying to justify software patents again - Authored by: Imaginos1892 on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 06:50 PM EDT
- Installing Linux on Windows 8 PCs: No easy answers - Authored by: JamesK on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 09:17 PM EDT
- ...When software is Patentable - Authored by: argee on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 09:24 PM EDT
- Samsung angers judge by sending rejected evidence from Apple trial to the media - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 06:26 AM EDT
- Nokia Shares Post Biggest 7-Day Gain Since 1992 - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 04:24 PM EDT
- HP faces billion dollar bill from Oracle (and many similar articles) - Authored by: tiger99 on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 07:54 PM EDT
- HP faces billion dollar bill from Oracle -> Oracle faces billion dollar bill from HP - Authored by: TennSeven on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 08:33 PM EDT
- I am Leo Laporte, Chief TWiT. AMA! - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 09:13 PM EDT
- HP wins over Oracle in Itanium legal battle - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 10:24 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 02:43 PM EDT |
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: betajet on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 04:08 PM EDT |
From Geek Times:
Apple v. Samsung kicks off
innovation debates
Samsung showed examples of handsets and tablets
released before the first iPhones and iPads but having a roughly similar look
and feel.
“If you make something popular it doesn’t mean you can exclude
other people from doing it,” the Samsung attorney said. “Apple didn’t invent the
rectangular form factor you see, it didn’t invent the large touch screen,” he
added.
He claimed as much as 26 percent of some iPad and iPhone bill of
materials are for Samsung components. That includes the Retina display Apple
heavily markets and is made exclusively by Samsung. “Who’s the innovator?” he
asked.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 05:04 PM EDT |
| Comment when Samsung started their arguments.
The implication being that the
jury just heard
a whole lot of stuff fabricated from whole cloth,
and now the
jury will hear 'the other side of the story'.
Samsung attorneys doing a
fine job.
Following Howard Mintz live blog
A comment
that should resonate with the jury:
"Samsung isn't in the habit of suing its
business partners."
At this point, it reminds me of the Oracle-Google
trial,
when IMO, Google won over the jury the first day.
I.E., the jury
knows who is twisting and attacking over
common sense stuff.
But this is
classic:
#Apple didn't use Steve Jobs video but Samsung is...to show what
Samsung says is Jobs showing how iPhone can email photo with its patents.."That
is cool technology, I admit it," Charles V. tells jury..."The issue is, Samsung
invented it."
Game over.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 05:13 PM EDT |
| Samsung invented sending email??? Wow, that's a hell of an invention! :D [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: kawabago on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 06:47 PM EDT |
I beg to differ but I am an artist and I am more than happy
when people steal my ideas. Why? Because art is
communication and the more people who get my message, the
better my art is doing at conveying it. The more people who
see my work or derivations of it the better off I'm going to
be. If you're terrible, no one copies you. So copy me all you
want, it's a measure of how well I'm doing.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 07:22 PM EDT |
I've seen a lot of "~pj" articles since the Oracle/Google trial
started. Is PJ back? Is that other guy (Sorry, I can't recall his name.) gone?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 08:28 PM EDT |
|
Link
The Judge’s exclusion of evidence on independent
creation meant that even though Apple was allowed to inaccurately argue to the
jury that the F700 was an iPhone copy, Samsung was not allowed to tell the jury
the full story and show the pre-iPhone design for that and other phones that
were in development at Samsung in 2006, before the iPhone. The excluded evidence
would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design.
Fundamental fairness requires that the jury decide the case based on all the
evidence.
...
Apple’s legal team was quick to take issue with Samsung’s
release of evidence excluded from the trial, saying the action was contemptible.
Judge Koh was none to pleased with the move herself, calling for an immediate
meeting with Quinn.
"Tell Mr. Quinn I’d like to see him today," Koh said. "I
want to know who drafted the press release, who authorized it from the legal
team."
