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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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
Don't be obtuse | 393 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Don't be obtuse
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 11 2013 @ 09:50 AM EDT
The claim is there for all to read. When charged with infringement, the first
thing one does is read the claims, parse them word for word and look for an
argument that ones products don't include as many aspects as possible.


Apparently, Samsung read the claims and decided NOT to make an argument that
their products did not include instructions for testing the position of the
edge.

I'm sure the argument Apple made was something like, see how the Samsung
products work? That looks like it has to infringe our claim 19 to us and we so
allege. At that point Samsung is free to say, no we don't, see, here's the
related portion of our code, it doesn't test the position of the edge, instead
it counts "mississippies". When it gets to 4 mississipies it assumes
you are at the edge of the document and stops.

Apparently, they didn't do that. I wonder why....

[ 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 )