A nice one by the judge:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...tice-samsung-didn-t-copy-ipad-judge-says.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...tice-samsung-didn-t-copy-ipad-judge-says.html
A nice one by the judge:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...tice-samsung-didn-t-copy-ipad-judge-says.html
A nice one by the judge:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...tice-samsung-didn-t-copy-ipad-judge-says.html
Here is another one:
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/06/apple-wins-27-new-patents-obtains-patent-inductive-charging/
It gets better!!
A nice one by the judge:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...tice-samsung-didn-t-copy-ipad-judge-says.html
A nice one by the judge:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...tice-samsung-didn-t-copy-ipad-judge-says.html
I think that will get overturned. I hope not though, much hilarity will ensue if they actually make those announcements.
A nice one by the judge:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...tice-samsung-didn-t-copy-ipad-judge-says.html
http://vr-zone.com/articles/apple-a...l-and-dock-with-moveable-connector/16702.html
Apple helped develop OpenCL,but the patent seems vague again?
OpenCL obviously is not very "open" then!!
I think that will get overturned. I hope not though, much hilarity will ensue if they actually make those announcements.
Do Samsung really want consumers reminded that they essentially failed to copy the iPad by creating a generic and "uncool" product.
Honestly, the judge has a history of being a complete tool.
He once ruled that this:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GAI_s0xBt_U/TxxrxN5uHNI/AAAAAAAAUKU/D8glUz-a0-c/s1600/claimantsbus.png
Infringes on copyright of this:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-a9bnYfPqR4o/Txxr4pa8mhI/AAAAAAAAUKc/ZcUb9TAAw90/s1600/defendantsbus.png
Because of the similar use of selective colour and same subject. Despite the fact the bus is different (black sign up front vs nothing), the bus is moving on one compared to stationary, one has people the other doesn't and the field of view is drastically different.