[IvanIV]

They look now like a litigation company with a manufacturing of a few gadgets on the side. I think the way how one can obtain preliminary bans on products must change, because that's what is getting abused to bully the competition and probably not by Apple only.

[darkjedimaster]

Prototype pictures of the Iphone 5 have been leaked & they look awfully similar to a rival handset.

http://www.youmobile.org/blogs/entry...-leaked-Photos

[Big Poy]

Originally Posted by darkjedimaster

Prototype pictures of the Iphone 5 have been leaked & they look awfully similar to a rival handset.

http://www.youmobile.org/blogs/entry...-leaked-Photos

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/appl...ages-are-fake/

[alanwarwic]

I think it was US Judge Posner who said that Apple were acting against the interests of the public.

It is funny how we often need a judge to state what is bleedin obvious.

[finbaar]

Originally Posted by Big Poy

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/appl...ages-are-fake/

I was just about to say they are fake. Apple don't leak. There will very likely be versions of the new iPhone in the wild now but they will not look like the finished article. It may be even Apple do not know what it will finally look like themselves. When the iPhone 4S was released we did not know it was going to be the same design as the 4. Still it is interesting to speculate.

[alanwarwic]

Originally Posted by finbaar

Apple don't leak.

So the leaks about losing Google maps and Flash were not true.

[finbaar]

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

So the leaks about losing Google maps and Flash were not true.

No, Apple don't leak. The statement is correct in the context of my post which was appertaining to iPhones.

Catamite.

[alanwarwic]

Originally Posted by finbaar

No, Apple don't leak. The statement is correct in the context of my post which was appertaining to iPhones.Catamite.

They certainly will if they see fit.

[paulbrock]

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

They certainly will if they see fit.

or 'accidentally' leave an iphone in a bar...

[paulbrock]

Originally Posted by finbaar

Catamite.

Not familiar with this word, and after looking up its meaning, wondering how its relevant to a mobile phone thread.

[daclick]

I Wish Apple Would Just Pee Off.

[finbaar]

Originally Posted by paulbrock

Not familiar with this word, and after looking up its meaning, wondering how its relevant to a mobile phone thread.

It was directed to at the catamite who was trying to appear "clever" by taking a single sentence from a post out of context to make a cheap point.

Catamite is a great word. Try using it in a meeting next week.

[swordman]

Originally Posted by finbaar

It was directed to at the catamite who was trying to appear "clever" by taking a single sentence from a post out of context to make a cheap point.

Catamite is a great word. Try using it in a meeting next week.

Problem is are you trying to appear clever ..... if so you really should know what a word means for it to have an effect.

I can only assume siri give you that word

[Schadenfreud]

Originally Posted by finbaar

It was directed to at the catamite who was trying to appear "clever" by taking a single sentence from a post out of context to make a cheap point.

Catamite is a great word. Try using it in a meeting next week.

So you resort to name calling in order to try and undermine someone else's point of view?

The fact that you use a little known word in order to try and sound clever actually does the opposite of what you attempted.

[Thine Wonk]

Originally Posted by finbaar

No, Apple don't leak. The statement is correct in the context of my post which was appertaining to iPhones.

Catamite.

I don't understand, so you're now saying Apple only don't leak iPhone details?

[alanwarwic]

Originally Posted by finbaar

... directed to at the catamite who was trying to appear "clever" by taking a single sentence from a post out of context to make a cheap point.Catamite is a great word.

'Apple don't leak'.

Funny that the only context is Apple which is made more obvious by the very sad reply.

[paulbrock]

of the 6 hearings mentioned this week in various courts, 4 are Apple challenging someone
http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/06/a...ft-oracle.html

[alanwarwic]

Seems Apple is infringing on UMTS and have to pay Samsung in a court ruling.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...ch_court_rules

The official statement on the Samsung case seems to be that Samsung is "blatantly" copying Apple's products. Sounds very bizarre as a defence but this is Apple.

[Roush]

It's a symbolic, but ultimately hollow victory for Samsung.

As they failed to establish infringement for the other 3 patents they were asserting they now owe Apple approximately €800,000 in legal fees which will outstrip any damages award for the 1 patent they did prevail on.

[alanwarwic]

Originally Posted by Roush

...which will outstrip any damages award for the 1 patent they did prevail on.

Rather than often appearing to be making things up why not link so others can think for themselves.

[Roush]

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

Rather than often appearing to be making things up why not link so others can think for themselves.

http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/06/s...its-first.html

The Dutch court in question previously rejected Samsung's 2.4% royalty demand as unreasonable, and that was for Samsung's entire pool of 3G essential patents. We're talking about just one of those patents here, so damages will be relatively low.

The court is currently deciding what a reasonable rate will be for that single patent.

Apple has always said it will pay a reasonable rate for such licenses, but Samsung has yet to offer Apple reasonable terms. The court throwing out Samsung's unreasonable 2.4% demand affirms this.

[wavejockglw]

Samsung and others will win in the long run as they and others are end to end designers and manufacturers of devices. Apple may innovate but make nothing themselves. That fact alone puts them at a huge disadvantage in the fast changing IT marketplace.

Litigation is the only route open to a very greedy compny with not much more than a design base which relies on third party component makers and cheap far east assembly backed up with brand appeal, restricted/revenue protected use and often blind loyalty and snob value, all of which are now being challenged.

[alanwarwic]

Most of these patent exercises are symbolic.
Samsung only actioned this patent late in defence.

Apple are actually doing very well in not being ridiculed in the main media for their ludicrous stunts.
To me, it could have horrendously backfired but this seems not to be the case.

[Roush]

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

Samsung only actioned this patent late in defence.

No, there's nothing late about the appearance of Samsung's 3G essential FRAND pledged patents in this case.

There isn't the same level of transparency in the EU courts as there is in the US, but it first became known that Samsung made these claims in this court in July 2011.

https://twitter.com/edibleapple/stat...13509492207617

[alanwarwic]

Originally Posted by Roush

No, there's nothing late about the appearance of Samsung's 3G essential FRAND pledged patents in this case.

Because Samsung did not file when the iPhone first appeared they cannot backdate the awards.

It is certainly Apple who are abusing the patent system.