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
·中華民國立法院必須成立專案,彌補國軍老兵精神肉體損失
·台灣現象 罵少數族群為「外省豬: 在美國是「零容忍」
·縱使終結蔡英文暴力集團,立馬下台,也解決不了中國的問題
·民國備忘錄之一 中華民國國軍榮民土地被民進黨侵占現象
·中華民國(目前仍困在台灣)對太平島的主權
·起底習近平之一節
·萬年國會口號,是李登輝陳水扁發明的邪門假民主標籤,用來消滅中國大陸來的
·蔣經國總統對台灣工商業者談話
·加州窗外依然是靜寂的明月光 夏至這一天
·中華民國公主復仇記
·英國脫歐及世界各國股票市場起落排行榜
·萬里青山將軍留下的話
·何謂中國自古以來的國格 一身輕似葉,所重全名節
·台灣盲流的邏輯與世界價值觀有很大落差
·稟告洪秀柱主席 您不能把國民黨產悉數全給台灣
·蔡英文出洋相!高級訪問團 vs 高層訪問團
·1945年台灣光復歌
·台灣民進黨主席蔡英文稱慰安婦是自願的
·《中華民國在華郵登出聲明 南海仲裁無效 僅僅是鬧劇
·中華民國非流亡政府 駁斥蔡英文謬論
·國民政府抗日時期,上海作曲家,陳蝶衣:不變的心 莫做亡國奴!
·美國總統大選及為中華民國正義申冤
·想消滅中華民國的中共心虛 驕兵必敗
·解析民進黨團隊的為政現象 要苦主中華民國承擔財閥逃之夭夭的勞工稅
·真偽國民黨
·中華民國永遠與中華民族復興富強的腳步而前進
·我家族的抗戰史實 將軍令 獨山之役 日軍侵華戰爭的完結篇
·1949年,中共你改了名,換了姓,你一手能遮天嗎?
·史實:勇敢的中華民國
·前車之鑑:美國總是要你有聯合政府 並且可以有武裝勢力
·
·我的祖國就是中華民國 真假國民黨要有所分辨
·台灣光復的來源 1943德黑蘭會議
·歷史學家余英時對蔣經國的評語
·莊子夏蟲語冰 台灣民粹主義 曲士無法治國
·何謂台灣人權?
·台灣怎樣才會有救?讓全台灣學會說 感恩的心❤ 感謝有您🙏
·對習近平及洪秀柱即將會面的期許 民族團結重任唯大 黨為輕
·追剿日本傀儡蔡英文 VS 追究南韓女總統朴槿惠
·全黨糜爛 糜爛 再糜爛 奢華 奢華 再奢華
·中國人你為何緘默不語?
·中華民國被出賣的始末
·各國股市對川普當選總統的信心指數排名榜
·比較美國與中華民國的退伍軍人
·第一世界大戰停戰協定於11月11日1918簽訂
·請識別美國良幣總統與劣幣總統
·中華民國抗戰時期的台灣參政員列表
·幸虧有中華民國立法院在台灣
·比較美國民主黨 VS 共和黨 對古巴卡斯楚過世的看法
·民進黨600
·民進黨600
·民進黨600
·民進黨228招數已經過時啦!
·中華民國起義啦!天快亮了!還我河山!
·台中的彩虹🌈
·沒有人願意在共產黨體制下被統一
·台灣舉世無雙的無厘頭「轉型正義」:侵略者向受害者要求賠償
·台灣軍公教被欺負,是選蔡英文當中華民國總統的後果
·中華民國:黃鐘毀棄,瓦釜雷鳴,讒人高張,賢士無名
·國權宣言,民權宣言,人權宣言
·中國國民黨主席的歷史責任
·請中國國民黨黨主席競選人參酌 表述國民黨的民族主義至上彩虹願景
·川普習近平即將會晤 台灣你準備好了嗎?
·中華民國之國軍的文曲星:歷史小說家高陽
·懷念國民政府教育部對人類的貢獻
·比較美國法定社會安全福利金及台灣的退休金與年金的不同: 重點是軍公教的
·讚👍馬英九提名的監察委員,在台灣維持現狀的正義!
·台灣民進黨集體迫遷外省軍人眷村是犯罪行為
·天佑國民黨,尤其是人道主義的交通部
·先期來台灣的移民,民進黨的祖先,是宰殺原住民的兇手
·民進黨是漢人 對台灣原住民是始作俑者的征服者
·台南市長賴清德的傲慢與偏見
·我是正港台灣人 日本及民進黨祖先侵略者 必須轉型正義
·兩位水利工程師對比: 偉大的孫運璿 vs 日本殖民心態的八田與一
·我的母親國: 中華民國🇹🇼
·習近平請注意:支持台灣獨立,是違反中國國民黨抗日戰爭的初衷
·台艦台造 獵雷艦 拉菲葉🌿🍃事件再版?
·何謂國民黨鄉愿?
·中國國民黨黨主席選舉面面觀 台胞證大於中華民國護照
·誰是正宮中國 ?台灣之幸!中華民族之福!
·中國國民黨黨主席吳敦義可否維持現狀?
·習近平:不准推卸責任
·六四感言 民主自由不是天上掉下來的餡餅
·蔣介石是否曾託孤台灣?
·國寶級紀綠片大師齊柏林驟逝
·兩位國民黨黨主席洪秀柱及吳敦義:何不提名推薦600名外省第二代給中共19全
·前瞻未有後顧之憂 台灣患集體健忘症
·蔣介石不願負起丟失大陸之歷史責任
·蔣介石不願負起丟失大陸之歷史責任
·台南市長賴清德想當台灣國第一任總統?邊緣化國民黨話語權?
·大陸中共,民進黨,台灣國民黨,請注意⚠
·武昌起義僅僅是反抗暴政的完結篇
·中國大陸的普世價值已非仇視西方國家的意識型態
·狀元紅的故鄉是中國大陸中原
·沒有中華民國軍人,就沒有中國
·笨蛋🥚才會慶祝🎁中華民國受難日:77事變
·何謂有意義的慶祝七七事變
·台灣人民的生死戰 前瞻基礎設施若通過 將一窮二白
·千萬個劉曉波,中國人迷途可知返?
·前無古人 後無來者,中共搬國庫到國外,郭文貴行跡敗露
·國父孫逸仙完成代代相傳的夢
[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