Posts by Jaemon

How about you try to consider COPYRIGHT

"Be forewarned, tablet designers. Apple apparently want to claims ownership not only of rounded corners and rectangular shapes, but also of thinness. ®"

Apple is not suing samsung for rounded corners or regtangular shape....

Apple is suing Samsung cause Samsung used THE EXACT SAME rounded corners and regtangular shape that Apple used in the iPad and iPhone and that violates copyright law.

Furthermore "prior art" only have any meaning in PATENT cases NOT COPYRIGHT cases so how about that thread of comments try and learn somthing about the difference between the two...

Additionally no that suckey image of the old samsung phone does not prove anything except that the imbicile that made it dont understand copyright... (and its been debunked many times as the samsung thingie did not appear before the iPhone, it was anounced but with out image or demonstration of actual product.. (sorry copyright law dont cover things you say you will do only at some point in the future only what you do/publish/create).

And even IF that samsung thingie was released earlier than the iPhone it is so different in the actual design features that the copyright that Samsung have for that phone does not cover the iPhone.

And yes patent trolls are a scurge on the planet but as Apple actually MAKES stuff it is by definition not a patent troll.

most obliged

J

Hmm shoot in foot much ?

Two names on that list is really weird, Samsung and Cisco cause as apparent from the AVC/H.264 licensors list below they are on both sides of that fight...

But as everybody with a brain know the MPEG-LA AVC/H.264 is the pooled patents on video compression of a virtual whos whos in video from Apple to Sony to Panasonic. Whos on the WebM buddy list... mostly open source projects so deeply indentured to google they might as well buy them (AMD, Cisco Systems, Logitech, MIPS Technologies, Matroska, Mozilla, Opera, Samsung, Texas Instruments, and the Xiph.org Foundation).

So lets look at the rest AMD, Cisco, Logitech, MIPS Tech, Samsung, Opera, Texas Industries....

Obviously Cisco and Samsung have some legs to stand on in video patents wise (they are on the H.264 list), and AMD with their ATI branch could have some chops there too, but Logitech and Opera ? What on earth do they have in video compression patents ?

And another thing, as the list below shows, would everybody please shut the funk up with naming Apple and Microsoft as the main patent contributors its just not true.

While i could understand how Samsung might consider their google buddies closer than their TV making competitors I have one question.... Even though it would be quite interesting to see Samsung make a TV with a digital TV tuner without a MPEG-LA license as almost all digital broadcast and cable signals use mpeg4 compression...

Furthermore, why are LG, Sony AND Ericsson not on the google buddylist ? (mayhaps they like their spot on the MPEG-LA list better)...

Sony makes the nerdalicious Google TV box Sony/Ericsson and LG makes android phones.

And strangely missing from both lists.... Nvidia.

Moan and bitch all you want about patents but they are not going away.

/J

PS! before anybody writes a single letter about patents consider this, patents DO NOT COVER IDEAS, they cover METHODS, think about that for a minute. If you can do something described in a patent in a way that is not the way the patents describes then you can implement that method to all you want...

AVC/H.264 licensors:

Apple Inc.

Cisco Systems Canada IP Holdings Company

DAEWOO Electronics Corporation

Dolby Laboratories Licensing Corporation

Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute

France Télécom, société anonyme*

Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Foerderung der angewandten Forschung e.V.

Fujitsu Limited

Hewlett-Packard Company

Hitachi, Ltd.

Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.

LG Electronics Inc.

Microsoft Corporation

Mitsubishi Electric Corporation

NTT DOCOMO, INC.

Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation

Panasonic Corporation

Polycom, Inc.

Robert Bosch GmbH*

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

Sedna Patent Services, LLC

Sharp Corporation

Siemens AG

Sony Corporation

Tandberg Telecom AS

Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson

The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York

Toshiba Corporation

Victor Company of Japan, Limited

There is a reason for everything even link bait

And might the reason that Verizon is not into WP7 phones at the moment be that microsoft have yet to provide a timeframe for when they (microsoft) will support CDMA baseband software ?

It's like asking a sahara resident what he thinks about snow... no its not on his mind much.

but why on earth verizon chose to go with cdma and not the world standard (GSM for the unwashed masses) is a mystery... like why T-mobile in the us chose to use a slightly altered 3G GSM frequency (making them basically the only carrier with more than 50 customers to use the 1700 mhz / 2100 mhz band for 3G). CDMA is in use only in the us and by one carrier in china (plus a few island states and one or two other countries)... its just plain old stupid now with more new stupid punditry on top...

Pure and utter link bait this is....