|
Authored by drakaan on Aug 23, 2013 13:31:53 GMT
"A federal judge has quashed Samsung's hopes for a new patent trial over Apple's "bounce-back" patent, a key issue in the pair's landmark trial last year. US District Court Judge Lucy Koh issued a ruling late Thursday denying a Samsung motion for a new trial regarding the "bounce-back," or '381 patent. Samsung filed this motion in July, according to Groklaw." Click here for the full article.
|
|
gringo
Veteran Member
Posts: 29
|
Authored by gringo on Aug 23, 2013 14:20:02 GMT
Was that the patent that was invalidated by USPTO? This is ridiculous. Nothing is "bouncing" in Apple's iPhones. There is only a CPU making calculations, and images being presented on screen. Apple never invented either the math that calculates the bounce nor the notion of doing that calculation with a computer. This is not rocket science, but rather simple high school math. Here is the math: www.sosmath.com/calculus/geoser/bounce/bounce.htmlThe only bouncing that takes place is in the eye of the beholder. So Apple has a patent on people's eyes/cerebral cortex? I am a software developer. Does the existence of this patent mean that I can no longer incorporate random effects in my code based on simple, well known physics, without fear of being sued by Apple? Outrageous! I guess the only hope for Samsung now is the appeals process.
|
|
|
Authored by drakaan on Aug 23, 2013 14:29:29 GMT
Just the same old logic wherein some people don't understand that programming a computer and programming a loom are note significantly different.
I think the main cognitive problem comes from the fact that computer displays can be updated fast enough to seem like they do more than display images while it takes a lot more time to make a new rug on a loom.
Actually, while it would be extremely slow, a computer using a loom as a display would be a good demonstration of why a program doesn't make a computer a new machine...it just instructs it to perform different calculations and display (or weave) something different...repeatedly.
|
|
nsomos
Veteran Member
Posts: 140
|
Authored by nsomos on Aug 24, 2013 4:18:41 GMT
I would hope that Samsung has a successful appeal of this ruling. But with the way this country is going it would not surprise me if the US injustice system failed Samsung.
|
|
Cm
Guest
|
Authored by Cm on Aug 24, 2013 6:40:43 GMT
I would hope that if the USA and Apple are not that interested in justice for Samsung that they shut down their American factory (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/12/16/samsungs-new-texas-factory-for-a5-chip-production-now-fully-operational/).
|
|