|
| Authored by: PJ on Sunday, October 07 2012 @ 08:16 PM EDT |
The thing is, Apple designated it as proof of
copying. So whether or not it speaks to what
happened next, which it doesn't, the question
is simply whether it proves copying. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Charles888 on Monday, October 08 2012 @ 07:14 PM EDT |
There is all kind of references to the boss' trust in the
ingenuity of his people, and in their capabilities. There
is the reference to using their biggest asset (large
screens) to leapfrog the market. There is the reference to
trusting their intuition rather than constantly soliciting
feedback from others on unfinished products. On and on.
I really don't see how this document thread could have been
used as an evidence of anything. There seems to be a really
thin foundation for it to be allowed to be used in this
fashion.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 10 2012 @ 08:28 AM EDT |
The top guy may have had reason to do as you state (top guy says one thing
"do a better job", then through coded messages demand something else
"copy apple"), but the only actual thing shown with this transcription
is that he asked his design staff to do a better job. This is not evidence that
he said anything more than "do a better job"; the argument that this
evidence shows that Samsung executives wanted to copy Apple is just flat out
wrong; it shows nothing like that.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
