Apple has been rebuffed in its attempt to exclude Samsung testimony in the two firms' ongoing patent infringement case. Judge Lucy Koh has struck down a request for relief filed by Cupertino's legal eagles in objection to comments made by Samsung relating to Apple's use of patents it has claimed Samsung infringes upon. The …
I read this as...
Samsung : "Mummy Appy's not sharing toys with me, and he's not even playing with them!"
Apple : "Am to! Make him stop telling lies!"
Unfortunately Koh has to respond as a judge rather than a frustrated parent so is making them proove their claimed use/none use. I would far prefer the frustrated parent approach of forcing them to share, or taking the toys (patents) off both them. I don't imagine their is any legal methodology for that of course but it would be much more satisfying.
Re: I read this as...
I was reminded of a comment by the late John Mortimer QC to the effect that he preferred having to defend murderers rather than act in divorce. With the former, once the deed had been done there was a sense of finality. With the latter he'd get a ranty phone call at any hour of the night along the lines of "do something, he's only gone and taken the toaster"
Re: I read this as...
Personally I think the Judge should give them both a good slap upside their heads and send them to bed without any supper!
I really miss...
Groklaw's excellent coverage of this.
Obligatory "thanks Obama!"
Will someone *please*...
..just bang their damned heads together and yell so that their ears reside six feet inside their skulls "PLAY THE FUCK NICE"?
I'm getting so fucking tired of this crap is almost makes me want to dump them all - no matter who the hell they are - into a sodding blast furnace, and turn the dial up to "vapourise with intent".
When the going gets tough ...
the losers start suing.
When will this stupidity end?
At least KOH shows she has the guts to tell either party where to go.
The stupidity ends ...
... when the lawyers have all the money.
Any one else see this as tarnishing the Apple brand?
If the they keep having to resort to petty suits and apparently lies to strangle the competition it reflects that they fear the competition and are not sure in their own product.
Which having to use an iPhone5 for six months before I could cajole my boss into letting me pick my own Android device (plumped for an Xperia Z1, not as good as my OneX UI wise but the tech's nice) I can quite see.
I've not had an iPhone before that point, maybe they were once ahead of the curve, but definitely not now, "annoyingly restrictive" is my lasting impression.
Did Samsung have Siri on their phones? Reason I ask is because of this part from the article "deploys the Siri virtual assistant,". Don't see anyway Samsung could be in violations as they refuse to let Siri on their phones and be seen as giving up against Apple.
Re: Since when...
Nope.. But there's a whopper of a "patent" ( 8,086,604) involved that basically states that the action of presenting the results of a search on a database ( including the whole bloody internet) , using [any form of input], using [any number] of [not specified] "heuristic methods" on, of course, a mobile device is a true Apple Innovation.
I especially liked the block schematics provided, truly impressive.. [/sarc]
Re: Since when...
Reading the actual patent, surely the heuristics is patentable - however the patent seems to cover interacting with the heuristics which are - quite frankly - obvious and should not be patentable in the slightest!
" Using a plurality of heuristic algorithms to operate upon information descriptors input by the user, the present invention locates and displays candidate items of information for selection and/or retrieval. Thus, the advantages of a search engine can be exploited, while listing only relevant object candidate items of information."
If Apple had gone for Google instead would that patriotic flag be waving as strong?
An interesting question considering Apple has also played the race card on this one.
Its was also very funny race card appointing Koh in the first place. Unlike others, she continually has to prove her impartiality whilst also proving she is 'American'. Koh cannot win on that one yet rightly gets ridiculed.
I've figured out the cause of all this.
No, it's not the late Steve Jobs' "war on Android" comment.
The problem is, Apple has too much cash hanging around.
See, their shareholders have been pushing for payouts, and they don't want to pay out. So (here's their mistake) they went to their lawyers looking for a way not to payout. The lawyers' response:
"Well, some nice costly lawsuits (patent ones, for example -- we could really draw those out forever) could convince the shareholders that you need to hold onto that mountain of cash as a legal reserve..."
strike down, ey?
and I will STRIKE DOWN upon thee with grrreaT vengeance and fuuuurRRrious anger those who attempt to slander and destroy old sammy, and you will KNOW I am THE JUDGE(tm) when I lay my verdict upon you!!
Idea for a patent law firm:
Sylvester McMonkey McBean - Patent Law.
(with respect to Dr Seuss)
Proves, you can't teach a Sneech.
- Product round-up Coming clean: Ten cordless vacuum cleaners
- Product round-up Too 4K-ing expensive? Five full HD laptops for work and play
- Review We have a winner! Fresh Linux Mint 17.1 – hands down the best
- 'Regin': The 'New Stuxnet' spook-grade SOFTWARE WEAPON described
- Worstall @ the Weekend BIG FAT Lies: Porky Pies about obesity