I expect he did, given that this means that none of the features you're talking about are actually claimed by Apple as part of the patent and so it doesn't matter how much Samsung's products differ from Apple's in those regards - they'll still infringe on the patent just as much as if they were identical.
As I understand it, in a design patent all of the parts of the diagrams that are depicted using dotted lines are not part of the subject matter being claimed. So the charger port on the bottom, the existence and placement of the camera on the rear, the switches on the sides, the placement of the button on the bottom etc are all irrelevant to whether Samsung infringes. Apple have literally got a patent on devices with rounded corners, a rectangular screen, and a speaker slot at the top.
The trouble is that the jury don't seem to have considered the question of prior art at all - they appear, from the statements by the foreman, to have just concluded that Samsung copied Apple and therefore deserved to be punished for it. They completely failed to consider whether it was actually illegal for Samsung to do so or take into account the fact that their award had to be based on actual damages and not on any desire to punish Samsung. The standards that juries are held to isn't exactly a high one, but this is a fiasco even so.
The only reason Henry Ford did fine is because he finally managed to get a particularly nasty and broad patent that'd been holding back the automobile industry for years invalidated. Otherwise his cars would've been a lot more expensive because, like other companies before him., most of his revenue would've gone into patent licensing costs.
Bernard von NotHaus issued silver coins stamped with face values in dollars that looked really similar to genuine US-issued currency, was encouraging people to pass them off as US dollars in stores, and sold them to his members at a substantial discount to the face value (though still more than the actual value of the silver they contained). He even thought it would be a good idea to pass one off to an unsuspecting store clerk on camera in a TV interview, describing it to her as "the new dollar". It's not exactly surprising that he was done for counterfeiting.
Doesn't look good is a understatement. The WSJ actually found a deposition by an actual arbitrator for the NAF claiming that credit card companies refused to let her serve as arbitrator for any of the cases brought against them by consumers after she ruled in favour of the consumer in one of them. That's pretty damn convincing evidence that binding arbitration is biased against the consumer.
If the GP's assertion is correct, it's entirely possible that driving late at night causes an increased risk of the driver falling asleep and having an accident whether or not they're drunk, and it just happens that people are more likely to have a BAC of over 0.08 when driving late at night than when they're driving during the day. That's the problem with statistics that fail to account for confounding factors.
Actually, it's an app Apple put on the phone, and apparently the block applies no matter whether or not you got your phone from AT&T in the first place...
The alternative would be that the payment provider requires you to have a Bitcoin balance loaded onto the card that's already safely under their control before you use it to pay for anything, which was I think exactly what they've said they're going to do.
Have you ever heard of network effects? Most companies don't accept cards other than Mastercard and Visa for payment because there's no point accepting a payment method hardly anyone has, most consumers don't have other cards because there's no point having a card that you can't actually pay anywhere with, and most banks don't offer anything else because no consumer wants them. So Mastercard and Visa effectively have a strangehold on the payments market.
You'd think so, but I kept coming across the other side of this story on feminist blogs - a suprising number of the regular female commenters claim that their female co-workers or relatives have not-so-subtly suggested solving the problem of a boyfriend or husband who doesn't want kids by "accidentally" forgetting to take their birth control and that he'll love kids once he has them sprung on him as a surprise, as though this is a perfectly normal thing to do. (It's also not exaaaactly compatible with feminism; that's probably one reason why it gets discussed so much.)
Well... um, if the man in this hypothetical situation was raped for that there sperm, then sure--he shouldn't pay a red cent.
Under current US law, it doesn't make one iota of difference whether he was raped, or even if he was way under the age of consent and the adult woman in question was in a position of power over him - child support is for the benefit of the kids, and everyone knows it benefits kids to be brought up by a kiddy-rapist enough to justify making one of her victims pay for it.
You're missing one important aspect of drug testing: without sufficient testing, we can't actually know that the drug will save 10% of heart patients. Until we've tested the drug in large-scale, well conducted clinical trials and then carefully checked those trials over for the usual drug company shenanigans, for all we know it actually kills 5% of patients that would otherwise survive.
"Even" hair-loss treatment? One of the common treatments for male baldness is essentially an anti-androgen, so it'd be more surprising if it didn't affect libido and sexual performance.
Maybe. There are a fair few people out there who identify as pansexual because they're attracted to both cis women and trans men, which doesn't exactly make them qualified to judge the attractiveness or otherwise of big balls.
Yeah, KDE 4.0 was absurdly broken. If you're a typical end-user, what's almost certainly one of the first customizations you make when setting up a new desktop? Setting new wallpaper, of course. In KDE 4.0, if you changed the wallpaper the first time you logged in and then Plasma crashed before you logged out again - and it often did - it managed to mangle its own config files so that when it automatically restarted you had no desktop, no panel or taskbar, no obvious way of launching apps...
Chances are that what you were seeing was actually Plasma crashing and then automatically restarting, there just wasn't any way to tell without looking at the process list because it wasn't displaying any of the stuff it was meant to display having trashed most of the contents of its config.
