Topic: Nintendo Found Guilty of Patent Infringement for 3DS Technology?

@the_shpydar
is it wrong that i heard spock's voice when i read your well-written post? it has left me feeling informed yet strangely aroused.

i'm going to bed now.

I did post that it was possible they ACCIDENTALLY used it. How do you comprehend sources and notes if you can't even read my posts?

It's also possible that they deliberately stole technology from a patent. And frankly if Nintendo did then it got off really lightly at $30 million.

Also, I don't think you should be calling out a lawyer on his ability to comprehend the written word. Your articulation is incomprehensible, and just about everyone here agrees on that. If a lawyer, a journalist and a whole bunch of other very smart people (whose jobs I do not know, I am sorry) can't understand you, your articulation is the problem. Not their comprehension of it.

How is asking what kind of law he handles irrelevant to the discussion?

Because he's still going to know more about patent law than anyone else here, regardless of which kind of law he practices. So it's not relevant.

You guys are fighting a brick, and losing.

You do realise that calling yourself a "brick" is not complementing yourself, right?

The easiest way to describe it would just be "trial lawyer" or "litigator" or just "all-purpose lawyer man"

I work in a lot of different areas of law. Mainly, I handle a mix of matrimonial/family law (divorce, custody, child support, etc) and civil litigation (personal injury, etc), but also some criminal law (typically "lesser" crimes — no murder trials or anything like that) and other random stuff like contracts/business suits, landlord/tenant stuffs, and more.

But i do not drive a sports car.

I thought law firms handed those out like candy

Thanks for that - law has always fascinated me.

I read all of your posts. That does not change the fact that you are engaging in discussion in an incomprehensible manner, with a complete lack of logic . I present the above quote as Exhibit "A". I honestly have no idea what point you are trying to make with that one.

EDIT:
@Bankai
Sadly, the work-a-day lawyers like myself are not rich like on TV.
Of course, i also don't have to work 100+ hour weeks like at some of the big "white shoe" firms in NYC, so it's a fair trade in my eyes.

Well if you guys can't comprehend or interpret my posts, and then I get argued against when you obviously didn't get what I meant, your points are invalid. I don't think calling myself a brick is such an insult when someone who doesn't consider themselves a brick is losing in a fight against one.

All I got to say before this thread gets closed for going off topic, is:
Don't say I'm wrong if you didn't understand what I meant, and fighting a brick and losing is questionable.

@Bankai
Sadly, the work-a-day lawyers like myself are not rich like on TV.
Of course, i also don't have to work 100+ hour weeks like at some of the big "white shoe" firms in NYC, so it's a fair trade in my eyes.

Well there goes my childhood innocence

I assumed that TV never lied to me! Because the TV portrayal of journalists as chain smoking, heavy drinking individuals with remarkably poor personal hygene is... actually quite accurate. I assumed all surgeons looked like George Clooney and all lawyers wore Brioni suits.

..........

An ex-employee of Sony? Why'd they fire him? Was it for having new ideas? I can see how that would have conflicted with Sony Entertainment.

Who said this thread was getting closed for going off-topic? Are you trying to say that you're attempting to derail this thread intentionally? Because I know a quick way to end that without closing any topics at all. :/

@gamesake: was he fired? perhaps he quit; some people do, y'know. maybe he wanted time off to work on his ideas that nintendo wanted to use without paying for.

ok lets keep talking about other peoples lives and stuff we don't really know much about then shall we.

It's possible. He may have just gotten bored with Sony and decided to move on. We can all relate to that.