Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
| AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
| AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
| Twitter
Sean Fallon
| Twitter
Jack Loftus
| Twitter
John Herrman
| Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen
| Twitter
Rosa Golijan
| Twitter
Chris Jacob
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Kyle VanHemert
Comment Account Questions:
Please enter your email address to have your password reset.
Registering will give you a user profile and the ability to add other users as friends. To become a commenter, however, you need to audition.
Want to know more? Consult the Comment FAQ and legal terms.
You don't need to login to comment. Just enter your email address below.
See how your address will be displayed in the Comment FAQ.
06/24/09
I mean, how else will they finish paying their Cayennes otherwise?
06/24/09
If you're Japanese, do you want a white lawyer representing you, or do you want a Japanese lawyer representing you that speaks English, and Japanese, and understands cultural nuanced use of language natively so that he can request clarification of terms as they are translated into English for the court proceedings?
06/24/09
Company A builds product.
Company B reverse engineers product, copies it, sends their product to market while knowingly infringing upon Company A's patent/patents
Company B then works to come up with a work-around the patent/s before Company A sues them.
Company A sues them.
Company A then requests that all products from Company B are banned from import during hearing.
Company B's products are then either banned, or not banned temporarily.
Company A then requests for all monies Company B made selling infringing products.
Company will then usually get portion of Company B's sales.
Company B releases work-around.
Company B retires infringing product line in US.
Company B is then cleared to continue now importing non infringing crap to US.
Occasionally Company B gets thumped hard before it gets to this end point and is effectively shut out of the US market entirely until case is resolved and products are no longer infringing upon Company A's products.
The short version as my former IP paralegal wife states it: Crooked Asian company sues other crooked Asian company in an attempt to corner market. The end.
06/24/09
06/24/09
Except in this case, Company A is Sharp...I'm pretty sure the were making LCD's waaaaay before Samsung.
06/24/09
Or, are you just some sort of flaming moron who throws out idiotic comments like the one you just posted above?
06/24/09
06/24/09
agreed. they're much better than Dull Infernus.
06/24/09
06/24/09
06/24/09
06/24/09
06/24/09
06/24/09
that vizio waitin at home for ya?
06/24/09
06/24/09
06/24/09
but... the cake is a lie!
06/24/09