Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 51

Thread: Apple Caught Photoshopping Galaxy Tab 10.1 to Look Like iPad for Lawsuit

  1. #11
    3SWiki.org
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Owner Since
    10+ Years

    Location
    The Silver State
    Posts
    661
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 94 Times in 53 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by IPD View Post
    google acquiring motorola mobile patents. google also looking to buy kodak patents.

    I definitely find that to be the most game changing news to appear over the last few weeks. Whether you wish for Apple's death or not, there's no question that Apple will need to step up there game in order to stay competitive. We're bound to see some great new innovations in the mobile market over the next few years.

  2. #12
    Forum User Not Verified
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Owner Since

    Posts
    196
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 45 Times in 37 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by IPD View Post
    google acquiring motorola mobile patents. google also looking to buy kodak patents. apple is about to get sodomized without the benefit of someone spitting on its figurative "hole".

    rofl google got punked by Microsoft... Microsoft was eyeing motorola... and forced google to jump and overpay for that crud.

    Apples fine... its laughing at the stupidity of Google... They ticked off all the other android phone makers... they overpaid for a stinker company... the patents they got are mostly crap.

    Has Google wasted $12bn on a dud patent poker-chip? ? The Register

    Lets also not forget Oracle is about to split googles hole...

    rofl don't steal Java and you wont get sued...

    here is what the judge said...

    When the email surfaced during a hearing last month, Judge William Alsup, who is overseeing the case, told Google: "You're going to be on the losing end of this document with Andy Rubin on the stand." Rubin runs Android for Google.

    Oracle could end up with triple whatever base amount is finalized (Google even acknowledges it could be between $1.4 and $6.1 billion) if the Judge finds that Google willingly and knowingly infringed upon Oracle’s patents.


    http://www.infoworld.com/d/the-indus...rt-case-169933
    Last edited by Mikes2nd; 08-18-2011 at 11:17 AM.

  3. #13
    Member verified
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Owner Since
    Oct '08 - Oct '10

    Location
    Royersford, PA
    Posts
    3,814
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    1,059
    Thanked 442 Times in 317 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mikes2nd View Post
    rofl google got punked by Microsoft... Microsoft was eyeing motorola... and forced google to jump and overpay for that crud.

    Apples fine... its laughing at the stupidity of Google... They ticked off all the other android phone makers... they overpaid for a stinker company... the patents they got are mostly crap.

    Has Google wasted $12bn on a dud patent poker-chip? ? The Register

    Lets also not forget Oracle is about to split googles hole...

    rofl don't steal Java and you wont get sued...

    here is what the judge said...

    When the email surfaced during a hearing last month, Judge William Alsup, who is overseeing the case, told Google: "You're going to be on the losing end of this document with Andy Rubin on the stand." Rubin runs Android for Google.

    Oracle could end up with triple whatever base amount is finalized (Google even acknowledges it could be between $1.4 and $6.1 billion) if the Judge finds that Google willingly and knowingly infringed upon Oracle’s patents.


    Google still trying to remove damning email from court case | The Industry Standard - InfoWorld
    Google wants judge to dismiss four charges in Oracle suit - smartphones, patent, oracle, legal, intellectual property, Google, consumer electronics, Android - Techworld

    Google refers to an earlier Oracle document where Oracle admits that it isn't aware of any commercial products that are marked as using the patents. As such, Google argues it shouldn't be liable for damages until after July 2010, when Oracle notified it of the infringement.
    R135
    ╚╬╬╝
    - 24

  4. #14
    Relax, it's just rocket science!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Owner Since
    Nov 2001

    Location
    Ozark, AL
    Posts
    1,211
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked 122 Times in 76 Posts

  5. #15
    Member verified
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Owner Since
    Oct '08 - Oct '10

    Location
    Royersford, PA
    Posts
    3,814
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    1,059
    Thanked 442 Times in 317 Posts
    Oracle sucks ass. The only thing they're good at is spending money on planes and boats.

