View Single Post
Old 08-18-2011, 03:12 PM   #199
RockdaMan
Banned
RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.RockdaMan ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 1,644
Karma: 213512
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: On the other side of over there
Device: Pandigital Novel, Kindle G1 (broken), iPod Touch
I would posit that the date it was presented to the public is immaterial. Of greater significance would be the date that the patents, processes and trademarks were presented for registration to the government.

It would be interesting to see Joo Joo go after the Android tablet makers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham View Post
There's no need for the quote marks. We all understand that we're mumbling on the sidelines.

However, can you explain to me why, when Apple's injunction revolves around Samsung having 'stolen' the iPad's trade dress, the JooJoo should not be used as an indication that the features highlighted by Apple (flat screen, black bezel, rounded corners, side ports), all of which appeared earlier in the JooJoo, were obvious choices in tablet design and should be available to all manufacturers.

Please don't say 'it's for the judges to decide'; that's taken as read. This is a forum discussion. What's your opinion?

Graham
RockdaMan is offline   Reply With Quote