Judge Denies Samsung's Request for iPhone 5, iPad 3
Article Comments 8
Jun 22, 2011, 7:13 AM by Eric M. Zeman
The judge overseeing the Apple-versus-Samsung patent battle has denied Samsung's request to see unannounced Apple products. The judge indicated that while Samsung is entitled to parity, this particular request was overreaching. In part of the judge's court order, however, the judge indicated obliquely that Apple may not get its wish of an immediate injunction barring Samsung from selling certain models in the U.S. Apple sued Samsung in April, alleging that Samsung has blatantly copied its iPhone and iPad products. Samsung countersued.
Sep 7, 2022
Apple has revealed the iPhone 14 series, with new features, improved specs, and new size options. In place of a Mini option, the iPhone 14 will come in the same 6.1-inch and 6.7-inch screen size options as the Pro models.
Sep 14, 2021
Apple today announced the iPhone 13 series. All models feature improved battery life, display, cameras, and processor.
Apr 5, 2021
The Supreme Court today ruled against Oracle in its bid to force Google to pay for implementing Java in the Android smartphone operating system (OS). Oracle owns the intellectual property and copyrights for Java, but Java is widely used throughout the open-source software community.
Feb 25, 2021
Vietnamese manufacturer VinSmart has officially entered the US phone market thanks to a deal with AT&T for "nearly 2 million smartphones". AT&T (and its Cricket prepaid brand) recently started selling two distinct entry-level phone models from VinSmart.
Mar 30, 2021
The US Federal Trade Commission has decided not to appeal its antitrust case against Qualcomm to the US Supreme Court, effectively ending the matter in Qualcomm's favor. The FTC sued in 2017, claiming that the way Qualcomm links the sales of baseband processors with patent licensing amounts to anticompetitive behavior and unfair business practices.
It is now Apple's turn to capitalize on their own products to remain attractive rather than trying to stay proprietary to one design at a time. That is what seems to be the underlining perception of what is going on here.
If a restaurant wants to stick with one hamburger choice, it shouldn't get mad when the competiton has taken that hamburger and made it more attractive with more choices. I hate using this analogy, but it does cast an example of how Apple is ...
look at China, they dont believe in patents BS!,
there is enough money for everybody!