What letter of the law did they not follow? They had a link, they had the statements required, in 14 pt font. That was the extent of what was required of them.
The clearly stated intent of the notice was to undo the damage that Apple's previous lies had done to Samsung.
Wrapping acknowledgement of the court's ruling in statements claiming that Samsung copied them is not going to undo that damage. Quoting a court ruling already indicated to be invalid by the very judge demanding the notice was at best stupid; quoting a flawed jury verdict that's currently under appeal was disingenuous. Taken all together, Apple's statement was frankly dishonest, and quite clearly in breach of the court's mandate.
Which will be why the judge has requested that they now comply with that ruling.
No, the problem is that the whole point of the notice was to correct Apple's lies that Samsung had infringed on their IP.
Instead Apple's original notice cast further aspersions on Samsung. This is oddly enough diametrically opposed to the whole point of the notice.
The judge's ego doesn't come into it. Apple's compliance with a court order is the key factor here, and continued non-compliance can only end badly for Apple.
Or just buy a Parker Jotter which is slim, elegant, joyfully simple, well made and despite its symetry is a doddle to write with.
I hate asymmetrical pens, they force my fingers to contort and/or are just bloody uncomfortable to hold.
Jotters also have the massive advantage of fitting into trouser pockets alongside my wallet. A slim comfortable pen always with me is more useful than an ergonomic pen that I left at home.
I'm terribly sorry, I thought that since you've posted so many times about the dangers of leaving ships in ports that you'd be able to PROVIDE FUCKING EVIDENCE of the danger.
No? As I requested, just shut the fuck up.
Many boats stayed in port. None of them killed anybody. So far the score is 1-0 to the ships that stupidly sailed merrily into a fucking hurricane.
Oh for fucks sake will you shut the fuck up until you can tell us how many people were killed by that tanker?
Right now approximately infinitely more people were killed by the ship that didn't tie up in dock than by the ship that did. Spewing wise words about what's safest doesn't fucking change that.
So for the record, Apple really isn't abusing standards essential patents like Samsung/Motorola.
I wasn't aware that Samsung were abusing standards essential patents at all.
My understanding is they're willing to licence them on fair and reasonable terms. Apple on the other hand insist on using them without licencing them.
charging absurd rates
So Samsung want $6 (per phone) for patents essential to the very nature of a device, while Apple want $30 (per phone) for patents that should never have been fucking granted in the first place.
While you're right about absurd rates, I'm not sure you realise just who is trying to charge them.
Considering I'm already a customer of EE paying less than that for unlimited data (constrained only by the 3G bandwidth), yes, I think the price is unreasonable.
£40 for unlimited and they'd have got me upgrading. £30 for unlimited would be reasonable. £36 for 500MB is laughable.
I find that I can see a lot of detail, even on the 'zoomed out' views.
For me though, the back and forth "nothing much happening" is an essential part of the game. There's a lot going on there, and it's not all just filler between the 'exciting' moments. I watch the whole game because I want to see it, see the runs being made, see the way the players are interacting, see whether the midfielder is passing forward, sideways or back to the defence, whether the fullbacks are getting forward (and whether the wingers are covering back).
That's essential for assessing the team and player performance, and why a match highlights reel is unfulfilling even if it is highly entertaining.
watching a zoomed out view on TV (which are the only ways most Americans have ever seen it), you can't appreciate the footwork that's being done,
How many decades is it since you watched football on TV?
There are multiple cameras at most televised games these days. You get close up footage of individual moves, sometimes during live play and always on replays.
You don't even need them to see the legs of the little men moving, and realise and appreciate the skill and agility they're displaying.
You need the wider tv view, and the seat midway up the stand in the stadium, to appreciate the work being done by the team, the off the ball runs and movement, the opportunities and possibilities.
with the ball changing sides so often, it's difficult to have a sense of when you'll see some hard pressure being applied or something important will happen
Sorry, hadn't realised you were attention deficit.
There's something happening all of the time the ball's in play. The most innocuous pass could go wrong, lead to a break and a scoring chance. The man casually stood in the centre of the pitch could be waiting for that run in from the wings behind the defence so that he can play an inch-perfect long ball into the stride of the runner for a first-time shot into the goal.
You can only see the runner if your TV isn't zoomed into the player, or if you're sat in a stand watching from a distance. You can only appreciate the quality of the pass in its context. You can only experience the awe of his vision and skill if you were watching what otherwise may have been a seemingly unthreatening position.
There's a ton of stuff happening in a football game. Your inability to understand it probably reflects your focus on the immediate, on the specific interesting between opposing players at the point of the ball, as a result of your officiating.
Football is a team game. It's about pressure, momentum, movement, aggression, composure, and sometimes about skill with an air-filled bladder.
Yes, it's perfectly normal for people to walk around like a thug in a gated community (especially one he didn't live in).
What the fuck does "normal" have to do with it?
It's a town you don't normally just walk around in.
Could you explain to me how you traverse the area without walking, if you lack an automobile?
Anyway, why didn't anybody shoot Zimmerman after he left his car and chased an unarmed man on foot? After all, he was acting aggressively while walking through the area carrying a firearm.
Please, tell me how that isn't actually correct? What was the kid doing before Zimmerman confronted him?
the issue is distrust of anybody wearing a uniform, and especially because of the generally held sentiment that private security guards are people who are too incompetent and mentally unstable to get a job as a Real Cop
which of these actions you mention is considered sufficient provocation to warrant an assault that could have killed Zimmerman?
Do you know for certain that head slamming took place? Do you know what caused any head slamming that did take place?
The only thing that's certain right now is that Zimmerman caused the incident to happen. He initiated it. He used excessive force - shooting an unarmed man is pretty fucking excessive.
Slashdot Mirror
What letter of the law did they not follow? They had a link, they had the statements required, in 14 pt font. That was the extent of what was required of them.
The clearly stated intent of the notice was to undo the damage that Apple's previous lies had done to Samsung.
Wrapping acknowledgement of the court's ruling in statements claiming that Samsung copied them is not going to undo that damage. Quoting a court ruling already indicated to be invalid by the very judge demanding the notice was at best stupid; quoting a flawed jury verdict that's currently under appeal was disingenuous. Taken all together, Apple's statement was frankly dishonest, and quite clearly in breach of the court's mandate.
Which will be why the judge has requested that they now comply with that ruling.
The problem seems to be the judge's egos.
No, the problem is that the whole point of the notice was to correct Apple's lies that Samsung had infringed on their IP.
Instead Apple's original notice cast further aspersions on Samsung. This is oddly enough diametrically opposed to the whole point of the notice.
The judge's ego doesn't come into it. Apple's compliance with a court order is the key factor here, and continued non-compliance can only end badly for Apple.
Or just buy a Parker Jotter which is slim, elegant, joyfully simple, well made and despite its symetry is a doddle to write with.
I hate asymmetrical pens, they force my fingers to contort and/or are just bloody uncomfortable to hold.
Jotters also have the massive advantage of fitting into trouser pockets alongside my wallet. A slim comfortable pen always with me is more useful than an ergonomic pen that I left at home.
the fact that they need to restock it periodically says a lot.
Yeah. It says that people anal enough to care about pens leaking on their clothes are too fucking stupid to buy pens that don't leak.
I'm terribly sorry, I thought that since you've posted so many times about the dangers of leaving ships in ports that you'd be able to PROVIDE FUCKING EVIDENCE of the danger.
No? As I requested, just shut the fuck up.
Many boats stayed in port. None of them killed anybody. So far the score is 1-0 to the ships that stupidly sailed merrily into a fucking hurricane.
Technically it's a self-funding activity.
"Hello, are you the Captain? Yes, we're here to collect Her Majesty's ship. You can buy it back at the auction"
Oh for fucks sake will you shut the fuck up until you can tell us how many people were killed by that tanker?
Right now approximately infinitely more people were killed by the ship that didn't tie up in dock than by the ship that did. Spewing wise words about what's safest doesn't fucking change that.
It may or may not be bullshit
Just a point of accuracy. It clearly is bullshit.
Samsung however did agree to license certain patents at a fair price
I'd say 2.4% is a very fair price, especially when being asked to pay up to 40% for far less valuable patents.
I'm not emotionally attached, beyond being fucked off with Apple's bullshit behaviour. I just happen to swear all the fucking time.
So for the record, Apple really isn't abusing standards essential patents like Samsung/Motorola.
I wasn't aware that Samsung were abusing standards essential patents at all.
My understanding is they're willing to licence them on fair and reasonable terms. Apple on the other hand insist on using them without licencing them.
charging absurd rates
So Samsung want $6 (per phone) for patents essential to the very nature of a device, while Apple want $30 (per phone) for patents that should never have been fucking granted in the first place.
While you're right about absurd rates, I'm not sure you realise just who is trying to charge them.
4G is a horse they're letting you ride for 4 minutes a month. Right now I have a pony pulling my wagon all month, for less cost.
