|
Authored by: stegu on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 08:47 AM EDT |
Not to support Apple's position here (which I think is unreasonable in the
extreme), but PJ's comment on the inconsistency of Apple complaining over
expensive FRAND licensing is a bit like comparing apples to oranges. FRAND
licensing is supposed to make standards-essential patents available to
competitors to create a reasonably level playing field. The Apple case against
Samsung is all about preventing Samsung from competing at all. This is not about
Apple seeking monetary compensation for patents. It's a crusade to crush
Android. It has the opposite effect on me - I just bought the most expensive
Samsung phone I could find.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: pem on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 12:53 PM EDT |
Forbes: Apple v. Samsung: Don't ever believe
what people tell you
About Apple's MIT Marketing Prof. John Hauser
arguing that Apple's patented features added $100 to what people were
willing to pay for Samsung's phones.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Gringo_ on Monday, August 13 2012 @ 12:12 AM EDT |
I watched the video and the commercial after, but it was
an AT&T
commercial - not the Samsung commercial PJ says she
saw. However, it did
feature a smart phone. Though I could
not discern the brand name, nor was it
mentioned, I would
guess it was an iPhone, because it had that distinctive and
novel rectangular shape with rounded corners that only an
inventive company
like Apple would think of.
Anyhow, all sarcasm aside, I think it is great
to see
these kinds of endorsements for remixing. Kirby Ferguson
emphasized the
human dimensions, that remixing is as
natural as sharing... Well - he didn't
mention sharing, but
I thought that was a nice touch to add. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 13 2012 @ 07:01 AM EDT |
Is it too late for this to be brought forward as prior art?
Did Sun let anyone else know about this, or have one around still. Did Oracle
throw it out with the trash when they cleaned out the Sun offices.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 13 2012 @ 12:08 PM EDT |
"DOJ Won’t Ask Supreme Court to Review Hacking Case":
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/08/computer-fraud-supreme-court/
The law was passed in 1984...
What is the state of affairs when the majority of the population are breaking
the law every day?
What's the definition of Revolution?
I don't know whether to laugh or cry these days.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: BobinAlaska on Monday, August 13 2012 @ 02:18 PM EDT |
This is a well written article. I think it is a shame that Samsung is not able
to put the following quote form the article in front of the jury.
"From a
mid 1990s interview, Jobs says: "Picasso had a saying, he said:
'Good artists
copy, great artists steal'. We have, you know, always, ah,
been shameless about
stealing great ideas".
Later a dying, and perhaps embittered, Jobs
tells his biographer Walter
Isaacson: "I will spend my last dying breath if I
need to, and I will
spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank,
to right this
wrong...I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen
product. I'm
willing to go thermonuclear war on this"."
If you haven't
read it yet please do, it is worth it.
Clicky for your convenience--- Bob Helm, North Las Vegas, NV
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 13 2012 @ 05:26 PM EDT |
So M$ has "licensed" design patents, with a "no-cloning"
clause to prevent them from actually using the licensed designs?
And Apple offers a "discount" to their licenses if you don't use their
technology?
What about this seems like the licenses aren't about designs or technology?
Sounds like "pay us if you don't, pay us even more if you do".[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 13 2012 @ 07:31 PM EDT |
This
Newspick extensively quotes Christopher Carani .
He
is an Invited Speaker: "Apple v. Samsung-Design Patents in Action,"
New York State Bar
Association, New York, New York, September
2012
His slide set from a WIPO conference is available as [PDF,
57pp, 5.7MB] U.S. Design Patents: The Path
To Meaningful and Sustainable Protection
.
It'd be interesting to hear more of what he says about this
case.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|