|
|
|
| Authored by: jesse on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 01:02 PM EDT |
| Thank you. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jesse on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 01:02 PM EDT |
| Thank you. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jesse on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 01:03 PM EDT |
| Thank you for the work. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jesse on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 01:04 PM EDT |
| Thank you [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Steganography - Blizzard is secretly watermarking WOW screenshots - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 01:44 PM EDT
- Former Apple exec: ‘Apple haven’t invented anything’ - Authored by: feldegast on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 01:50 PM EDT
- Samsung will seek to ban Apple's Iphone 5 - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 01:53 PM EDT
- Google Glass moves beyond photography: details on heads-up display emerge - Authored by: SilverWave on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 02:56 PM EDT
- BBC Reith Lectures - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 03:54 PM EDT
- IETF standardizes the Opus audio codec as RFC 6716 - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 07:30 PM EDT
- GOOG: We Didn't Know You Could Patent Round Corners - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 08:44 PM EDT
- Hmmm a warning? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 12 2012 @ 01:34 PM EDT
- Thank you thread - 9/11 and beyond - Authored by: myNym on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 10:38 PM EDT
- Hot Rods and Kustom Kars are part of America's soul - alas, no more - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 12 2012 @ 12:42 AM EDT
- Florian Sighting - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 12 2012 @ 02:37 AM EDT
- Florian Sighting - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, September 12 2012 @ 09:50 AM EDT
- Florian Sighting - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 12 2012 @ 11:22 AM EDT
- Google: 500 million Android devices activated globally - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 12 2012 @ 06:04 AM EDT
- September 12, 1962 - "We choose to go to the moon." - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 12 2012 @ 10:49 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 01:27 PM EDT |
If Apple wanted, they could use their designs, and use the
FREE to use Android OS...
Now, wouldn't that be interesting... and still they could sue
and say to the buying public, look we have the best designs,
everyone is copying Apple, we now have both our OS and the
Android OS, so take your pick, make it an Apple, and use our
STORE including iTunes etc instead of the other Android OS
folks?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 01:42 PM EDT |
My experience with court cases, the vast majority of which is from Groklaw
(Thanks, PJ), is that both sides ask for the moon and they're happy if they get
low earth orbit.
--Mike Amling[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 02:33 PM EDT |
Will probably be their new trademark. Shoot for the stars
via a wormhole to your foot.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 06:08 PM EDT |
IANAL, nor am I American, but even I know that the supreme court has ruled that
a PI is only available if the court believes "there is a substantial
likelihood of success on the merits of the case"
Apple already lost => game over[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: arnt on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 08:43 PM EDT |
..a wee intro: Inspiration goes several ways, I the repeat
cultural
and
linguistic imperialist ;o)
found this a neat
opportunity
to introduce my
fellow Groklawers to intrigue, in Norwegian:
;o)
http://www
.dagbladet.no/tegneserie/lunch/?
1347228000&d=-1
..to get you
started ;o): "How about you, Nico? Do you need
a new job phone
before we
drop
free choice?" "(There is a God!) Yes! I do!!"
"(Let's
see... the new
iPhone can be pre-ordered from Wednesday next
week!)
When is the
deadline, Gunnar?" "Tuesday. Appearantly."
..next lesson ;o):
http://ww
w.dagbladet.no/tegneserie/lunch/?
1347314400&d=-1
"(You asked for
it, Gunnar...) Could I have a look at your
Samsung?"
"(Careful now!)
Well... that can't hurt."
"It sure has some nice and round corners!" "Thank
you!"
"You can't barge ahead enforcing Apple's patents on your
own,
Nico!!"
"Hey! Your glasses too have a slight curvature,
Thorsen!"
..lesson #3: ;o)
http://www
.dagbladet.no/tegneserie/lunch/?
1347400800&d=-1
"I don't care who
started. A phone war is the last thing we
need!"
"Nico. You're getting
the hardest punishment..."
"Please, have mercy! I only wanted a new
cellphone!"
"It's ringing in your Wal-Mart bag, Nico! Aren't you
going
to pick it up?" "Nokia! Right?"
..today (Wed Sep 12 2012)'s
Lunch ;o)
http://www.
dagbladet.no/tegneserie/lunch/?
1347314400&d=1
Nice handy tool for
strip gist translation exercises: ;o)
http://translate.google.com/#no/en
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: BitOBear on Tuesday, September 11 2012 @ 09:18 PM EDT |
You know, if Apple just said "we want a do over with a normal jury"
then they wouldn't have to argue over the PI.
It's not like Apple is actually going to get "a brazillion dollars".
Starting from scratch, resetting the clock as it were, would be a heck of a lot
of FUD.
Samsung probably wouldn't object. They might even move jointly. 8-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Crocodile_Dundee on Wednesday, September 12 2012 @ 01:29 AM EDT |
It's one of them right?
My experience here is that they are only granted when there both a good chance
that the action will prevail, and where without it, significant harm will take
place.
I note a three pronged test that apparently applies in Canada suggests "The
three-pronged test that courts in Canada and in other jurisdictions apply in
considering applications for interlocutory injunctions is well established: the
applicant must demonstrate that (1) there is a serious question to be tried, (2)
he will suffer irreparable harm if denied the relief, and (3) the balance of
inconvenience pending trial favours him."
I would think that on balance, if a jury has found in favour of the respondent
-- no matter how weak their decision might seem -- that the balance of
inconvenience should swing the other way (at least), and the presumption that
the applicant will suffer irreparable harm would be somewhat questionable (at
least).
---
---
That's not a law suit. *THIS* is a law suit![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
