>You've got this:
>
>>Look at every post you made in this thread after Apple's
>>victory. You seem personally hurt by Apple's successful W.
>>Your posts prove you a fanboy.
>
>So being a "fanboy" is an argument now? I've stated in other
>threads that I actually have a personal inclination to see the
>company do well (as it directly affects the size of my yearly
>bonus). Bad business practices reflect poorly on a company...
>hence my crusade.

Apple defending technology that it patented is not bad business practice at all. It's furthe prooft of you trolling and blatant fanboyism on your part. A lot of people have stock in Apple and bet against it so your statement proves nothing.

More proof your trolling/blatant fanboyism is found in you not saying shit about Microsoft. It's clear between the previous fact/Apple's recent dealings with Android OEMs that don't rip off IP and your lack of silence that you're trolling.

Why is any company that protects the IP it built a bad company that engages in horrible practices?

>
>As for Apple's "successful W".... this was built on a house of
>cards. Sure, they'll probably still win some fines, but
>Judge Koh just ruled that infringement wasn't "willful", which
>was the entire basis for the jury's $1 billion award (not to
>mention awards based on patents that are tentatively declared
>no longer valid by the issuing body).
>
>Now, can you actually discuss this issue like a well informed,
>rational human being, or are you just going to continue
>relying on inane catch phrases and accusatory statements?
>
>I'm fine with either one, but it's clear I'd have a lot more
>fun if you continue with the track that you're on now.

I'm beyond rational. Seriously, go back and look a what you posted in this thread. You still haven't answered my question. How has Apple stifled innovation? You put it out there so explain it.

>
>> Most of those articles are half-assed clickbait.
>
>Could you explain how they're half-assed clickbait? Please
>explain to me, oh wise, well informed Apple supporter.

I'm not supporting Apple as much as I am modulating the truth and defending a great company's name against a fanboy's attack. A lot of your sources aren't credible. You posted swipes from android blogs.

>
>>So Samsung STILL LOST and IS GUILTY AND OWES Apple $1
>billion.
>>Okay got it.
>
>Hmm... so you still haven't read the articles, nor understand
>what is going on.
>
>Here's a direct question for you: if the patents the awards
>were based on are found invalid, and if Judge Koh herself
>finds that Samsung did not willfully infringe, will that $1
>billion award still stand? Serious question... I would love
>to see your answer to this.

You swiped something and skimmed through it. Apple's bid for extra damages were thrown out. That's it.

Let me break this down for you:
Samsung LOST
Samsung still owes $1 billion
Samsung is still partially guilty of trade-dress.

The publically released evidence shits all over this post and your claims by the way.
How come you didn't post that?

Of course it's going to stand. Samsung didn't get the damages thrown out.
>
>Edit: Oh, and I noticed you still haven't addressed that post
>I linked to up above.

I addressed it earlier but you Cuban b'd my response.