Apple was the first to "market the litigation" - Apple has provided their
point of view quite explicitly in various marketing.
There's a reason the
UK required Apple to post a comment indicating the Court's had found that
Samsung did not infringe a very specific part of Apple's total marketing claims.
Marketing claims that choose to convict Samsung of wrong-doing before any
trials even began.
Perhaps you can point to a specific instance of
Samsung's marketing that occurred prior to Apple initiating their public
campaign?
My point: it can be reasonably viewed that Samsung was just
responding to Apple's attacks - in both the Court and the Marketing
campaigns.
If you're going to say it's wrong for Samsung to have
responded - then you must also agree it was even more wrong for Apple to have
initiated.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|