decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
I think he has a misconception. | 264 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Please produce evidence of Samsung's abuse
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, December 12 2012 @ 03:24 PM EST
Sure, you're starting to see the advancement of these bogus
theories in collateral and unreleated cases such as Realtek
Semi v. LSI, 2012 WL 4845628 (N.D. Cal. 2012).

This is what weaponizing these patents is doing. The
strategy spearheaded by the QE team (pace Google and the
manufacturers) will make the overall patent litigation
system worse, not better.

Again, this doesn't make Apple good, or the patent system
good, but this is pointing out something which is kind of
important. When you're a fan, you tend to lose perspective.
Blame Apple (or Microsoft, or whatever) for starting it if
you want. But some of the aggressive and novel theories that
have been used, if they gain any traction, will do a lot
more harm to the industry in the long run.

And we are already starting to see it happen. But hey, don't
believe me. Give it some time.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

If all you have is heresy
Authored by: Wol on Wednesday, December 12 2012 @ 04:47 PM EST
Well, it seems that IS all he has ... :-)

(Okay, I know you spelt it heresay)

Cheers,
Wol

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

I think he has a misconception.
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 13 2012 @ 12:22 AM EST
I think since there is investigations going on about FRAND abuse, he is under
the impression that companies that have FRAND patents are misusing them in the
courts.

FACT: Samsung approached Apple with a fair opening offer.
FACT: Rather than negotiating Apple goes to the courts claiming patent
infringement and FRAND abuse.
FACT: Samsung is only using its FRAND patents in a counter suit against Apple.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )