|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 25 2012 @ 03:42 AM EDT |
I suppose you mean by Apple, who started this mess.
It always a pleasure hearing ignorance squeak. Please squeak by.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 25 2012 @ 04:42 AM EDT |
Reasonable cost to Samsung? For a bogus patent on prior art?
Stuff it.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 25 2012 @ 07:42 AM EDT |
How could you possible argue $30/device "reasonable"? Wasn't Apple's
proposal also something like $18-24/device for windows phone, which is ALREADY
LICENSED? Not that zero x 24 is a lot, but it shows how farcical that
"offer" was.
Apple isn't Microsoft - they're quite different strategies. Microsoft is - as
usual - an opportunistic parasite - they're rent seeking and will go away
(temporarily) if you pay into their protection racket. Yeah companies shouldn't
have to do that, but at least they have the option to. Apple appears to be
after injunctions/feature differentiation only.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|