Slashdot Mirror
Samsung: Android's Multitouch Not As Good As Apple's
itwbennett writes "Hoping to avoid a sales ban in the Netherlands, Samsung has said that Android's multitouch software doesn't work as well as Apple's. Samsung lawyer Bas Berghuis van Woortman said that while Apple's technology is a 'very nice invention,' the Android system is harder for developers to use. Arguing the bizarre counterpoint, Apple's lawyer Theo Blomme told judge Peter Blok, that the Android multitouch isn't inferior and does so infringe on Apple's patent: 'They suggest that they have a lesser solution, but that is simply not true,' said Blomme."
Yeah, but those are *square* icons, you see.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
No, I swear to God, our multitouch sucks, its nowhere as good as Apple's. He's lying your honor, their Samsung multitouch is almost as good as Apple's
First to file does not eliminate prior art as a way to invalidate a patent.
From here:
The law will switch U.S. rights to a patent from the present "first-to-invent" system to a "first inventor-to-file" system for patent applications filed on or after March 16, 2013. The law also expands the definition of prior art used in determining patentability. Actions and prior art that bar patentability will include public use, sales, publications, and other disclosures available to the public anywhere in the world as of the filing date, other than publications by the inventor within one year of filing (inventor's "publication-conditioned grace period"), whether or not a third party also files a patent application. The law also notably expands prior art to include foreign offers for sale and public uses.[6]
In conclusion, YOU FAIL IT.
Samsung: Our phones are WAAAAY crappier than Apple's!
Apple: No they're not, they're just as good!
Bizarro world.
We have gotten to the point where Samsung is insisting Android is crap while Apple is insisting it is every bit as good as their technology. Could an actual flying pig be more than a week away?
You are the one that needs the lesson:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/appxl_35_U_S_C_102.htm
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless -
(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent
so this:
" If you do it and dont patent it doesn't count as prior art."
is just wrong.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I feel like I've fallen into a Monty Python skit.
Vendor A: "I assure you our product inferior to the competition's!"
Vendor B: "Don't believe his lies! His product is every bit as good as ours!"
Something is seriously wrong in the market if we're getting arguments like this.