2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum

GLD 366.54

+1.2%

Nov 5 4:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

From: Haim R. Branisteanu	8/25/2012 11:00:09 AM
	5 Recommendations Read Replies (5) of 217545

My observation on the Apple ruling which was very biased toward Apple and in fact brought about huge damage to the general public. The patent law in the US is highly flawed in its concept of what can be patented and is tilted toward the company with more money and fast talking attorneys and the jury system (composed mostly of ignorant people in most places) to be supportive to the locals. (Further my general observation of the US judicial jury system is its validity only in small communities 100 to 200 years ago where the community agreed upon their way of living but void in a modern society more so in complex technical oriented litigations, 3 judge panels are more welcomed of knowledgeable judged well versed also in technology and commerce within the US and not locals in such situations) The US patent law itself does not promote innovation but inhibits it, as it covers mundane aspects such as visual and practically designs of form and figure which in most cases is close to innovation as Neptune is to the sun. As such anything designed to be used by humans, in a more effective way is patented and has little to do with true innovation but a lot to do with evolution and plain greed. As far as justice, in this trial no justice was done only enforcement of protectionism of the local company products. What this trial proves is that the US is so close to the concept of open markets and fair trials as is Pluto from the earth. All in all I only hope that the Apple trial will be dismissed and open the field of smartphones to more competition. I own a Samsung cellphone and I think it is way superior and easier to use than Apple. Apple did not improve on it cellphone to make it easier to use for ALL consumers, and sticks to its original design which makes it almost worthless to users like me. Very sad day for the consumer in the day of the ruling, which leaves the consumers with fewer choices and mediocre ones. My personal response to this ruling is not only not to buy any Apple products which until now in many cases, admired, but more so, to recommend to anyone to avoid buying Apple products and buy other similar products from other manufacturers in reaction to their pointless litigation which unfortunate because of the US legal system they won.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next