Apple 1 Samsung 0

[PrimalJay 10]

Go Google go, crush that rotten Apple to the core.

[Lemonetree 10]

Stealing ideas and doing it before the rest played quite a role in apple market leadership, Samsung is doing well in the industry and galaxy is a perfect product.

[kidneystone 23]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19425052

 

I thought a jury was made of 12 people picked at random and then scrutinised. Out of the millions of people that could have been picked it just so happens that the jury forman is some sort of expert and leads the rest of the jury to a guilty verdict. Stinks of corruption to me

[jeweller 10]

Its all relative in technology development you are always gonna get similar designs.however when the Galaxy came along it was so obviously a copy of the Iphone think they were taking the mick.

 

in what way was it a copy, android is a linux based operating system, and linux has had 'apps' available to download way before the iphone came out.

 

Then theres the phone design itself. now we would all agree that any phone these days is going to be of a similar size and shape, and there were pc phones out with touch screen way before apple did it.

 

 

So what exactly have samsung stolen? lets see, the fact that apps and programs are in blocks on the home screen? No,as windows has been set out this way forever, as has linux for years.

 

Touchscreen? No, apple do not own touchscreen technology. cash machines have done it for years.

 

BUT..wait... samsung the sneaky buggers have stolen iphones bounce back feature...WOW.

 

where would the technology world be without apple..absolutely no where. I mean can you imagine had the bounce back feature never been invented. Phones would be pointless.

 

Oh and by the way, i heard the new iphone is going to have NFT..hahaha the samsung nexus had this like 2 years ago.

 

guess what else its going to have...satnav with 3d views..hahah already done on android.

 

But its not apples problem anyway... i think their the smartest people on the planet...i mean if i could make a phone, with features that are 2 years old and get people to buy it at those i prices, and become the richest company in the world then i certainly would.

[kinetic 10]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19425052

 

I thought a jury was made of 12 people picked at random and then scrutinised. Out of the millions of people that could have been picked it just so happens that the jury forman is some sort of expert and leads the rest of the jury to a guilty verdict. Stinks of corruption to me

 

Not in America. They use jury selection; they call up a big number of potential jurors (for example, in the OJ Simpson case there were 250 potential jurors!). The defence and the prosecution are then allowed to submit questions to the jurors. Based on their responses both the defence and prosecution are allowed to peremptory challenge (remove, without giving reason!) a certain amount of jurors each until only 12 are left (so say they have a pool of 40, they can each nominate a juror to be dismissed from that trial until they end up with a pool of 12).

 

The jury then vote for their own foreman (they can pick whoever they like, but it would be a fairly natural thing for them to pick the person with the most knowledge/expertise related to the case).

 

This is actually considered quite controversial, with many arguing against it. For example in the aforementioned OJ trial, polling data (pre-trial) indicated most white people thought OJ was guilty, whilst most black people thought he was innocent. They whittled down the 250 jurors to "8 blacks, 2 Hispanics, 1 half-Caucasian, half Native American, and 1 Caucasian female", which caused an outrage at the time!

 

We used the same system ourselves up until 1998 (although it was hardly ever implemented, and on occasions when it was each side could only dismiss 3 jurors - unlike the US). Also I don't think they were allowed to be questioned on their beliefs (unlike the US system) before being dismissed, beyond asking if they were somehow sympathetic to the accused. For example by living near him/her or knowing them or their family, etc. (I think now they under obligation to declare if this is the case - obviously you wouldn't end up with your brother on the jury).

 

Wikipedia: Peremptory challenge

Edited September 20, 2012 by kinetic
typo

[kidneystone 23]

Not in America. They use jury selection; they call up a big number of potential jurors (for example, in the OJ Simpson case there were 250 potential jurors!). The defence and the prosecution are then allowed to submit questions to the jurors. Based on their responses both the defence and prosecution are allowed to peremptory challenge (remove, without giving reason!) a certain amount of jurors each until only 12 are left (so say they have a pool of 40, they can each nominate a juror to be dismissed from that trial until they end up with a pool of 12).

 

The jury then vote for their own foreman (they can pick whoever they like, but it would be a fairly natural thing for them to pick the person with the most knowledge/expertise related to the case).

 

This is actually considered quite controversial, with many arguing against it. For example in the aforementioned OJ trial, polling data (pre-trial) indicated most white people thought OJ was guilty, whilst most black people thought he was innocent. They whittled down the 250 jurors to "8 blacks, 2 Hispanics, 1 half-Caucasian, half Native American, and 1 Caucasian female", which caused an outrage at the time!

