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 568575
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Thu 1st Aug 2013 12:05 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Logical fallacy. I'm not saying your reasoning is wrong, it may very well be right. I'm noting your difference in tone and wording when it comes to Samsung and Apple.

Samsung gets a legal justification from you, Apple gets snide remarks.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 1st Aug 2013 12:25 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Of course Samsung gets that. It's called siding with the victim of a broken system.

Apple is the aggressor. Samsung the victim. People tend to side with ones who have been treated unjustly.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by majipoor on Thu 1st Aug 2013 13:28 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
majipoor Member since:
2009-01-22

"Apple is the aggressor. Samsung the victim."

You are obviously assuming here that Apple claims are all baseless, otherwise Apple would be the victim and Samsung the aggressor fighting back at the victim.

But in this case, you are encouraging using a gun (SEP patent which is unavoidable) to fight back an aggressor which attack you with a stick (Apple's patent have simple workaround). Too bad you are not an US citizen: you would have done a nice republican from Texas).

Reply Parent Score: 2

v RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by Liza on Thu 1st Aug 2013 13:43 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
RE[6]: Comment by Nelson
by Tony Swash on Thu 1st Aug 2013 17:17 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Nelson"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Of course Samsung gets that. It's called siding with the victim of a broken system.


OK - here are a few very simple question.

Do you think that Samsung copies the designs of other successful companies as an important part of it's core business strategy?

Do you think that Samsung's copying has been highly focussed on Apple in recent years because of the latter's product successes?

If you do think Samsung copies do you then think that degree of copying by Samsung has sometimes gone too far?

Do you think the use of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs ) as a weapon in legal actions is ever justified?

Reply Parent Score: -1