emails show Google support for Samsung in the Apple lawsuit case

[Mr_Quatro]

I didn’t see this coming, but I’m not a fan of Apple or Google.

[emails show Google offered to aid Samsung in Apple case](emails show Google offered to aid Samsung in Apple case)

New evidence in the Apple-Samsung patent trial bolstered a widespread suspicion: this case might as well be called Apple v. Google.
Apple on Tuesday introduced a deposition by Google lawyer James Maccoun, who verified emails that the search giant had offered to cover some of Samsung’s legal costs and agreed to foot some of the damages if the Korean electronics giant lost.

[Sage_Rat]

Your link is not a link.

[Mr_Quatro]

@Sage_Rat

Your link is not a link.

That was a Wall Street Journal blog … I think this one is better from CBS: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/google-agreed-to-pay-for-samsungs-defense-against-apple/

Now they’re calling it the google vs apple case

Google patent attorney James Maccoun, in deposition testimony presented by Apple in court here, authenticated emails between Google and Samsung from 2012 that said that the Internet giant would “defend and indemnify” Samsung over its use of technology that Apple said infringed its patents. The emails said Google would help shoulder some of the cost for the defense, as well as for any damages should Samsung lose its battle.

[Tabby_Cat]

I mean, is this surprising? Samsung is Google’s main and only weapon against iPhone locking them out of all that delicious web eyeballs, of course you’d want to help them out.

[Projammer]

Is this any different from M$ infusing cash into SCO when SCO was tangling with Novell/Linux over patents?

The whole enemy of my enemy thing.

[Sage_Rat]

Having read the article, I’m impressively ambivalent. “Slide to unlock” is hardly the invention of the century. Most of these things shouldn’t be patented to begin with and Apple’s big invention with the iPhone/iPad was the overall design, not any one little gimmick. Android may have ended up using a few of the same gimmicks, but that’s because they’re relatively obvious once you have an underlying design goal of killing any form of built-in keyboard.

[BigT]

The thing I can’t get over is how crafty Steve Jobs was about this. He specifically crafted this thing to only happen after he was gone. Sure, he’d rattled the sabres about infringement for years, but he was smart enough not to get involved in this sort of thing.