Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, January 20 2013 @ 11:02 AM EST |
So, we have Apple (and everyone agrees) state / argue that all
the consumers that were attracted to Siri and any Siri feature
bought an Apple iPhone. Sincr that's irreperable harm to Apple,
then Apple should be able to obtain an injunction on Apple's
iPhone 4S/5.
Maybe that's how capitalism and the free markets work.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PJ on Sunday, January 20 2013 @ 01:31 PM EST |
Well, in the order, the court quoted from
experts, one of whom said that without this
one aspect, Siri wouldn't be able to function.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: ukjaybrat on Monday, January 21 2013 @ 08:36 AM EST |
The funniest thing about all of this is, yes, people may have
originally purchased the iphone because of siri, but now it is
widely known as just a gimmick and no one ever uses siri
unless they are out with friends asking it dirty or silly
questions just to gauge her reactions.
---
IANAL[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Charles888 on Monday, January 21 2013 @ 10:17 PM EST |
... from a single user interface
REMOTELY novel? I find it alarming
that some people are acknowledging
at least some limited functionality
A patentable and owned by Apple.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 29 2013 @ 12:12 PM EST |
Don't forget that Siri was a very popular and useful app that ran on older
hardware before Apple bought it and artificially restricted its use to boost
sales.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|