|
|
|
| Authored by: thorpie on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 12:21 AM EDT |
for a week at least
---
The memories of a man in his old age are the deeds of a man in his prime -
Floyd, Pink[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: bugstomper on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 12:25 AM EDT |
Please summarize in the Title box error->correction or s/error/correction/ to
make it easy to scan see what needs to be corrected and to avoid duplication of
effort.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 12:40 AM EDT |
Does this decision foreshadow a reversal of the jury verdict?
Seems to me a hopeful sign.
If she where were going to uphold the verdict there would be no reason to
overturn the injunction.
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 01:01 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 01:06 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 01:23 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: stegu on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 03:04 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 03:33 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Wol on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 04:05 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 04:27 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 06:06 AM EDT
- She couldn't really have waited. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 10:19 AM EDT
- Not foreshadowing, Judge did not have a choice - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 08:01 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: bbmaniac on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 02:58 AM EDT
- Foreshadow? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 04:05 AM EDT
- Ehh... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 10:45 AM EDT
- Ehh... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 12:04 PM EDT
- She's just implementing the jury verdict - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 08:29 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: bugstomper on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 12:54 AM EDT |
Please stay off topic in these threads. Use HTML Formatted mode to make your
links nice and clickable.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- TabAppliPuters - Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 05:33 AM EDT
- TabAppliPuters - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 08:15 PM EDT
- looks like eu is getting closer to US patent system - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 07:11 AM EDT
- Meanwhile, someone has it in for Samsung..... - Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 07:57 AM EDT
- While the EU scrutinises Apple..... - Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 08:01 AM EDT
- Seriously? - Noah Kagan making an obscenely hostile environment for women - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 09:32 AM EDT
- Off Topic threads - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 10:46 AM EDT
- PricewaterhouseCoopers Paid $1 Billion as Consultant on Mortgage Settlement - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 11:45 AM EDT
- I like Posner - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 11:54 AM EDT
- people here might find this useful - Authored by: sumzero on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 12:02 PM EDT
- Dial M for Murderous intent - someone's upset the Apple cart - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 01:59 PM EDT
- ROFL - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 05:55 PM EDT
- Off Topic threads - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 02:05 PM EDT
- Off Topic threads - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 02:27 PM EDT
- Samsung files patent infringement motion against iPhone 5 - Authored by: DannyB on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 02:56 PM EDT
- The Most Important Meeting You've Never Heard Of - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 04:44 PM EDT
- Access to unsealed JMOL in Samsung vs Apple - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 05:36 PM EDT
- A phone call out of the blue; $500,000 – no strings attached: Meet the 2012 MacArthur Fellows - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 06:51 PM EDT
- NFL -Upon further review - Disingenuous legal logic - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 07:57 PM EDT
- Verdict - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 10:44 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: bugstomper on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 02:12 AM EDT |
Please type the title of the News Picks article in the Title box of your
comment, and include the link to the article in HTML Formatted mode for the
convenience of the readers after the article has scrolled off the News Picks
sidebar.
Hint: Use Preview to check that your links are ok. Avoid a Geeklog
"feature" that posts long links broken by inserting line breaks in the
URL at punctuation points such as
<a href="http://www.example.com/xyzblahblah_
blahblah/abcblahblah/defblahblah?
abcblahblah
.html">text</a>
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 04:28 AM EDT |
So, of course, I am having trouble following it.
On June
26, 2012, the Court preliminarily enjoined Samsung from “making, using, offering
to sell, or selling within the United States, or importing into the United
States, Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computer, and any product that is no
more than colorably different from this specified product and embodies any
design contained in U.S. Design Patent No. D504,889.” ECF No. 1135 (“June 26
Preliminary Injunction”)
I know that 'colorable' has a particular
meaning in litigation, but my first reading seemed reasonable: Samsung could not
import and sell the Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computer and anything close to it.
Samsung could not call it the 'Tab 10.1 And A Bit' and put a tiny, matt-black
dot in one corner in order to avoid the injunction.
But, what does 'and
embodies any design contained in U.S. Design Patent No. D504,889' actually mean?
Does that mean 'any design element'? Would straight sides be a design element?
Obviously, a rectangle with rounded corners might be the sort of design element
intended, but what about the proportion of bezel to screen or the aspect ratio
of the screen?
If Samsung imported a Tab 12.2 with a pointy-corner,
thick-bezel design, would Apple have to refer it to the court to decide if it
was included in the injunction. What does Samsung have to do to show that their
Tab 10.2 is more than colorably different when compared with the Tab
10.1?
I assume that the judge can sanction a party for failing to abide
by the injunction, but what I took to be a fairly obvious injunction, turns out
to leave me totally confused.
I think it is best for all concerned that
this injunction is dissolved. Other than the Galaxy Tab 10.1, its relevance to
other possible devices leaves too much room for
mischief.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jpvlsmv on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 02:52 PM EDT |
For a minute, I had read that "the court will retain the bond" as
implying that Samsung will get that money, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
Bummer. I was thinking that it would be a great opportunity for Samsung to
score some PR points... "Samsung announces a $2.6M give-away of Galaxy Tab
10.1 devices. And you can thank Apple for it ;)"
--Joe[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 06:57 PM EDT |
Anyone feel Judge Koh is owed a bit of an apology from people
on this site who were slamming what they expected her to do
before she even ruled on this motion?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 08:52 PM EDT |
I hope this isn't an indication of the Judge validating the
verdict. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