 

We used the same system ourselves up until 1998 (although it was hardly ever implemented, and on occasions when it was each side could only dismiss 3 jurors - unlike the US). Also I don't think they were allowed to be questioned on their beliefs (unlike the US system) before being dismissed, beyond asking if they were somehow sympathetic to the accused. For example by living near him/her or knowing them or their family, etc. (I think now they under obligation to declare if this is the case - obviously you wouldn't end up with your brother on the jury).

 

Wikipedia: Peremptory challenge

 

Even out of say 250 potential jurors (or even 2500 potential jurors) what are the odds of getting some sort of expert in this field, they must be astronomical. Still stinks of corruption to me

[kinetic 10]

Even out of say 250 potential jurors (or even 2500 potential jurors) what are the odds of getting some sort of expert in this field, they must be astronomical. Still stinks of corruption to me

 

As the link in the first post says; the case took place in San Jose. Which is the main city in Silicon Valley!

 

"285.9 out of every 1,000 private-sector workers" work in high tech industry.

 

"San Jose residents produce more U.S. patents than any other city"

 

"Thirty-five percent of all venture capital funds in the U.S. are invested in San Jose"

 

It contains the headquarters of: "Adobe, Altera, Brocade Communications Systems, Cadence Design Systems, Cisco Systems, eBay, Lee's Sandwiches, Sanmina-SCI, and Xilinx, as well as major facilities for Becton Dickinson, Ericsson, Hewlett-Packard, Hitachi, IBM, Kaiser Permanente and KLA Tencor. Other large companies based in San Jose include Altera, Atmel, CEVA, Cypress Semiconductor, Echelon, Integrated Device Technology, Micrel, Netgear, Novellus Systems, Oclaro, Online Trading Academy, Quantum, SunPower, Supermicro, Tessera Technologies, TiVo, Ultratech, and VeriFone"

 

(source for all of the above: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Jose,_California )

 

So it's not really so remarkable. They obviously chose the court location which they felt would give them the best chance of winning, a place where you can't walk down the street without tripping over high-tech employees or patent holders.

 

I think patent laws are frankly ridiculous, so I'm not being tribal or arguing for one side over the other, just pointing out that the foreman's background isn't really as out of the ordinary (considering the location) as you think it is and he probably didn't have that much affect on the outcome. It's home turf, they were never going to lose that case!

[Resident 1,185]

As the link in the first post says; the case took place in San Jose. Which is the main city in Silicon Valley!

 

 

 

(source for all of the above: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Jose,_California )

 

So it's not really so remarkable. They obviously chose the court location which they felt would give them the best chance of winning, a place where you can't walk down the street without tripping over high-tech employees or patent holders.

 

I think patent laws are frankly ridiculous, so I'm not being tribal or arguing for one side over the other, just pointing out that the foreman's background isn't really as out of the ordinary (considering the location) as you think it is and he probably didn't have that much affect on the outcome. It's home turf, they were never going to lose that case!

 

The Califonia judgement is a bit of a farce to be honest. As it's been stated, chosing a court where the HQ of the plaintiff is based is going to cause bias on the jury, especially because most Americans don't know the difference between North and South Korea.

 

Even Wozniak, the guy that co-founded and built Apple technologically before he retired and Jobs tooks over has publically stated that he hates the way that Jobs and the board keep trying to sue everyone and says that the Califonia judgement won't hold.

[PrimalJay 10]

The Califonia judgement is a bit of a farce to be honest. As it's been stated, chosing a court where the HQ of the plaintiff is based is going to cause bias on the jury, especially because most Americans don't know the difference between North and South Korea.

 

Even Wozniak, the guy that co-founded and built Apple technologically before he retired and Jobs tooks over has publically stated that he hates the way that Jobs and the board keep trying to sue everyone and says that the Califonia judgement won't hold.

 

Maybe Wozniak should be poached by Microsoft and let him sort them out, love to see what Apple would say about that.

[alchresearch 214]

Swiss railways ticked off at iOS clock knock-off

Trademarked and copyrighted clock design reproduced in iOS 6 app

 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/21/apple_copied_swiss_rail_clock/

[PrimalJay 10]

Swiss railways ticked off at iOS clock knock-off

Trademarked and copyrighted clock design reproduced in iOS 6 app

 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/21/apple_copied_swiss_rail_clock/

 

What ever next, will Apple be suing anyone who uses apples in their logos, I mean real fruit ones.

 

Apple are on a downwards spiral to me and is always a sign of a company going nowhere when they are addicted to lawsuits.

[muddywolf 10]

What ever next, will Apple be suing anyone who uses apples in their logos, I mean real fruit ones.

 

Apple are on a downwards spiral to me and is always a sign of a company going nowhere when they are addicted to lawsuits.

 

Did you understand what he linked? Apple is not complaining or claiming copyright breach, it's the other way around.