|
| Authored by: crazy canuck on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 02:28 PM EDT |
These games are getting very interesting.
As part of Samsung's response, they should ask for an increase in the bond,
should the judge deem to allow Apple's request. How about an amount of $200M or
more to make Apple think twice.
I know that PJ has said that this is about PR and damaging Samsung's name (which
I agree). But there needs to be a big stick that hits Apple over the head should
this go Samsung's way ( which I support).
Can you imagine the press should the injunction be deemed to have been put in
place in error and Apple needs to forfeit the bond to Samsung.
Headlines : Apple pays Samsung hundreds of millions for forcing injunction in
error. Samsung has not wronged Apple"
CC :>)
---
CCdn[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 02:39 PM EDT |
It's what lawyers do to earn their keep. Follows a pattern from their hot shot
atty. So far the score, I believe, is Apple 1 and others 6. She has just got to
try harder.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 12 2012 @ 04:24 AM EDT |
One argument for Apple in this dispute.
If they expect the jury verdict will not stand in December,
also the argument that the jury did not found the Galaxy Tab
10.1 infringing will become invalid.
The discussion should return to the situation before that
verdict.
So can we conclude the legal team of Apple does expect the
that jury verdict will be found invalid?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
