百家争鸣
明暗經緯錄
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[明暗經緯錄]->[韓國特色的臆想症受到了打擊]
明暗經緯錄
·共和黨在愛俄華州的總統候選人提名大會
·林憲同律師寫給宋楚瑜先生的信
·飄泊者的希望 國民政府
·缺席選票被否決
·偷中華民國國器的論文 模糊的外交已轉成暗渡陳倉非法吞併
·給美國所有總統候選人 政治正確的命題
·民進黨株連財團侵犯中華民國罪
·中華民國的共識與革命
·大屠殺前 日本發傳單保證南京平安
·美國政治正確的命題 加強弱勢政府
·終于共和党說出我們內心的話
·不要殺會唱歌的國民黨鳥
·投票時 請思量 你我還有幾個20年
·中華民國總統大選前 灌輸愛給台灣與大陸
·總統選舉 是非功過 自在民心
·中華民國是共主共識 眾望所歸
·中華民國馬總統平衡美國與中共
·馬總統應該廢除民進黨陳水扁的不公正國家法律
·潮漲潮落 邏輯路徑 市場估值
·蔣經國只發給南部鄉農 和平紅利
·我有一個夢想
·親愛的小舅舅 屬雷根高科技部隊
·最後 美國總統就職典禮舞曲歌唱家依妲過世
·中國黨民 即為國民
·新春佳節第一炮 未來的中華民國總統 可以保護大陸子民
·美國總統國事諮情文
·台灣門神 是古代中國的英雄
·美總統國情諮文記要
·美總統國情諮文記要
·一國兩制下的蝗蟲走狗 怕怕
·台灣怕怕 一國兩制下的蝗蟲走狗
·台灣大陸尚未出才人能超越92共識
·虛擬主席 贖救中國
·恭喜賀喜中華民國 產生首位女性立法院副院長
·台灣仁道 戰勝中共霸道
·蘋果被簡化
·習近平的先遣部隊
·為中華民國國府文宣說話
·國民黨治下的歡樂 台灣鳳 已飛飛
·神農經百草園裡面沒有的秘密 老印第安法子救命
·蘇氏畫語PK源氏物語
·要勇敢的站起來
·請新科立委張曉風不要剝奪平民看典雅公文的權利
·本人當選中華民國退伍軍人協會理事
·馬英九的核心支持精神 來自于何方
·分析比較美國社團組織 國民黨無幼獅
·中國乾兒子 嘉許華
·凌煙閣英雄已遠
·中華民國功臣的畫像
·台灣第一火車的沉淪
·黃埔小子PK張藝謀來台統戰
·韓戰臨津江之役
·國民黨治下的教育 電影的功效
·民脂民膏
·芝加哥工業巨頭Avery Brundage擁有我商的文化瑰寶
·中共國事分析
·艾未未的鳥巢意象對比傅抱石的石頭城
·王立軍可供出核廠誘引川震
·中華民國憲法未規定總統得死在台灣
·中共社會主義全民瘋癲症候診斷
·食人族國家利益 江山如此多慘
·小舅的乾爹張國燾
·中共用雷鋒精神搶奪地方文物
·載灃改革者精神PK慈禧同志們
·國家的血脈 參政院立法院
·台灣曾有的淨土 台中
·陳水扁記憶出問題 忘記臺獨
·有一些失敗比勝利更勝利
·薄熙來一個人無法概括性承擔中共責任
·如何改造張老謀子﹖
·共產黨的辯護士 此地無銀三百
·中央無人 春光乍現 溫保姆上哪兒遊魂去了
·江澤民的太子黨對胡錦濤的共青團
·河南饅頭為中共贏得打
·中華民國國民政府的道德產權及知識產權不可受侵犯
·扛槍的黃埔父親正傳
·和談什麼﹖ 1949美國並沒有搶救太平豪華客輪
·解碼8341 中央警衛隊
·誰維護了中華大陸領土主權
·台中的雲端PK漢城
·中共債遺胡溫
·因為方勵之 大陸人還有希望
·老態龍鐘的不政改 中共恐怕老命不保
·當中國出發時
·馬英九總統 請採取孔子的中庸之道
·經國先生之子來美國留學 依然深深愛台灣
·一切有情 都無掛礙
·民進黨缺乏對台灣責任感
·共黨達官貴人其實不如普通老百姓自由
·賽先生已經創造出兩岸和平架構 等候德先生出現來成為一統國家
·1949年大陸失去的不止是黃金及故宮文物
·蘇州國家園林意識 解語亭
·共產黨下臺前的三大交待
·列舉中共中央政治局在河南省的歷史劣跡罪狀
·班禪13世 認同華夏
·為什麼﹖藏人未曾控訴英國人? 台灣人不曾追究日本人?
·為什麼﹖藏人未曾控訴英國人? 台灣人不曾追究日本人?
·幫助中共從良的第一步
·馬英九的憲兵是否被矯枉過正
·有巢士與銀行鬥智
·紀念偉大台灣的母親們
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
韓國特色的臆想症受到了打擊

   
   韓國特色的臆想症受到了打擊
   
   紐約時報﹐ 8月25日
   


   韓國三星敗訴, Apple 蘋果公司勝訴﹐陪審團判決﹐獲得$1 billion 10億美金的賠
   償。
   
   殺雞儆猴﹐誰敢亂說亂抄襲﹖
   
   版權所有﹐翻印必究。
   
   再說屈原是韓國人﹖
   
   老子告訴你﹐三星﹐是河南中原的星星。
   
   偷走咱的文化福祿壽三星﹐變成你的商標?
   
   哈哈哈! 大快人心!
   
   假三星﹐抄襲中原﹐受到美國的制裁。
   
   看來﹐唯有國民黨老派﹐才能讓台灣登上亞洲4小龍之首。
   
   牛郎織女星下凡 7夕時
   
   
   
   
   附錄
   
   http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/technology/jury-reaches-decision-in-apple-samsung-
   patent-trial.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&adxnnl=1&emc=edit_th_20120825&adxnnlx=1345888827-
   BbeRa/6dHXT7m5CxSCHJWw
   
   Jury Awards $1 Billion to Apple in Samsung Patent Case
   
   Apple won a decisive victory on Friday in a lawsuit against Samsung, a verdict
   that will give Apple ammunition in a far-flung patent war with its global
   competitors in the smartphone business.
   What the Verdict Said
   
   * Samsung violated a series of Apple's patents related to the software and
   design of mobile devices.
   * Apple's patents were valid.
   * Apple did not violate any of Samsung's patents.
   * Apple was awarded $1 billion in damages.
   
   The nine jurors in the case, who faced the daunting task of answering more than 700 questions on sometimes highly technical matters, returned a verdict after just three days of deliberations at a federal courthouse in San Jose, Calif. They found that Samsung infringed on a series of Apple’s patents on mobile devices, awarding Apple more than $1 billion in damages.
   
   That is not a big financial blow to Samsung, one of the world’s largest electronics companies. But the decision could essentially force it and other smartphone makers to redesign their products to be less Apple-like, or risk further legal defeats.
   
   Consumers could end up with some welcome diversity in phone and tablet design — or they may be stuck with devices that manufacturers have clumsily revamped to avoid crossing Apple.
   
   Samsung said it would ask the court to overturn the verdict and, if that is unsuccessful, appeal to a higher court.
   The jury found that various Samsung products violated Apple patents covering things like the “bounce back” effect when a user scrolls to the end of a list on the iPhone and iPad, and the pinch-to-zoom gesture that users make when they want to magnify an image. Samsung was also found to have infringed Apple patents covering the physical design of the iPhone.
   
   In its decision on a countersuit by Samsung, the jury added some sting by finding in favor of Apple across the board. Samsung had asked for more than $422 million from Apple, contending it had violated Samsung’s patents, but got nothing.
   Because Samsung was found to have willfully infringed Apple patents, the judge in the case could grant an Apple request to triple the damages Samsung is required to pay, though lawyers said the size of the initial award made this less likely.
   Despite the eye-popping award, one of the largest ever in a patent case, the more important effect of the jury’s decision could be the impact it has on Android, the Google operating system used by Samsung and a broad array of other companies in their devices. For every iPhone sold worldwide, more than three smartphones running Android are sold, reflecting the meteoric rise of Google’s software.
   
   Apple’s suit against Samsung, the world’s largest maker of smartphones, has partly been viewed as a proxy war against Google, which Apple executives have derided as a copycat, swiping Apple’s innovations. Steven P. Jobs, the late chief executive of Apple, told his biographer that Android was a “stolen product.”
   Apple is expected to ask the judge in the Samsung case for an injunction preventing Samsung from shipping products that infringe on Apple’s patents. The verdict could also bolster Apple’s legal attacks on Android devices from other companies.
   “It’s going to make it very difficult for not only Samsung, but for other companies to mimic the Apple products,” said Robert Barr, executive director of the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology at the University of California, Berkeley.
   
   Charles Golvin, an analyst at Forrester Research, said consumers could experience some discomfort in their use of smartphones if Samsung and other manufacturers are forced to design around certain basic functions to avoid violating Apple’s patents, though he believes the decision will prod them to innovate. “Consumers will adapt, but there will be some bumps in the road as they make that adaptation,” Mr. Golvin said.
   
   The trial provided a rare window into the inner workings of the two companies, especially the highly secretive Apple, forcing them to divulge sales figures, business negotiations and internal memos. Apple executives offered colorful detail, like the way its designers cook up new products around a kitchen table at the company’s headquarters.
   
   The evidence Apple presented, including internal Samsung memos and strategy documents, left little doubt that the iPhone inspired a major effort by the Korean manufacturer to overhaul its mobile phones. But a key question throughout the trial was whether the jury would decide that Samsung had stepped over the line by improperly copying Apple’s technologies. The members of the jury did not explain their decision before stealthily heading out a side exit.
   
   The verdict in the trial hardly concludes the legal battles over patents among companies in the mobile business. There are dozens of such cases winding their way through the courts; Samsung and Apple have also been battling in Germany, Australia and elsewhere. Even so, Samsung remains a major supplier of components for Apple products.
   
   While the decision is likely to weigh on Samsung shares, it sent Apple’s stock up 1.8 percent in after-hours trading. In a statement, Katie Cotton, an Apple spokeswoman, applauded the court for sending a “clear message that stealing isn’t right.”
   
   “We make these products to delight our customers, not for our competitors to flagrantly copy,” she said.
   
   Samsung said in a statement that the decision was a “loss for the American consumer.”
   
   “It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices,” the company said. “This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims.”
   
   Lisa Alcalay Klug contributed reporting.
(2012/08/25 发表)
blog comments powered by Disqus

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场