Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #95100 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201610.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-10-03 15:35 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-10-04 14:51 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 185 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201610.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2016-10-03 15:35 +0000
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-10-03 16:12 +0000
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. "Mongoose" <mongoose@rikkitikkitavi.com> - 2016-10-03 12:26 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-03 12:36 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-03 12:59 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-03 13:16 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Anonymous <nobody@roance.net> - 2016-10-03 17:30 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 15:22 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-03 18:38 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-03 22:20 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-03 22:51 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-03 23:56 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 20:55 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-04 09:10 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-04 10:04 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-04 14:21 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-04 22:14 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 23:14 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 16:06 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-03 22:29 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 20:55 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-04 09:12 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. PAS <abc@doremi.net> - 2016-10-04 10:03 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-04 10:17 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-04 09:44 -0500
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. "Mongoose" <mongoose@rikkitikkitavi.com> - 2016-10-03 16:08 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-03 16:31 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-03 16:46 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. "Mongoose" <mongoose@rikkitikkitavi.com> - 2016-10-03 18:26 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-03 18:38 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-03 22:25 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 21:08 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-04 09:24 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-04 14:22 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-05 01:40 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-05 11:05 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-05 16:18 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-05 22:45 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-05 16:50 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 16:53 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-05 17:15 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 22:48 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-06 09:22 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 09:50 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-05 23:07 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 17:08 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-05 23:17 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-05 17:22 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 22:48 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-05 18:05 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 22:48 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 11:07 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 15:33 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 16:22 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 09:44 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 09:47 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 10:08 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2016-10-06 15:07 +0100
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 11:08 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 10:33 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 16:43 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 16:48 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 14:56 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 18:53 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 16:04 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 18:59 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 16:08 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 19:31 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 16:43 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2016-10-07 00:44 +0100
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-07 06:40 -0500
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 19:45 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 19:12 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 22:19 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-07 12:25 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 19:09 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-05 17:18 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-05 23:21 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-05 17:34 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-05 23:42 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-05 17:53 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-06 00:17 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-05 18:26 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-06 00:45 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 09:09 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-06 15:22 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 09:34 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 10:02 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-06 00:32 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-05 19:03 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-06 00:30 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-06 00:46 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-06 00:58 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 22:48 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 09:54 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 09:57 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 10:14 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 15:33 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 16:56 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 16:24 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 18:54 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 11:13 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 15:33 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-06 23:49 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 15:00 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-07 00:05 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 15:31 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 19:15 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 22:19 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-07 00:01 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-07 12:28 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-05 23:23 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2016-10-05 16:40 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-05 20:29 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 22:48 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-05 18:02 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 22:48 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 11:19 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 16:51 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-05 23:04 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 17:05 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-05 17:16 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-05 23:16 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-05 18:10 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-05 22:48 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 11:21 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 15:33 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 16:27 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 15:33 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 19:00 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 16:09 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 19:36 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 16:42 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 19:20 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-06 22:19 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-07 12:31 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-07 14:43 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-05 22:07 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 11:22 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 10:36 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 16:32 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-05 18:01 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-06 09:42 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-06 16:20 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-06 19:28 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2016-10-06 21:03 -0500
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. bill van <billvan@delete.shaw.ca> - 2016-10-06 19:18 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2016-10-06 19:27 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-07 12:33 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-07 20:41 +0200
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-07 13:37 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-07 00:00 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Leonard Blaisdell <leoblaisdell@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-03 22:32 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-04 09:42 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 15:59 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-03 22:16 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-03 22:51 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-03 23:51 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-03 23:55 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-04 09:21 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-04 10:29 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 10:26 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-03 14:09 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 11:19 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-03 14:27 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 11:35 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-03 14:56 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 11:59 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-03 15:01 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 12:07 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-03 15:35 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 12:43 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2016-10-03 15:36 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-10-03 12:45 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-03 20:54 +0000
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-03 17:17 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-03 16:48 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-03 22:55 +0000
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-03 19:04 -0400
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-03 23:17 +0000
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-03 19:30 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2016-10-03 16:01 -0600
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. Electric Comet <electric-comet@mail.invalid> - 2016-10-17 10:00 -0700
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. pinnerite <pinnerite@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 20:16 +0100
Re: Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-04 14:51 -0500
Page 1 of 10 [1] 2 3 … 10 Next page →
| From | Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201610.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 15:35 +0000 |
| Subject | Apple (Who really never invented anything they could steal) loses patent retrial, owes $302.4 million to VirnetX. |
| Message-ID | <cdd08df106ed38829b23143599f3a53d@msgid.frell.theremailer.net> |
Apple has been ordered to pay $302.4 million to the patent holding and security software company VirnetX for infringing patents covering secure computer and mobile communications. A jury in Tyler, Texas, found Friday that Apple infringed on two patents related to its FaceTime videoconferencing application. The award also includes damages for infringement of VirnetX technology in Virtual Private Network on Demand. The verdict was the result of the third trial filed since 2010 against Apple by VirnetX, a company that makes most of its money from licensing patented technology that creates virtual private networks over the internet. A verdict in February ordered Apple to pay VirnetX $625.6 million in damages after two lawsuits were combined. But in August, a federal judge voided the verdict, saying that combining two lawsuits into a single trial confused the jurors and was unfair to Apple. He ruled that both cases needed to be tried separately. Apple said it plans to appeal the verdict but declined to comment further. https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-patent-retrial-owes-302-4- million-to-virnetx-facetime-video-calling-tyler-vpn/
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 16:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <e5febgF4d7fU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #95100 |
Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201610.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote: > Apple has been ordered to pay $302.4 million to the patent > holding and security software company VirnetX Oh no, the sky is falling! : D Corrupt court known for siding with patent trolls gives Apple a slap on the wrist for doing nothing wrong. $300 million is a drop in the bucket for a company that takes in over $18 billion a quarter. Apple makes enough money in profit to pay this fine in a couple days. Big deal. Laughably lame troll brought to you by Fritz Wuehler. Try c.s.m.a. next time, dummy. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mongoose" <mongoose@rikkitikkitavi.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 12:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nsu0rv$ei6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #95102 |
"Jolly Roger" wrote in message news:e5febgF4d7fU1@mid.individual.net... Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201610.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote: > Apple has been ordered to pay $302.4 million to the patent > holding and security software company VirnetX >Oh no, the sky is falling! : D Corrupt court known for siding with patent >trolls gives Apple a slap on the wrist for doing nothing wrong. You fangurls are really stupid. Apple screws you without vaseline, and you bend over for more. > $300 >million is a drop in the bucket for a company that takes in over $18 >billion a quarter. Apple makes enough money in profit to pay this fine in a >couple days. Big deal. Especially in the light of they don't pay any taxes. >Laughably lame troll brought to you by Fritz Wuehler. Try c.s.m.a. next >time, dummy. Confused, fangurl This is CSMA. Try not to worry so much. We know the courts decision was a blow to you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 12:36 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <031020161236327686%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #95107 |
In article <nsu0rv$ei6$1@dont-email.me>, Mongoose <mongoose@rikkitikkitavi.com> wrote: > > $300 > >million is a drop in the bucket for a company that takes in over $18 > >billion a quarter. Apple makes enough money in profit to pay this fine in a > >couple days. Big deal. > > Especially in the light of they don't pay any taxes. apple pays a shitload of taxes. > >Laughably lame troll brought to you by Fritz Wuehler. Try c.s.m.a. next > >time, dummy. > > Confused, fangurl This is CSMA. Try not to worry so much. We know the > courts decision was a blow to you. it isn't.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 12:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <98wIz.10982$%J2.1067@fx26.iad> |
| In reply to | #95108 |
On 2016-10-03 12:36, nospam wrote: > In article <nsu0rv$ei6$1@dont-email.me>, Mongoose > <mongoose@rikkitikkitavi.com> wrote: > >>> > > $300 >>> > >million is a drop in the bucket for a company that takes in over $18 >>> > >billion a quarter. Apple makes enough money in profit to pay this fine in a >>> > >couple days. Big deal. >> > >> > Especially in the light of they don't pay any taxes. > apple pays a shitload of taxes. Look up the EU's ruling that the sweetheart deal with Ireland must be voided because it amounted to an illegal government subsidy for Apple. Oh wotthehell, I'll save you the trouble: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/31/technology/apple-tax-eu-ireland.html?_r=0 Have a good day, -- Best, Wolf K kirkwood40.blogspot.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 13:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <031020161316422259%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #95111 |
In article <98wIz.10982$%J2.1067@fx26.iad>, Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> wrote: > >>> > > $300 > >>> > >million is a drop in the bucket for a company that takes in over $18 > >>> > >billion a quarter. Apple makes enough money in profit to pay this fine > >>> > >in a > >>> > >couple days. Big deal. > >> > > >> > Especially in the light of they don't pay any taxes. > > apple pays a shitload of taxes. > > Look up the EU's ruling that the sweetheart deal with Ireland must be > voided because it amounted to an illegal government subsidy for Apple. now look up that it's not a sweetheart deal nor is it specific to apple, but rather it's part of the tax code itself and completely legal. also look up that apple isn't the only company to legally use the tax code in that manner. google, microsoft, facebook, intel and others do the same thing. after that, look up that ireland is siding with apple, *not* the eu. in other words, ireland doesn't want apple to pay and it's questionable whether the eu has any say in the matter in the first place. <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-ireland-idUSKCN 1180WR>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anonymous <nobody@roance.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 17:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <99b0abb8fe797c6d214bd05082d9f7ca@roance.net> |
| In reply to | #95113 |
In article <031020161316422259%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam wrote: >now look up that it's not a sweetheart deal nor is it specific to >apple, but rather it's part of the tax code itself and completely >legal. > >also look up that apple isn't the only company to legally use the tax >code in that manner. google, microsoft, facebook, intel and others do >the same thing. > >after that, look up that ireland is siding with apple, *not* the eu. > >in other words, ireland doesn't want apple to pay and it's questionable >whether the eu has any say in the matter in the first place. > ><http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-ireland-idUSKCN >1180WR> The bad guys are sitting in the Irish parliament. For centuries Ireland tried to convert from an agricultural country to a worthless nonproductive banking nation at the EU's expense. And that plan was paid by the EU twice, by direct funding and by a big loss of taxes due to Ireland's irresponsibe tax dumping strategy, which allowed companies to avoid payments on a large scale. On top of that, when in 2008 the economic bubble burst, they once again held out their hands to be bailed out by the EU and the IMF with additional multi-billion Euro benefits. When will EU representatives recognize that it's time to end that farce, time to make the spalpeens understand that solidarity has to be mutual. http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/how-apples-irish-subsidiaries-paid-a-0005-percent-tax-rate-in-2014.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 15:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nsulnr$ls$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #95143 |
On 2016-10-03 2:30 PM, Anonymous wrote: > In article <031020161316422259%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam wrote: > >> now look up that it's not a sweetheart deal nor is it specific to >> apple, but rather it's part of the tax code itself and completely >> legal. >> >> also look up that apple isn't the only company to legally use the tax >> code in that manner. google, microsoft, facebook, intel and others do >> the same thing. >> >> after that, look up that ireland is siding with apple, *not* the eu. >> >> in other words, ireland doesn't want apple to pay and it's questionable >> whether the eu has any say in the matter in the first place. >> >> <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-ireland-idUSKCN >> 1180WR> > > The bad guys are sitting in the Irish parliament. For centuries Ireland > tried to convert from an agricultural country to a worthless > nonproductive banking nation at the EU's expense. And that plan was > paid by the EU twice, by direct funding and by a big loss of taxes due > to Ireland's irresponsibe tax dumping strategy, which allowed companies > to avoid payments on a large scale. On top of that, when in 2008 the > economic bubble burst, they once again held out their hands to be bailed > out by the EU and the IMF with additional multi-billion Euro benefits. > > When will EU representatives recognize that it's time to end that farce, > time to make the spalpeens understand that solidarity has to be mutual. > > http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/how-apples-irish-subsidiaries-paid-a-0005-percent-tax-rate-in-2014.html > Again: how is Apple doing anything different than what anyone else does: i.e. organizing its affairs to take advantage of the tax laws?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 18:38 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <031020161838049141%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #95148 |
In article <nsulnr$ls$1@news.datemas.de>, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > > Again: how is Apple doing anything different than what anyone else does: > i.e. organizing its affairs to take advantage of the tax laws? they're doing the same thing plenty of other companies do, who all get a free pass. <http://www.taxjusticeblog.org/archive/2016/05/google_and_tax_avoidance_ from.php> You may have heard about Google Inc.¹s restructuring last year, which resulted in the technology company becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of a new Delaware corporation called Alphabet Inc. What you may not know is how this restructuring can help the company potentially avoid millions in state taxes. ... As of the end of 2015, Google had $58.3 billion in offshore ³permanently reinvested² profits on which it pays no U.S. taxes, up from $47.4 billion in 2014.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 22:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <RlEIz.8803$9A2.3172@fx09.iad> |
| In reply to | #95148 |
On 2016-10-03 18:22, Alan Baker wrote: > On 2016-10-03 2:30 PM, Anonymous wrote: >> In article <031020161316422259%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam wrote: >> >>> now look up that it's not a sweetheart deal nor is it specific to >>> apple, but rather it's part of the tax code itself and completely >>> legal. >>> >>> also look up that apple isn't the only company to legally use the tax >>> code in that manner. google, microsoft, facebook, intel and others do >>> the same thing. >>> >>> after that, look up that ireland is siding with apple, *not* the eu. >>> >>> in other words, ireland doesn't want apple to pay and it's questionable >>> whether the eu has any say in the matter in the first place. >>> >>> <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-ireland-idUSKCN >>> 1180WR> >> >> The bad guys are sitting in the Irish parliament. For centuries Ireland >> tried to convert from an agricultural country to a worthless >> nonproductive banking nation at the EU's expense. And that plan was >> paid by the EU twice, by direct funding and by a big loss of taxes due >> to Ireland's irresponsibe tax dumping strategy, which allowed companies >> to avoid payments on a large scale. On top of that, when in 2008 the >> economic bubble burst, they once again held out their hands to be bailed >> out by the EU and the IMF with additional multi-billion Euro benefits. >> >> When will EU representatives recognize that it's time to end that farce, >> time to make the spalpeens understand that solidarity has to be mutual. >> >> http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/how-apples-irish-subsidiaries-paid-a-0005-percent-tax-rate-in-2014.html >> > > Again: how is Apple doing anything different than what anyone else does: > i.e. organizing its affairs to take advantage of the tax laws? Again: The Apple deal (and some others too) violated Ireland's own tax laws. These deals were kept secret until some furshlugginer so'n'so went whinging to the EU Commission about it. That's when the shit hit the fan. The Irish Parliamentarians are covered in it. Have a good day, -- Best, Wolf K kirkwood40.blogspot.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 22:51 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <031020162251070041%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #95209 |
In article <RlEIz.8803$9A2.3172@fx09.iad>, Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> wrote: > > > > Again: how is Apple doing anything different than what anyone else does: > > i.e. organizing its affairs to take advantage of the tax laws? > > Again: The Apple deal (and some others too) violated Ireland's own tax > laws. These deals were kept secret until some furshlugginer so'n'so went > whinging to the EU Commission about it. That's when the shit hit the > fan. The Irish Parliamentarians are covered in it. apple didn't violate ireland's tax laws or any other laws. it's also not an 'apple deal', it's the existing tax code that applies to all companies. google and other companies do the same thing. <http://www.taxjusticeblog.org/archive/2016/05/google_and_tax_avoidance_ from.php> ...As of the end of 2015, Google had $58.3 billion in offshore ³permanently reinvested² profits on which it pays no U.S. taxes, up from $47.4 billion in 2014.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 23:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <qLFIz.8859$RE2.4137@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #95216 |
On 2016-10-03 22:51, nospam wrote: > In article <RlEIz.8803$9A2.3172@fx09.iad>, Wolf K > <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > Again: how is Apple doing anything different than what anyone else does: >>> > > i.e. organizing its affairs to take advantage of the tax laws? >> > >> > Again: The Apple deal (and some others too) violated Ireland's own tax >> > laws. These deals were kept secret until some furshlugginer so'n'so went >> > whinging to the EU Commission about it. That's when the shit hit the >> > fan. The Irish Parliamentarians are covered in it. > apple didn't violate ireland's tax laws or any other laws. > > it's also not an 'apple deal', it's the existing tax code that applies > to all companies. [...] No, it doesn't. That's why some furshlugginer so'n'so went whinging to the EU Commission. They apparently suffered from the same delusion you do, and were shocked - shocked, I tell you! - to find they had to pay taxes at a higher rate than Apple (and several other companies). Have a good day, -- Best, Wolf K kirkwood40.blogspot.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 20:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nsv97c$ajc$2@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #95209 |
On 2016-10-03 7:20 PM, Wolf K wrote: > On 2016-10-03 18:22, Alan Baker wrote: >> On 2016-10-03 2:30 PM, Anonymous wrote: >>> In article <031020161316422259%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam wrote: >>> >>>> now look up that it's not a sweetheart deal nor is it specific to >>>> apple, but rather it's part of the tax code itself and completely >>>> legal. >>>> >>>> also look up that apple isn't the only company to legally use the tax >>>> code in that manner. google, microsoft, facebook, intel and others do >>>> the same thing. >>>> >>>> after that, look up that ireland is siding with apple, *not* the eu. >>>> >>>> in other words, ireland doesn't want apple to pay and it's questionable >>>> whether the eu has any say in the matter in the first place. >>>> >>>> <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-ireland-idUSKCN >>>> >>>> 1180WR> >>> >>> The bad guys are sitting in the Irish parliament. For centuries Ireland >>> tried to convert from an agricultural country to a worthless >>> nonproductive banking nation at the EU's expense. And that plan was >>> paid by the EU twice, by direct funding and by a big loss of taxes due >>> to Ireland's irresponsibe tax dumping strategy, which allowed companies >>> to avoid payments on a large scale. On top of that, when in 2008 the >>> economic bubble burst, they once again held out their hands to be bailed >>> out by the EU and the IMF with additional multi-billion Euro benefits. >>> >>> When will EU representatives recognize that it's time to end that farce, >>> time to make the spalpeens understand that solidarity has to be mutual. >>> >>> http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/how-apples-irish-subsidiaries-paid-a-0005-percent-tax-rate-in-2014.html >>> >>> >> >> Again: how is Apple doing anything different than what anyone else does: >> i.e. organizing its affairs to take advantage of the tax laws? > > Again: The Apple deal (and some others too) violated Ireland's own tax > laws. These deals were kept secret until some furshlugginer so'n'so went > whinging to the EU Commission about it. That's when the shit hit the > fan. The Irish Parliamentarians are covered in it. > > Have a good day, Ireland disagrees with you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 09:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <0TNIz.14489$SE2.5504@fx20.iad> |
| In reply to | #95220 |
On 2016-10-03 23:55, Alan Baker wrote: > On 2016-10-03 7:20 PM, Wolf K wrote: >> On 2016-10-03 18:22, Alan Baker wrote: >>> On 2016-10-03 2:30 PM, Anonymous wrote: >>>> In article <031020161316422259%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam wrote: >>>> >>>>> now look up that it's not a sweetheart deal nor is it specific to >>>>> apple, but rather it's part of the tax code itself and completely >>>>> legal. >>>>> >>>>> also look up that apple isn't the only company to legally use the tax >>>>> code in that manner. google, microsoft, facebook, intel and others do >>>>> the same thing. >>>>> >>>>> after that, look up that ireland is siding with apple, *not* the eu. >>>>> >>>>> in other words, ireland doesn't want apple to pay and it's questionable >>>>> whether the eu has any say in the matter in the first place. >>>>> >>>>> <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-ireland-idUSKCN >>>>> >>>>> 1180WR> >>>> >>>> The bad guys are sitting in the Irish parliament. For centuries Ireland >>>> tried to convert from an agricultural country to a worthless >>>> nonproductive banking nation at the EU's expense. And that plan was >>>> paid by the EU twice, by direct funding and by a big loss of taxes due >>>> to Ireland's irresponsibe tax dumping strategy, which allowed companies >>>> to avoid payments on a large scale. On