Beyond stupid
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| caitlyn Nov 02, 2012 5:24 PM EDT |
Tweaking a judge is always beyond stupid. It almost certainly will hurt them in future cases, and not just with this one judge. All the Apple fanbois who are cheering this don't seem to understand that it will likely bite Apple later. |
| maxxedout Nov 03, 2012 10:09 AM EDT |
I have no love for Apple and inal, but just imagine what a legal mess for Apple if they bluntly stated that Samsung didn't copy their products. |
| helios Nov 03, 2012 10:38 AM EDT |
Jimmy Kimmel stated it perfectly when he said that if you were in New York or New Jersey standing in line to buy the new Ipad this past weekend, you should be punched in the throat. A reference to the hundreds of thousands of people in the vicinity who are fighting for their very existence. I mean, hey....who can bother with people either flooded to the rooftops or have their entire world burning in front of them? The New Ipad IS OUT! I personally find the video below a scream. Funny thing, on G+, the Apple Fans don't seem to share the same opinion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RyWS... |
| gus3 Nov 03, 2012 3:20 PM EDT |
Tweaking a judge is not stupid, when said judge is displaying clear contempt for both Constitutional and judicial law. Of course, the right thing to do at that point is to file a complaint with the state's judicial ethics board. Don't threaten to do it, just do it once you have the goods on him/her. There are times when "contempt of court" is the correct course of action, that is, when the court is behaving contemptibly. |
| jdixon Nov 03, 2012 10:38 PM EDT |
> ...when said judge is displaying clear contempt for both Constitutional and judicial law. Uhn, gus3, he's a UK Judge, not a US one. |
| gus3 Nov 04, 2012 5:00 PM EDT |
Yes, I know. I'm not sure what foundational document lays out the powers of the judiciary in English law. However, in the case at hand, what Apple needs to do is to admit that their lawsuits against Samsung are without merit. Their refusal to do so is simply compounding stupidity with stupidity. The original intention was to denegrate Samsung via lawsuit, gaining P.R. points for Apple. That much was obvious. The judge calls it right in ordering Apple to apologize for their cheap shots. |
| jdixon Nov 04, 2012 8:05 PM EDT |
> I'm not sure what foundational document lays out the powers of the judiciary in English law. While I'm loathe to recommend Wikipedia for in depth subjects, it seems appropriate for a broad overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_law |
| BernardSwiss Nov 04, 2012 8:33 PM EDT |
> However, in the case at hand, what Apple needs to do is to admit that their lawsuits against Samsung are without merit. Their refusal to do so is simply compounding stupidity with stupidity. I agree. In Linux forums, this appears to be obvious. However I notice that in non-Linux forums, this is still a highly contentious question. Apple fans (and IP maximalists) still talk in terms of Samsung's "theft" of Apple property (or in some cases, while avoiding explicitly using terms like "theft" and "steal" expressing equivalent tones of moral outrage), and also demonstrate a remarkable degree of double standards and selection bias regarding actual facts. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!