decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Why is Judge Koh denying Samsung's right to defend itself? | 227 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Why is Judge Koh denying Samsung's right to defend itself?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 03 2012 @ 07:04 PM EDT
Yeah... I think everyone forgets or just doesn't know how
Innovative HTC has always been. They've always made high
quality hardware and it's a shame the way Apple is trying to
take them out of business as well.

I read an article about how Apple's Copyright case in early
80's is what set the litigation Snowball rolling. It's like
they were the first to sue for spilling "Hot Coffee" on
themselves and won!

But in the end..... it's 'us' the consumers who get our pockets
picked in the end from both sides. With higher costs always
coming out of our pockets to fix some lame company's assumption
that Patents and Copyrights were only to grant them exclusive
monopolies. Not to protect true inventors or us consumers in
the first place.

Patents were born out of a need to get physically injured
returning soldiers from the Revolutionary War, a way to make a
living with their minds, instead of their missing hands and
legs. They were meant to be temporary measure too. At a time
when we had no public assistance available to help them. The
only thing we had that resemble healthcare was a free burial
for soldiers then they died. The only thing we had, that
resembled a Corporation..... was the East India Company and
they took care of you like Corporations were known to do in
Japan!

Even they didn't try to take advantage of Patents or the
inventors that held them, like Corporate America does today.
Like now where they're just traded like baseball cards on a
school ground, instead of benefiting original artists, writers,
and inventors and they were always accompanied by working
models.

Even Ben Franklin chose not to patent his inventions. But
rather to give them to public domain. So as to set an example
for wealthier citizens to also donate to the Open Public Good!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )