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
·楚下國寺頌三友
·不能忘懷屈原的楚國: 愛之宛
·屈原,請派通靈的巫師來向陳水扁索命
·中共被國際呼籲書要求: 增加核子透明化, 減少核武
·宅男台灣馬英九, 莫做山寨版國民黨主席
·落於人後的清華, 交通大學敬請注意: 科技掛帥美國最新消息
·中華民國行政院在台灣
·指導漢武帝背後的高人,太歲星星下凡: 如何打贏國民黨的道德戰役
·恢複天安門名譽以及國民黨原貌
·淺論比較台灣人本省外省的經濟狀況
·本省國民黨和外省國民黨之分野
·大霧茫茫, 指南針指點迷津: 中華民國回歸祖國大陸南京
·蜚聲國際的女烈士倪妲點燃伊朗革命聖火
·披荊斬棘的劉曉波: 中國可能的政治繼承者
·台灣權貴及中共太子黨羽將被司法折翼
·國民黨庇蔭下的台灣經營之神王永慶下葬了
·建議國共論壇: 取消今年10月1日中共國慶閱兵典禮
·本土台灣人患的心理病: 下意識歧視, 下意識排斥外省異己
·條分缕析台灣人的毛病弱點
·台灣以及大陸為何沒有宮部美幸?
·60年建國如何取代6000年建成的文化?
·社會沒有理, 怎麼寫推理小說?
·共黨燒抗戰時神聖醫學院: 成都華西南京中央大學醫學院
·2010上海世博能掛青天白日滿地紅國旗
·參加10.1.中共開國慶典, 就是給自己吃耳光
·最後一隻馬
·南京復原委員會: 如何搞定政治協商
·中原心聲: 拘留涉貪核工業領導,大快人心!
·請給中華民國陸軍官校一個掌聲
·敬告北京中央: 水庫越域引水政策失敗,始作俑者將受制裁
·提醒中共: 中華民國必需拾回失落60年的治理大陸主權
·警告馬英九: 拿出漢子形象,不要讓中華民國丟臉
·夜未央..中華民族之奮鬥
·夢中樹
·對日抗戰勝利後, 世界強權分裂了中國(中華民國)
·一首河南(中州)歌
·中原頌: 永遠的清明上河圖
·恭喜! 中華民國新任內政部長 江宜樺
·國民黨太仁慈, 才會拱手讓出江山
·和統會必需統籌兼顧
·紀念一個和平工作戰鬥者: 湯恩伯將軍
·漫談美國總統醫療計劃的不仁不智
·1972年《日中聯合聲明》是不合法的
·1972年"日本と中国の共同声明"合法的ではない
·請溫總理帶領總辭, 加州州政府也應總辭
·夜未央: 中共請速歸還全部中國的主權
·給泰縣胡錦濤舅舅一封信
·河南文化法人: 警告中共文物強盜, 惡貫滿盈,來日不多
·2011 年, 慶祝中華民國百年華誕在南京
·解析紅樓夢民族文學之謎: 滿漢混血兒家庭的時代作品
· 自由的孽海花: 戊戌變法是滿漢志士義薄雲天無間的合作
·空折枝, 恨已遲 清廷拒絕政改, 走上不歸路
·如此搞定馬英九的女兒
·中共國慶是不符合國情的黨慶
·風雨如晦, 雞鳴不已, 星星明滅, 白日升空
·比較鄧小平閱兵與胡錦濤的不同與共同點 加上蔣介石的鵝步閱兵式 與共產黨的對比
·在最後的終極統一之前的幾個步驟與佈局思考
·父親的望月思故鄉
·如何中華能自主獨立 傲然屹立神州
·話說民國: 中國曾經滄海 曾有偉大民族的想像力 激動人心的機動力
·恭祝中華民國九八嵩壽生日快樂!
·雙十懷金陵有感 喝杯南京雨花茶還願
·日本人揭露胡錦濤與小布希的核彈競賽戲 中原核爆大計劃
·論中共的集體健忘症症候
·號外! 歐巴馬對胡錦濤的施加主導議題 讓核武競賽曝光
·美國參議院財政委員會通過健保初審法案
·北京是華府核彈的第一目標
·民進黨清算國民黨黨產 = 就是納粹黨清算猶太人再版
·若是羅斯福有歐巴馬的魄力: 今天的中華民國首都是南京
·贈送芻議給馬胡政治協商: 匡正大陸台灣人心, 公投和平歸一領袖
·毛暴君皇帝, 說了算, 一
·杜鵑花開立法院: 紀念永遠微笑的參議員的仁愛
·馬英九可否冒大不韙問台灣屏东萬巒人: 你們不怕豬流感嗎?
·也談不恥下吃是中國吃的文化
· 敬請內政部長加強管理國人冬季吃狗肉, 以免得狂犬病
·中共下錯政治賭注的不歸路
·國民黨提拔本省人的傳統又見證在馬內閣
·警告中共 請給我們一個中華民國的代表
·沒有國名的偽中華民國代表的簽字 MOU兩岸金融備忘錄 無效!
·解析美國總統奧巴馬訪中行程: 二個中國一個台灣, 籌謀新理想國
·台灣為何需要美國的軍售
·國宴知多少 胡錦濤請歐巴馬吃了一道溫馨香溢的泰州小菜
·提醒國共政治協商會議要點備忘錄
·國留日Waseda 早稻田精英制服日本法西斯黨
· 論國民黨文化與人材﹕分析臨危受命當國民黨秘書長的金溥聰的滿漢情節
·論國民黨文化與人材
·論國民黨敗選與比較中美民族文化造成的政治心理氣候
·台中狼煙四起 難忘六四抵抗極權坦克車的純朴勇敢身影
·兩個中國 = 中華民國護照 + 中華人民共和國護照
·中華梅花黨魁﹐貢獻一流思路 動員全世界聯署 釋放劉曉波 實施憲法治國
·給滿人金氏金溥聰的備忘錄之一
·馬英九把國民黨虎符交給金溥聰
·原罪中共被台灣法院審判
·台中清泉崗的中華封神榜 驍將邱清泉
·中共可以迴避政治責任多久﹖
·為何最後國共談判破裂
·政治局不敢談政治﹐就作廢了吧!
·中共陳雲林強行渡過台中關山﹐卻不敢談統一
·劉曉波的亡國之痛 彼狡童兮,不与我好兮
·為何馬英九的藍綠民調直下雲霄
·中共用反美來再度消費中華民國﹐瓦解台灣
[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