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 11:10 PM EDT |
After a very clear explanation of the trade dress issue, PJ wrote "If folks
are
buying Samsung phones or tablets thinking they are Apple iPhones or iPads,
then Samsung has a problem."
I think if the jury is shown an iPhone and
a Samsung phone and the jury
thinks they look the same and the jury finds that
the iPhone was first and had
design elements that were distinctive and not
dictated by the function, then
Samsung has a problem. While confusion is the
rationale for trade dress
protection, the liability occurs when a same-looking
product is released.
Thing is, most competitors want their products to
look different. None of
Gibson's guitars look like Fender's. The mid-60s Camaro
was Chevrolet's quite
distinguishable response to the market changing Ford
Mustang. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- The Problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 11:29 PM EDT
- The Problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 01:39 AM EDT
- The Problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 02:09 AM EDT
- The Problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 03:59 AM EDT
- The Problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 03:26 PM EDT
- The Problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 02:54 AM EDT
- The Problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 02 2012 @ 02:56 AM EDT
- The Problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 06:31 AM EDT
- Literacy Problem? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 11:36 AM EDT
- The Problem - Authored by: Glenn on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 11:33 PM EDT
- The Solution - Authored by: Ian Al on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 04:21 AM EDT
- A glass with black edges - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 11:54 AM EDT
- The Real Problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 12:33 PM EDT
- Not a good example - Authored by: albert on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 04:17 PM EDT
- The Problem - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 08:52 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 01:59 AM EDT |
In court when Judge Koh demand to see Mr. Quin ( due to the
press release ), wouldn't the meeting be exparte? Isn't that
frowned on?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 03:04 AM EDT |
It does not want the public to know the terms of its patent cross
license with Samsung, which it stated included coverage for Android, which it
calls "highly sensitive confidential information of Microsoft that, if revealed
to the public... would substantially harm Microsoft."
Let me fix
Microsoft's statement for them...
"highly sensitive confidential
information of Microsoft that, if revealed to the public... would substantially
harm Microsoft through the destruction of its FUD
campaign."
There, that wasn't too hard.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 03:23 AM EDT |
You have to know where Picasso "stole" this from to grok what "stealing" means
(at least in this context - Good Poets Borrow, Great Poets Steal…)
One of the
surest tests [of the superiority or inferiority of a poet] is the way in which a
poet borrows. Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what
they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something
different. The good poet welds his theft into a whole of feeling which is
unique, utterly different than that from which it is torn; the bad poet throws
it into something which has no cohesion. A good poet will usually borrow from
authors remote in time, or alien in language, or diverse in
interest. T. S. Eliot[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Borrow / Steal - Authored by: Wol on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 01:57 PM EDT
- Borrow / Steal - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 06:57 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 01:24 PM EDT |
http://www.decryptedtech.com/editorials/judge-lucy-koh-is-working-hard-to-deny-a
-fair-trial-to-samsung
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: DannyB on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 01:28 PM EDT |
If Apple can have exclusive rights to rectangles with round corners, it seems
this could create a monopoly on such rectangles, and potentially open the door
to abuse -- not that Apple would ever do anything abusive.
A solution,
it seems to me, would be for Microsoft to secure rights to rectangles with
non-round corners for their tablets.
There, problem solved. No
monopoly exists because both Apple and Microsoft can sell tablets. Everyone
happy.
(hides under desk now)---
The price of freedom is
eternal litigation. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: miltonw on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 03:53 PM EDT |
I think they should show the jury the full packaging of the two phones.
Is there ANYONE who, buying the phone in its package, could possibly think a
Samsung phone was an Apple phone???? Is Apple accusing Samsung of selling their
phones without packaging?
Where is there any possibility of confusion?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 01 2012 @ 10:03 PM EDT |
Help me understand the purpose of a question like that.
Is it like if someone's suing because they claim intellectual property rights on
a hamburger, and asking "have any of you heard of McDonalds" to weed
out clueless people?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