For the one that came after (and actually works), I see no reason why they shouldn't be rewarded for the effort on the parts that actually made it work. Patents on novel engineering regarding the guts of the device that made it a functioning tablet? No problem.
Of course, Apple didn't actually do most of the novel hardware engineering that made the iPad possible as a functioning tablet - in that regard Samsung actually did more to make the iPad possible than Apple did. The touchscreen display and CPU chip in the iPad are both engineered and built by Samsung.
The definition of communism is that the workers control the means of production. Russia could come up up with all the clever arguments about how the government was really the workers that they liked, that still didn't make it so.
Then your understanding is misplaced. Apple do licence the FRAND patents required to create a working mobile phone.
Actually, with the original iPhone they didn't license the FRAND patents - not directly, not through their component suppliers, not at all full stop - and Nokia wound up suing them over it. I believe Apple are still trying to weasel out of paying damages or license fees or anything for their patent infringement.
Until Apple got sued over it, they were using a chip from a manufacturer that paid no licensing fees and Apple also refused to pay licensing fees. The switch to Qualcomm was basically their way of stopping companies like Nokia and Motorola from pressuring them into paying the money they owe through injunctions preventing the sale of the iPhone, as far as observers can tell.
Apple only switched to a supplier of radio hardware that had licenses for some of the FRAND patents after they'd already been taken to court by I think Nokia for failing to license the patents at all - as in, neither Apple nor any of the manufacturers they used had licenses for the patents - and then probably only so they could drag the court case for damages for willful infringement out without having to worry about Nokia getting an injunction against them selling more iPhones.
From what I can tell, Apple failed to try and license the patents at all until they were sued by Nokia and Motorola over them, then insisted that FRAND entitled them to pay less for the patents than everyone else. (Not to mention the bit where they changed chip suppliers to one which already had a license for the patents in order to give Nokia less leverage to get the damages they were owed for hardware already sold.) Apple are not the good guys here.
This wasn't exactly some well-kept secret, it's the documented method for creating a Postgresql data directory and running it whether you want to do so system-wide or just set up an install in your home directory somewhere.
The Mint would be an idiot to set up Mintchip without some method of tracing transactions. Why? Because it relies on trusted hardware, and when someone inevitably extracts the secrets from one of those pieces of trusted hardware and uses it to print money they need a way to trace those funds back to the compromised device and revoke it.
Slashdot Mirror
I expect he did, given that this means that none of the features you're talking about are actually claimed by Apple as part of the patent and so it doesn't matter how much Samsung's products differ from Apple's in those regards - they'll still infringe on the patent just as much as if they were identical.
As I understand it, in a design patent all of the parts of the diagrams that are depicted using dotted lines are not part of the subject matter being claimed. So the charger port on the bottom, the existence and placement of the camera on the rear, the switches on the sides, the placement of the button on the bottom etc are all irrelevant to whether Samsung infringes. Apple have literally got a patent on devices with rounded corners, a rectangular screen, and a speaker slot at the top.
The trouble is that the jury don't seem to have considered the question of prior art at all - they appear, from the statements by the foreman, to have just concluded that Samsung copied Apple and therefore deserved to be punished for it. They completely failed to consider whether it was actually illegal for Samsung to do so or take into account the fact that their award had to be based on actual damages and not on any desire to punish Samsung. The standards that juries are held to isn't exactly a high one, but this is a fiasco even so.
The only reason Henry Ford did fine is because he finally managed to get a particularly nasty and broad patent that'd been holding back the automobile industry for years invalidated. Otherwise his cars would've been a lot more expensive because, like other companies before him., most of his revenue would've gone into patent licensing costs.
Bernard von NotHaus issued silver coins stamped with face values in dollars that looked really similar to genuine US-issued currency, was encouraging people to pass them off as US dollars in stores, and sold them to his members at a substantial discount to the face value (though still more than the actual value of the silver they contained). He even thought it would be a good idea to pass one off to an unsuspecting store clerk on camera in a TV interview, describing it to her as "the new dollar". It's not exactly surprising that he was done for counterfeiting.
Doesn't look good is a understatement. The WSJ actually found a deposition by an actual arbitrator for the NAF claiming that credit card companies refused to let her serve as arbitrator for any of the cases brought against them by consumers after she ruled in favour of the consumer in one of them. That's pretty damn convincing evidence that binding arbitration is biased against the consumer.
If the GP's assertion is correct, it's entirely possible that driving late at night causes an increased risk of the driver falling asleep and having an accident whether or not they're drunk, and it just happens that people are more likely to have a BAC of over 0.08 when driving late at night than when they're driving during the day. That's the problem with statistics that fail to account for confounding factors.
Actually, it's an app Apple put on the phone, and apparently the block applies no matter whether or not you got your phone from AT&T in the first place...
The alternative would be that the payment provider requires you to have a Bitcoin balance loaded onto the card that's already safely under their control before you use it to pay for anything, which was I think exactly what they've said they're going to do.
