Bangkok Post » Poll
- Most recent
- Most viewed
- 10:49 AMUS push on Myanmar enters new phase
- 10:40 AMPM: Japan visit for boosting investment
- 10:18 AMGold prices up 50 baht
- 09:50 AMBombs black out Yala district
- 04:49 AMIMF chief ducks scandal charges
- 12:00 AMSondhi shooting suspect dies
- 12:00 AMFirms crave tax guidance
Share your thoughts
For more candid, lengthy, conversational and open discussion between one another, use our Forum
Report objectionable comments click here. Include: discussion #, commenter name, comment date / time as it looks on the page. Example: discussion 15: 09/01/2009 at 10:00 AM.
Discussion 20 : 08 Sep 2012 at 14.3320
@spiceman - The design patent apple used should never have been issued, it was too broad. A phone with rounded corners and single button. When Samsung brought proof that their F700 was out before the Iphone, Apple's defense attorney was sweating and speechless until the judge threw that evidence out for no valid reason.
Apple took ideas from various phones and made it better, and claim they were the first, but they were never the first . They were the first to make it better and more reliable, I'll give them that.Discussion 19 : 04 Sep 2012 at 04.5219
Khun Soltair #18, a patent usually expires in 7 or 8 years, when anyone can copy, OK? So, what's your point, really? And how come no one has taken the latest Mercedes apart, reversed engineer, and made an exact copy, but with different logo? The Wright Brothers also had the same problem protecting their invention of the world's first practical airplane. My point is that patent law must be respected and protected, while it is still in force for the sake of future invention. However, after it expires, it is a fair game for all. Hope this helps!
Discussion 18 : 03 Sep 2012 at 02.2218
spiceman #6 wrote "And how come no one invented smartphone or tablet except the late Steve Jobs at Apple?" Nice thinking spiceman, according to your statement only Mercedes Benz Cars should be driving around. The first Motor Car was invented by Carl Benz in 1886. Next time think first.
Discussion 17 : 02 Sep 2012 at 21.3817
Spiceman, the whole walkman/revenge debate is pointless. Sony's Betamax was far superior to VHS but it was Sony's greed and control that allowed VHS to take over the market. Apple made a some great products, but their greed and insistence on control is what is killing them now and why they are suing Samsung. Competitors are making better, cheaper and more desirable products so either adapt or get out of their way. History is littered with companies that tried to sue competitors out of business and they themselves most often perished.
Discussion 16 : 02 Sep 2012 at 19.5616
@ Discussion 6 Sorry Spiceman, you're wrong about both sides having to agree on all jurors, Under Rule 47 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, both sides are only entitled to 3 peremptory challenges, meaning they can dismiss 3 potential jurors without needing to explain. After than, they can only be removed by the Court for cause. The Japanese case was decided by a judge, the American case by a jury, and while it's sad to say this, the best and brightest citizens often do not serve on juries, and this case may have been too complicated for a jury.
Discussion 15 : 02 Sep 2012 at 17.4215
Khun Ravbrat #14, Sony's Walkman has evolved into MP-3 player. In fact, if I am correct, the Walkman still outsells iPod in Japan. However, its world's domination is over.
Discussion 14 : 02 Sep 2012 at 15.4514
Spiceman D10, so two companies had a joint venture to produce flat screens - and this qualifies as revenge for the walkman????? This makes no sense whatsoever.
The walkman was a cassette based device that died because the world started using CD's instead. Compact Disc's that were (ironically) co-created by Sony & Phillips, so why do you say Sony blames Apple for killing the walkman?Discussion 13 : 02 Sep 2012 at 15.3713
Spiceman D9, Steve's iPad design is not original at all. Functional concepts of tablets goes back to 1968, Microsoft produced the first tablet pc in 2001. Apple had to buy a company in 2005 to have access to mutli-touch technology which goes back to IBM in the 1970's which is what Apple claims as it's own to operate their screens.
Another issue is 'fair use' of a patent which (essentially) allows anyone to use anyone's patent without permission if it is to substantially benefit the market.Discussion 12 : 02 Sep 2012 at 09.2612
Khun Kenny #11, I agree with you at some extent but as long as they can get away with it, I mean, going around the patent law.
Discussion 11 : 02 Sep 2012 at 08.0011
All these companies steal idea's off each other, i.e. many features and even the appearance of Microsoft Windows is a ripoff from IBM's OS2. Who eventually claims victory in this debate depends on who has the most resources and the resilience to stay the distance.
