Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 07 2012 @ 07:41 PM EST |
It's definitely! Apple legal head honcho (Bruce Sewell) on a
Kamikaze mission :-) [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 07 2012 @ 08:17 PM EST |
Just because non-practicing entitys are patent trolls doesn't mean the patent
abusing practicing entitys can't also be patent trolls. A tank is a vehicle,
that doesn't mean a car isn't a vehicle, or that a car is a tank. I think rather
then coming up with a new term for apple we should just expand the current one.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 07 2012 @ 09:09 PM EST |
Either duck or grouse
Tufty
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: BJ on Wednesday, November 07 2012 @ 10:21 PM EST |
Just don't get back to me when your gracious
goodwill towards Apple has expired.
I'll just mock you.
bjd
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 07 2012 @ 10:56 PM EST |
N/t [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 08 2012 @ 03:57 AM EST |
Assuming the claims that it's adding stylus stuff to the case
are correct.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 09 2012 @ 09:35 AM EST |
Personally, I've never bought into the definition which says an entity has to
be non-practicing to be a troll.
In fabled stories, a troll picks a
bridge and sits by it in order to collect a toll.
The troll owned neither
the body of water under the bridge, nor the bridge itself, nor the land on
either side of the bridge and the troll certainly didn't build the
bridge.
So when someone decides to patent something of which knowledge is
already in the public domain - whether or not the USPTO is silly enough to grant
said patent, they are a patent Troll!
To patent the process of "enter
2+2= into a calculator and read the display to see the result" is nothing less
then being a patent Troll.
The use of a calculator is public
knowledge
To apply math to a calculator is public
knowledge
Math is not patentable and is public knowledge
As a
result:
To apply for a patent on the public knowledge use of a device for
the application of a publicly knowledgeable formula
is a Troll - planting
your flag to collect a toll on something you don't have a claim over!
And
to put bluntly:
I see the application of software to a computer to be
exactly the use of a math formula through a calculator!
Not analogous -
exact. The only difference is the magnitude of resource in the hardware of a
computer vs a calculator.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|