Have you ever heard of network effects? Most companies don't accept cards other than Mastercard and Visa for payment because there's no point accepting a payment method hardly anyone has, most consumers don't have other cards because there's no point having a card that you can't actually pay anywhere with, and most banks don't offer anything else because no consumer wants them. So Mastercard and Visa effectively have a strangehold on the payments market.
You'd think so, but I kept coming across the other side of this story on feminist blogs - a suprising number of the regular female commenters claim that their female co-workers or relatives have not-so-subtly suggested solving the problem of a boyfriend or husband who doesn't want kids by "accidentally" forgetting to take their birth control and that he'll love kids once he has them sprung on him as a surprise, as though this is a perfectly normal thing to do. (It's also not exaaaactly compatible with feminism; that's probably one reason why it gets discussed so much.)
Well... um, if the man in this hypothetical situation was raped for that there sperm, then sure--he shouldn't pay a red cent.
Under current US law, it doesn't make one iota of difference whether he was raped, or even if he was way under the age of consent and the adult woman in question was in a position of power over him - child support is for the benefit of the kids, and everyone knows it benefits kids to be brought up by a kiddy-rapist enough to justify making one of her victims pay for it.
You're missing one important aspect of drug testing: without sufficient testing, we can't actually know that the drug will save 10% of heart patients. Until we've tested the drug in large-scale, well conducted clinical trials and then carefully checked those trials over for the usual drug company shenanigans, for all we know it actually kills 5% of patients that would otherwise survive.
"Even" hair-loss treatment? One of the common treatments for male baldness is essentially an anti-androgen, so it'd be more surprising if it didn't affect libido and sexual performance.
Maybe. There are a fair few people out there who identify as pansexual because they're attracted to both cis women and trans men, which doesn't exactly make them qualified to judge the attractiveness or otherwise of big balls.
Yeah, KDE 4.0 was absurdly broken. If you're a typical end-user, what's almost certainly one of the first customizations you make when setting up a new desktop? Setting new wallpaper, of course. In KDE 4.0, if you changed the wallpaper the first time you logged in and then Plasma crashed before you logged out again - and it often did - it managed to mangle its own config files so that when it automatically restarted you had no desktop, no panel or taskbar, no obvious way of launching apps...
Chances are that what you were seeing was actually Plasma crashing and then automatically restarting, there just wasn't any way to tell without looking at the process list because it wasn't displaying any of the stuff it was meant to display having trashed most of the contents of its config.
For the one that came after (and actually works), I see no reason why they shouldn't be rewarded for the effort on the parts that actually made it work. Patents on novel engineering regarding the guts of the device that made it a functioning tablet? No problem.
Of course, Apple didn't actually do most of the novel hardware engineering that made the iPad possible as a functioning tablet - in that regard Samsung actually did more to make the iPad possible than Apple did. The touchscreen display and CPU chip in the iPad are both engineered and built by Samsung.
The definition of communism is that the workers control the means of production. Russia could come up up with all the clever arguments about how the government was really the workers that they liked, that still didn't make it so.
Then your understanding is misplaced. Apple do licence the FRAND patents required to create a working mobile phone.
Actually, with the original iPhone they didn't license the FRAND patents - not directly, not through their component suppliers, not at all full stop - and Nokia wound up suing them over it. I believe Apple are still trying to weasel out of paying damages or license fees or anything for their patent infringement.
Until Apple got sued over it, they were using a chip from a manufacturer that paid no licensing fees and Apple also refused to pay licensing fees. The switch to Qualcomm was basically their way of stopping companies like Nokia and Motorola from pressuring them into paying the money they owe through injunctions preventing the sale of the iPhone, as far as observers can tell.
Apple only switched to a supplier of radio hardware that had licenses for some of the FRAND patents after they'd already been taken to court by I think Nokia for failing to license the patents at all - as in, neither Apple nor any of the manufacturers they used had licenses for the patents - and then probably only so they could drag the court case for damages for willful infringement out without having to worry about Nokia getting an injunction against them selling more iPhones.
From what I can tell, Apple failed to try and license the patents at all until they were sued by Nokia and Motorola over them, then insisted that FRAND entitled them to pay less for the patents than everyone else. (Not to mention the bit where they changed chip suppliers to one which already had a license for the patents in order to give Nokia less leverage to get the damages they were owed for hardware already sold.) Apple are not the good guys here.
This wasn't exactly some well-kept secret, it's the documented method for creating a Postgresql data directory and running it whether you want to do so system-wide or just set up an install in your home directory somewhere.
The Mint would be an idiot to set up Mintchip without some method of tracing transactions. Why? Because it relies on trusted hardware, and when someone inevitably extracts the secrets from one of those pieces of trusted hardware and uses it to print money they need a way to trace those funds back to the compromised device and revoke it.
That link appears goes to an Amazon Marketplace seller, and lot of the Apple-branded cables and adapters on there are counterfeits.