|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 03 2013 @ 11:54 AM EDT |
PJ,
You're not wrong. But you're also not right. What does that
mean? If you look at any particular fact, it will always
support what you want to believe, even if it arises
independently.
So try this out- do you think the litigation behaviors of
Samsung and Apple would be any different regardless of the
disposition of the referenced patent? Do you think if the
patent wasn't in question, Samsung would be pushing for a
quick damages trial, and Apple would want to stay it? That
would be crazy, right? They would behave exactly the same.
So the status of that patent has no bearing on their
actions.
I am still not sure what you mean by "PR". Given that the
vast majority of Americans have trouble naming a single
member of the Supreme Court, their knowledge of the
intricacies of even a high-profile case is... limited. There
may be a blip on the radar at some point when there is a
final resolution of this case, but that's about it.
I respect the work you've done educating the community here,
but, alas, most people aren't as up on the PR value of this
case as you are.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
