|
| Authored by: Charles888 on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 07:03 PM EDT |
In the US, Apple had between on a 5
year PR campaign talking up their
"innovative" products. The
implication is that they are the
inventors of these things. It is
unbelievable how many people argue
that Apple invented touch screens,
and how without them we would not
have touch screen phones.
Non technical people, including most
judges, have easily fallen under
that spell.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- ITC ruling - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 08:07 PM EDT
- ITC ruling - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 08:35 PM EDT
- ITC ruling - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 25 2012 @ 12:25 AM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: bilateralrope on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 08:47 PM EDT |
I don't think the bias is towards Apple specifically. Just towards patents in
general.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- ITC ruling - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 10:16 PM EDT
- ITC ruling - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 11:29 PM EDT
- All over - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 25 2012 @ 12:20 AM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 25 2012 @ 02:17 AM EDT |
I think that if the US uses unfair protectionist measures to
ban foreign imports by using unfair interpretation of
patents, then the US should be referred to the World Trade
organisation for use of illegal protective trade
restrictions, and US companies should face similar
retaliatory measures in response.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: electron on Thursday, October 25 2012 @ 06:40 AM EDT |
At its core the USA has fundamentally corrupt political and legal processes.
This ongoing saga in favour of Apple against Samsumg is to be expected in the
USA. Shame on the USA!
---
Electron
"A life? Sounds great! Do you know where I could download one?"[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- ITC ruling - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 25 2012 @ 07:22 PM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 25 2012 @ 10:32 AM EDT |
| Slashdot story
Original article (which
attributes the claim that the "DoJ is investigating" to Apple) [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 26 2012 @ 11:03 AM EDT |
| Story from slashdot (might be a little slanted)..
"We
recently discussed news of a UK court ruling in which the judge decided Apple
must publicly acknowledge that Samsung's Galaxy Tab did not infringe upon the
iPad's design, both on the Apple website and in several publications. The
acknowledgement has now been posted, and it's anything but apologetic. It states
the court's ruling, helpfully referring to "Apple's registered design No.
000018607-0001," and quotes the judges words as an advertisement. ..." [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
