Also please rename yourself PCFreek since you are clearly no admirer of Apple. In fact, why the fsck are you here? You would be more profitably employed viewing porn on your cheap Asus laptop, although even that would probably strain your intellectual abilities.

=:~)

With biased U.S. and British judges, they might as well abolish the USPTO as well.

If you’re a big enough target, they will find you.

(Money grubbing maggots.)

Who’s going to Hell first?

How about smart, reasonable and fair?

I’m all for walloping Apple over the head for actual willful crime. But where is there any actual profit to Apple over the conflicting FaceTime technology? There isn’t any! Therefore, this cruel-and-unusual-punishment is fair judgement against Apple HOW?!

IMHO this is merely more ‘Apple Bear’ behavior without merit. I have to wonder what influences have been placed upon this ‘judge’ and ‘judgement’. I don’t care if my saying so makes me appear like a fawning ‘fanboi’. Just as I am all for bashing Apple for poor behavior, I am also all for bashing our justice system for its own poor behavior. Deal with it.

More coffee please.

Which of course is ridiculous in our modern age. There should be processes to:

A) Educate the law and judgement communities about ongoing technological changes and innovations.

B) Remove from a case any judge who’s behavior demonstrates IGNORANCE of the core subject of case, or who’s behavior DELAYS ADEQUATE JUDGEMENT of any case. Koh clearly has vehemently killed the concept of a swift and speedy trial. She should have been removed, aka BOOTED, from the Apple v Samsung trial a year ago. But no, now Koh’s on the docket for its sequel trial. OMFG what a travesty of justice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedy_Trial_Clause

(And yes trolls, I can rip the decrepit old ‘Apple stole from Xerox’ yarn to shreds via the facts of the matter. Whereas the ‘Microsoft stole from Apple’ facts are a matter of public record).

We’re talking about a company, VirnetX, that is only a patent troll. They invent and make nothing, ever, except cash off the patents they BOUGHT. The exact nature of the patents they purchased isn’t evident here. We don’t know exactly how Apple’s tech and the VirnetX purchased tech match up. Often it is a question of who came up with the tech first (which was NOT VirnetX in any case) or how were the conflicting techs screwed up at our ever-incompetent US Patent Office.

IOW: We need to know more before pretending any ‘stealing’ occurred.

Not many judges have adequate knowledge nor heart to see and judge with fairness.

I’m even certain the patent violations in Apples case were far less blatant as well, but there is no justice to be Lund in the US legal system.