Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Aug 2012 23:54 UTC
Permalink for comment 532575
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-09-01
Google have been vary of Apple infringements from the start. Initially G1 had even multi-tough disabled.
They also have removed over-scroll from Android. (edit: more on the subject: http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/25/3268609/how-google-has-avoided-ap...)
But the number of design and interaction patents that were validated in this trial(despite obvious prior art) is just staggering.
There's only a limited number of ways one can do zooming and scrolling on a touch device as there's only a limited number of ways you can open door or press a button. This is just a common sense, Apple can claim ownership on a common sense. Nobody in his sane minds could declare this patentable, this just madness.
There's nothing reasonable Google could do to counter madness, you know that.
I'm wondering how come in the absurdly obvious patent cases before US courts it's always the US based companies that are given the leg.
Edited 2012-08-27 12:37 UTC