Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Aug 2013 09:36 UTC
Legal Recently, the ITC ruled in favour of Samsung, issuing an exclusion order against certain Apple products, barring them from being sold in the US. Several people have called upon president Obama to step in and overrule the decision (e.g. this guy) - however, not only would this set a very bad precedent for non-US companies, it would also simply be incredibly unfair if you actually look at the ITC ruling itself. Because of this, it is quite unlikely that Obama will step in.
Thread beginning with comment 568566
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Nelson
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 1st Aug 2013 11:38 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

It's not a defense at all. I never once said I agree with the exclusion order - in fact, I think it's ridiculous.

However, and I tried to explain this to you before, if Apple abuses the patent system with crappy software patents as an aggressor, then sure as hell the attacked get to defend themselves.

If I punch you, I sure shouldn't be crying if I get one in return.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by JAlexoid on Thu 1st Aug 2013 11:52 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

It's not a software patent.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Thu 1st Aug 2013 11:59 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Oh come on. Apple gets an exclusion order there's melodrama and sarcastic sniping about "free market at work".

Samsung gets one and there's rationalizations a page long. Give me a break.

As usual you play your semantic game and hide from the spirit of your post.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 1st Aug 2013 12:03 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

If you're the only one among many claiming grass is purple, you might consider the possibility you are wrong.

Reply Parent Score: 2

v RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Liza on Thu 1st Aug 2013 13:37 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by Beta on Fri 2nd Aug 2013 09:26 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

You're confused about who the aggressor is.

When Apple announced the iPhone, both Google(aka Motorola) and Nokia started to see dollar signs and both companies sued Apple. They sued Apple patents that are "crappy software patents" that were also given as part of basic cellular standards that they promised to licensed under FRAND terms.

Even in Samsung's case, Apple offered to settle with Samsung, rather than go to court, but Samsung was not interested.

I guess some people just hate innovative companies. That's fine, don't buy Apple products.

But when you start committing fraud by lying about the situation, that's not fine.

The history here is no in dispute. So, why lie?


I know you’re a new account as of yesterday… so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. For people that have been using smartphones for the last decade, and watching the technology sphere for longer, your history is absolutely incorrect.

You haven’t read the article above because you’re still insisting Apples narrative of the events is gospel truth, it is not.

And please, keep it pleasant in the comments section.

Reply Parent Score: 4