starxd

Everything you write is just dripping with arrogance.

I know in your world everybody is a fan of one thing and therefore hates the other thing. Sorry to disappoint you, but I don’t fit into that silly world. I have never once said any “hatred for Google” or anything in support of Oracle… because I literally don’t care. This case is interesting, so I have followed it and commented, but I have no allegiance to either company and I could not care less about who wins or loses. And I have never heard of Florian Mueller. Who is he? You are so biased that you have read all sorts of things into my comments that I never said. Have a nice day!

Not true. The judge found that Google infringed on other copyrights, and the issue of the 37 APIs and fair use has not been decided.

Huh?

Unlike you, I don’t care who wins this trial. It literally makes no difference to me. As I’ve said before, I am just an interested, completely impartial observer. You, on the other hand, had your mind made up before the trial even started, which is the very definition of being partial.

By what mechanism did this trial invalidate these patents?

People are allowed to express opinions in this country. Not everything has to be backed up by “psychiatrist records.” LOL!

Yes, that was fine. Your right to hurl insults is constitutionally protected. It is, however, rude and inappropriate and a gross overreaction, but you are free to act that way.

Apple gets sued quite frequently. What is your point?

Why do you care if his butt hurts?

Google is a lot more than just a search engine. Even if you don’t “type Google.com in your browser” it is hard to escape Google’s watchful eye.

MS is shorthand. M$ is confusing. I had no idea what you meant.

Ever heard of the first amendment? In the US we have something called free speech. If you think someone is a nut job you are free to speak that.

LOL! Everyone thinks they’re an attorney these days. That hardly qualifies as slander!

The judge did not rule no violation.

It ended, but it is far from settled. The most important copyright issues have yet to be decided.

How did they invalidate the patents? The jury simply ruled that Google didn’t infringe them, not that they are invalid.

Not necessarily. If the 37 APIs are ruled copyrightable, and Google’s infringement is determined to not be fair use, then the damages could be much higher. It seems unlikely, but it’s possible.

I don’t claim to be a lawyer, but it seems to me that there were all sorts of irregularities in this case that could be taken up on appeal. The judge seemed overly emotional, not entirely impartial and he made some pretty outrageous statements in court. And the jurors were dropping like flies.

I think he’s saying that he’s lost faith in their judgement based on these past decisions.

The jury has been dismissed.

They may seem intuitive now, but they were all quite unique ideas when they were first introduced and I see no reason they shouldn’t be patented.

If everyone is allowed to simply copy slide to unlock for example, there will be no innovation. But if they are forced to come up with their own unique solution, there will be innovation. That is how patents encourage innovation. I’m not sure why no one seems to get this..

Programmers are less likely to be impartial in this case, at least judging by those who’ve commented in this forum. They all had made up their minds before the trial even started.

In my example, I said the CEO pay would be capped at 5 times the lowest paid employee, so unless the janitor makes a million a year then the CEO won’t make 5 million. And yes, if said CEO who was cut from 5o million to 5 million could make more elsewhere, he would probably quit. Money is a very strong motivator and it’s all relative.

Yes, we agree that most people don’t know crap when they see it, and they typically go with whatever is cheapest. I don’t have an opinion about the Razr Maxx.

Depends on your definition of crap I suppose. A lot of people think fast food is crap, yet people just keep buying more and more of it. In fact, it’s often the crappiest stuff that sells the most.

The entire socio-economic system is different in those countries. Executive pay is just one small aspect of it. The US could instate a law tomorrow capping CEO pay at no more than say 5 times the lowest paid worker at a company, therefore ending income inequality, but that would have virtually no impact on company’s bottom lines or the economy as a whole. It would be a symbolic move that would do nothing but drive the smartest people out of those jobs.

I don’t disagree with you there.