On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 23 of 36:
Next »
« Previous
Do us all a favour please?
Can you please list "tic's 10 easy ways to determine acceptable lawsuits"? I mean, it obviously has nothing to do with the merits of the case since this hasn't even gone to trial yet.

You have listed #1: if the company doing the suing is not profitable, the lawsuit is frivolous.

I'm pretty sure I can guess at #2: if the company doing the suing is Apple, the lawsuit is valid (this law takes precedence over #1 should Apple ever cease to be profitable).

And #3 follows easily: if the company being sued is Apple, the lawsuit is frivolous.

And if you want to compare Apple suing a copycat and winning to Creative declaring that they own the idea of organizing things in hierarchies

Is it any more silly than suing someone because they used transparent cases? Transparent containers have been around forever, long before Apple decided to put a computer in one. It's all silly and I'm not suggesting that Creative's suit is any less silly. I just have to smirk at your immediate defense of a silly Apple suit because you were caught making fun of an identical suit by Creative many years later! Apple's suit was all about look and feel. This one is too (look at the application). There isn't any real difference.

That's okay tic, I was trolling for you with my post and it looks like I caught a live one. happy Missed you!
Posted by: NonZealot   Posted on: 06/14/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

This is a good one!  Palmyra | 06/14/06
They're both trying  DemonX | 06/14/06
Me I would not be surprised if a certain American company  Laff | 06/14/06
Now why would that be?  Confused by religion | 06/14/06
Yes, a good possibility  MacCanuck | 06/14/06
Not everything involves black helicopters...  John Zern | 06/14/06
It also doesn't mean  MacCanuck | 06/14/06
Depends on how you look at it  NonZealot | 06/14/06
Kind of like...  Rick_K | 06/14/06
Hey Laff, read this!  NonZealot | 06/14/06
Don't forget the nano scratch issue  MacCanuck | 06/15/06
Well you began OK but they you went off the edge.  Laff | 06/14/06
Then why bring in MS?  NonZealot | 06/14/06
You know I never actually mentioned MS by name...  Laff | 06/15/06
I take it all back Laff!  NonZealot | 06/15/06
Because based on they short history they are a bunch  Laff | 06/15/06
Dot Connection  DannyO_0x98 | 06/14/06
iPods have been around for years  Roger Ramjet | 06/14/06
Obvious business reasons  tic swayback | 06/14/06
Non-story  tic swayback | 06/14/06
So when is Apple going to sell off their stock?  NonZealot | 06/14/06
Apple won that suit  tic swayback | 06/14/06
Do us all a favour please?  NonZealot | 06/14/06
Do me a favor please  tic swayback | 06/14/06
Ouch!  NonZealot | 06/14/06
I will judge it based on the merits of the individual case  tic swayback | 06/14/06
Point by point  NonZealot | 06/14/06
Merit versus acceptance  tic swayback | 06/14/06
Then there is nothing to worry about  NonZealot | 06/14/06
Zealot...because of the "Human" factor.  Laff | 06/15/06
Double Ouch  MacCanuck | 06/15/06
re: MacCanuck  NonZealot | 06/15/06
NZ--settling is always cheaper than going to court...  tic swayback | 06/15/06
COMPLETE Zealot - STOP WASTING OUR TIME WITH YOUR BS - NT  raycote | 06/14/06
Awww, pumpkin!  NonZealot | 06/14/06
U.S International Trade Commission wastes time/money  Omch'Ar | 06/14/06

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here