  6. #16
    BAD ASS - I've got one Not Verified
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Owner Since
    2/2010

    Location
    L'Anse, MI
    Posts
    2,476
    Thanks
    1,262
    Thanked 594 Times in 488 Posts
    Huh.

    There's a 1G RT next town over with "ORACLE" plates.
    Ranked No. #1 in initial quality

    Idiots, simply by being idiots, seem capable of achieving randomly bad things that are beyond the imaginings of sensible people.

  7. #17
    Relax, it's just rocket science!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Owner Since
    Nov 2001

    Location
    Ozark, AL
    Posts
    1,211
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked 122 Times in 76 Posts
    The story just got a lot more interesting. Seems Apple has been caught doing the same thing in its smartphone lawsuit in the Netherlands.

    Apple files inaccurate evidence in Dutch Samsung case - ComputerworldUK.com

  8. #18
    Now with more poop-smear Not Verified
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Owner Since
    Not Anymore

    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    6,490
    Blog Entries
    3
    Thanks
    483
    Thanked 543 Times in 390 Posts
    yep. apple has its dick in the wringer now. perjuring itself. way to go.

  9. #19
    3SWiki.org
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Owner Since
    10+ Years

    Location
    The Silver State
    Posts
    661
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 94 Times in 53 Posts
    Not to beat a dead horse, but if you guys actually read the disputed patents, absolutely none of them have to do with the size of the device that these select news blogs are stretching so hard to make an issue out of. If anything, perhaps Apple's legal team simply scaled down the photo of the Galaxy S to show exactly how similar the ratio of each design element is to their current product lineup, which may be an allowable practice if the actual size of the device isn't what's being disputed. Have either of you even read the court documents as opposed to believing what's being fed to you? Is it any coincidence that both this article and the last keep pointing to 'Webwereld.nl' as the originator of these allegations, perhaps as some attempt to drive more traffic to their blog while stirring the pot between Apple and Samsung?

    Put simply, if this is not an allowable practice, the case will be thrown out -- and that'd be quite the amateur mistake on Apple's part, don't you think? As I said before, I suppose we'll see how it pans out.
    Last edited by stealthify; 08-23-2011 at 08:50 PM.

  10. #20
    Now with more poop-smear Not Verified
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Owner Since
    Not Anymore

    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    6,490
    Blog Entries
    3
    Thanks
    483
    Thanked 543 Times in 390 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthify View Post
    Not to beat a dead horse, but if you guys actually read the disputed patents, absolutely none of them have to do with the size of the device that these select news blogs are stretching so hard to make an issue out of. If anything, perhaps Apple's legal team simply scaled down the photo of the Galaxy S to show exactly how similar the ratio of each design element is to their current product lineup, which may be an allowable practice if the actual size of the device isn't what's being disputed. Have either of you even read the court documents as opposed to believing what's being fed to you? Is it any coincidence that both this article and the last keep pointing to 'Webwereld.nl' as the originator of these allegations, perhaps as some attempt to drive more traffic to their blog while stirring the pot between Apple and Samsung?

    Put simply, if this is not an allowable practice, the case will be thrown out -- and that'd be quite the amateur mistake on Apple's part, don't you think? As I said before, I suppose we'll see how it pans out.
    apple photoshops competitor products to appear more "similar" to apple products, then seeks a preliminary injunction to keep them from being sold in the first place.

    do us all a favor and take steve's dick out of your mouth.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
The 3000GT/Stealth/GTO Web History Project
3000gt.com
3000GT / Stealth International WWWboard Archive
Jim's (RED3KGT) Reststop
3000GT/Stealth/GTO Information and Resources
Team 3S
3000GT / Stealth / GTO Information
daveblack.net
3000GT/Stealth/GTO Clubs and Groups
Michigan 3S
MInnesota 3S
Wisconsin 3S
Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas 3S
North California 3000GT/Stealth
United Society of 3S Owners
3000GT/Stealth/GTO Forums
3000GT/Stealth International
3000GT/Stealth/GTO Event Pages
3S National Gathering
East Coast Gathering
Upper Mid-West Gathering
Blue Ridge Gathering