Darren, Some of us still hold a grudge on Apple. We remember our first Apple PC's and how everything Apple cost 2X what the IBM machines cost, how nothing - printer, disc drives, monitors, memory had to be Apple or it wouldn't work! Regards, Bob S.
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Darren Addy <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 11:11 AM, John Sessoms <[email protected]> wrote: >>> From: steve harley > >>> years of appeals will probably ensue, but the stifling effect will start >>> now >> >> >> Pretty much the way I read it. > > The stifling of patented Intellectual Property theft? I believe that > is the purpose of the laws that are on the books (to prevent or at > least disincentivize that). I'm sure that most of you know that > patents exist to reward innovators and stimulate innovation, for the > good of society. To allow Intellectual Property larceny would stifle > that innovation (and from that we all would suffer). > > Some of you act like this is the first patent lawsuit judgement you > have ever heard of. > > Presumably most of you are in favor of Pentax being granted patents on > their innovations and would have an opinion if some other company > "lifted them" to Pentax's detriment. Frankly, it seems like some of > you hear the word "Apple" and your heads disappear up your arses. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