Anyway, of course I want a pony. Doesn't everyone?
How else would you constrain demand for a limited resource?
If they offered everybody unlimited bandwidth at £20/month then everyone would switch off their DSL subscriptions and tether.
Even without that happening, population density means that there just wont be enough bandwidth to go around.
The price is ludicrous, but if everybody needs this then they're fucked, because there are some pretty strict upper limits involved.
Considering I'm already a customer of EE paying less than that for unlimited data (constrained only by the 3G bandwidth), yes, I think the price is unreasonable.
£40 for unlimited and they'd have got me upgrading.
£30 for unlimited would be reasonable.
£36 for 500MB is laughable.
actually seeing the footwork
I find that I can see a lot of detail, even on the 'zoomed out' views.
For me though, the back and forth "nothing much happening" is an essential part of the game. There's a lot going on there, and it's not all just filler between the 'exciting' moments. I watch the whole game because I want to see it, see the runs being made, see the way the players are interacting, see whether the midfielder is passing forward, sideways or back to the defence, whether the fullbacks are getting forward (and whether the wingers are covering back).
That's essential for assessing the team and player performance, and why a match highlights reel is unfulfilling even if it is highly entertaining.
watching a zoomed out view on TV (which are the only ways most Americans have ever seen it), you can't appreciate the footwork that's being done,
How many decades is it since you watched football on TV?
There are multiple cameras at most televised games these days. You get close up footage of individual moves, sometimes during live play and always on replays.
You don't even need them to see the legs of the little men moving, and realise and appreciate the skill and agility they're displaying.
You need the wider tv view, and the seat midway up the stand in the stadium, to appreciate the work being done by the team, the off the ball runs and movement, the opportunities and possibilities.
with the ball changing sides so often, it's difficult to have a sense of when you'll see some hard pressure being applied or something important will happen
Sorry, hadn't realised you were attention deficit.
There's something happening all of the time the ball's in play. The most innocuous pass could go wrong, lead to a break and a scoring chance. The man casually stood in the centre of the pitch could be waiting for that run in from the wings behind the defence so that he can play an inch-perfect long ball into the stride of the runner for a first-time shot into the goal.
You can only see the runner if your TV isn't zoomed into the player, or if you're sat in a stand watching from a distance. You can only appreciate the quality of the pass in its context. You can only experience the awe of his vision and skill if you were watching what otherwise may have been a seemingly unthreatening position.
There's a ton of stuff happening in a football game. Your inability to understand it probably reflects your focus on the immediate, on the specific interesting between opposing players at the point of the ball, as a result of your officiating.
Football is a team game. It's about pressure, momentum, movement, aggression, composure, and sometimes about skill with an air-filled bladder.
Except the norm will rapidly become, "Do your own fucking earthquake prediction"
Indeed. I was translating Glock27's suggestion that advancing towards potential harm can be legal into the specifics of this particular case.
Yes, it's perfectly normal for people to walk around like a thug in a gated community (especially one he didn't live in).
What the fuck does "normal" have to do with it?
It's a town you don't normally just walk around in.
Could you explain to me how you traverse the area without walking, if you lack an automobile?
Anyway, why didn't anybody shoot Zimmerman after he left his car and chased an unarmed man on foot? After all, he was acting aggressively while walking through the area carrying a firearm.
You racist cunt.
Has it occurred to you that justifiable homicides aren't the problem?
(Some of those could probably have avoided any homicide had there been fewer fuckwits running around armed)
Kid shot while walking down the sidewalk.
Please, tell me how that isn't actually correct? What was the kid doing before Zimmerman confronted him?
the issue is distrust of anybody wearing a uniform, and especially because of the generally held sentiment that private security guards are people who are too incompetent and mentally unstable to get a job as a Real Cop
Exhibit A: man currently on trial for murder
which of these actions you mention is considered sufficient provocation to warrant an assault that could have killed Zimmerman?
Do you know for certain that head slamming took place?
Do you know what caused any head slamming that did take place?
The only thing that's certain right now is that Zimmerman caused the incident to happen. He initiated it. He used excessive force - shooting an unarmed man is pretty fucking excessive.
Including stalking and harassing someone tha'ts calmly walking somewhere it's legal for them to be?
That doesn't sound responsible to me.
You sound very very racist.
Try rewriting that whole comment without mentioning someone's colour. It can be done.
It's "added extras" rather than cut into the film.
Actually, now you mention it, the specific scene may not even be in those. I'll have to go and check :(