|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 05 2012 @ 03:48 AM EDT |
I think the point was that getting a patent on ANYTHING about subject matter
pertaining to: design, user interface, customization, hardware layout, or
anything that is basically a function of how we USE a device, look at a device
(as in shape, size, and format), and finally the appeal & appearance of that
"object in question"--which pertains to the other issues at hand--it
is an absolutely ridiculous idea that ANY of this can be patented.
It starts to get as close as idiots trying to patent the garbage can icon on any
OS, trying to patent "the", trying to patent a certain number sequence
like "1234"... All these laws are exceptional examples of idiotic
idiots in play playing. The "Intellectual Domain" or also known more
commonly and hated more as "Intellectual Property" shouldn't be
allowed to be patented; it's a money grab and an obvious lie unto itself. It's
a process for rich people ONLY to subjugate those of less stature, milking a
dead cow they've already milked beyond comprehension.
Reverse engineering should allow any of this and if it doesn't the only people
that benefit from this process is a small minority of people in the organization
with the patent. It would lead to a consumer market dead and useless as slowly
every company that makes a new concept destroys that same concept for use for
the rest of the world. The best phone didn't come from the first company that
made it. Same with the T.V., the radio, the computer, your house, your car,
everything you possess has gone through this process of death and renewal.
Apple fights to win a process that if upheld absolutely destroys this entire
thing... The jurors have no idea how ultimately stupid they are at many levels
for NOT doing their duty as instructed and also not paying enough attention to
realize the people in their group with very loud opinions were ONLY JUST THAT,
opinions, and they shouldn't have listened to them and paid attention to the
evidence and acquired their own opinion and answer, not using someone else's...
BTW, if you didn't notice above, it was sarcasm. Just in case your detector is
broken.
What a stupid ending to this case; there certainly better be a change of
direction for this. The lack of proper respect to Samsung's case and side was
obviously thrown under the bus and as the one juror said, it happened after the
first day and he never even looked back--even though he, if he read his little
instructions (it's a lot to ask I know, you're just a citizen of a country that
relies on people like you/me/him to do their job there-and-then to protect the
most important things we have available to us: life, liberty, happiness, and all
that useless crap--not worth reading anything for, too much to ever ask for...),
if he'd read it he would've known that you're supposed to NOT form a decision on
day one. You're supposed to wait until deliberations, go through the evidence
and testimony again and then make your REAL decision. NOT the prejudiced,
biased, and non-egalitarian concept that juror may have had the moment they got
to the Apple spokesman (it'd be funny to see who was up on that first day, since
he said that did it for him--he could just tell that they had wronged Apple in
some way--HOW? Does he think he's a damned psychic, this juror group is
wonderful), up first, who cried and was very emotional...[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