top of that, when in 2008 the >>>> economic bubble burst, they once again held out their hands to be bailed >>>> out by the EU and the IMF with additional multi-billion Euro benefits. >>>> >>>> When will EU representatives recognize that it's time to end that farce, >>>> time to make the spalpeens understand that solidarity has to be mutual. >>>> >>>> http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/how-apples-irish-subsidiaries-paid-a-0005-percent-tax-rate-in-2014.html >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Again: how is Apple doing anything different than what anyone else does: >>> i.e. organizing its affairs to take advantage of the tax laws? >> >> Again: The Apple deal (and some others too) violated Ireland's own tax >> laws. These deals were kept secret until some furshlugginer so'n'so went >> whinging to the EU Commission about it. That's when the shit hit the >> fan. The Irish Parliamentarians are covered in it. >> >> Have a good day, > > Ireland disagrees with you. The Irish Government does. Of course. So what? -- Best, Wolf K kirkwood40.blogspot.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 10:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nt0nfg$f6v$5@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #95233 |
On 2016-10-04 6:10 AM, Wolf K wrote: > On 2016-10-03 23:55, Alan Baker wrote: >> On 2016-10-03 7:20 PM, Wolf K wrote: >>> On 2016-10-03 18:22, Alan Baker wrote: >>>> On 2016-10-03 2:30 PM, Anonymous wrote: >>>>> In article <031020161316422259%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> now look up that it's not a sweetheart deal nor is it specific to >>>>>> apple, but rather it's part of the tax code itself and completely >>>>>> legal. >>>>>> >>>>>> also look up that apple isn't the only company to legally use the tax >>>>>> code in that manner. google, microsoft, facebook, intel and others do >>>>>> the same thing. >>>>>> >>>>>> after that, look up that ireland is siding with apple, *not* the eu. >>>>>> >>>>>> in other words, ireland doesn't want apple to pay and it's >>>>>> questionable >>>>>> whether the eu has any say in the matter in the first place. >>>>>> >>>>>> <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-ireland-idUSKCN >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 1180WR> >>>>> >>>>> The bad guys are sitting in the Irish parliament. For centuries >>>>> Ireland >>>>> tried to convert from an agricultural country to a worthless >>>>> nonproductive banking nation at the EU's expense. And that plan was >>>>> paid by the EU twice, by direct funding and by a big loss of taxes due >>>>> to Ireland's irresponsibe tax dumping strategy, which allowed >>>>> companies >>>>> to avoid payments on a large scale. On top of that, when in 2008 the >>>>> economic bubble burst, they once again held out their hands to be >>>>> bailed >>>>> out by the EU and the IMF with additional multi-billion Euro benefits. >>>>> >>>>> When will EU representatives recognize that it's time to end that >>>>> farce, >>>>> time to make the spalpeens understand that solidarity has to be >>>>> mutual. >>>>> >>>>> http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/how-apples-irish-subsidiaries-paid-a-0005-percent-tax-rate-in-2014.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Again: how is Apple doing anything different than what anyone else >>>> does: >>>> i.e. organizing its affairs to take advantage of the tax laws? >>> >>> Again: The Apple deal (and some others too) violated Ireland's own tax >>> laws. These deals were kept secret until some furshlugginer so'n'so went >>> whinging to the EU Commission about it. That's when the shit hit the >>> fan. The Irish Parliamentarians are covered in it. >>> >>> Have a good day, >> >> Ireland disagrees with you. > > The Irish Government does. Of course. So what? > So they're in a far better position to know what is an is not legal in Ireland. :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 14:21 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <sqSIz.14554$SE2.8225@fx20.iad> |
| In reply to | #95249 |
On 2016-10-04 13:04, Alan Baker wrote: > On 2016-10-04 6:10 AM, Wolf K wrote: >> On 2016-10-03 23:55, Alan Baker wrote: >>> On 2016-10-03 7:20 PM, Wolf K wrote: >>>> On 2016-10-03 18:22, Alan Baker wrote: >>>>> On 2016-10-03 2:30 PM, Anonymous wrote: >>>>>> In article <031020161316422259%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> now look up that it's not a sweetheart deal nor is it specific to >>>>>>> apple, but rather it's part of the tax code itself and completely >>>>>>> legal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> also look up that apple isn't the only company to legally use the tax >>>>>>> code in that manner. google, microsoft, facebook, intel and others do >>>>>>> the same thing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> after that, look up that ireland is siding with apple, *not* the eu. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> in other words, ireland doesn't want apple to pay and it's >>>>>>> questionable >>>>>>> whether the eu has any say in the matter in the first place. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-ireland-idUSKCN >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1180WR> >>>>>> >>>>>> The bad guys are sitting in the Irish parliament. For centuries >>>>>> Ireland >>>>>> tried to convert from an agricultural country to a worthless >>>>>> nonproductive banking nation at the EU's expense. And that plan was >>>>>> paid by the EU twice, by direct funding and by a big loss of taxes due >>>>>> to Ireland's irresponsibe tax dumping strategy, which allowed >>>>>> companies >>>>>> to avoid payments on a large scale. On top of that, when in 2008 the >>>>>> economic bubble burst, they once again held out their hands to be >>>>>> bailed >>>>>> out by the EU and the IMF with additional multi-billion Euro benefits. >>>>>> >>>>>> When will EU representatives recognize that it's time to end that >>>>>> farce, >>>>>> time to make the spalpeens understand that solidarity has to be >>>>>> mutual. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/how-apples-irish-subsidiaries-paid-a-0005-percent-tax-rate-in-2014.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Again: how is Apple doing anything different than what anyone else >>>>> does: >>>>> i.e. organizing its affairs to take advantage of the tax laws? >>>> >>>> Again: The Apple deal (and some others too) violated Ireland's own tax >>>> laws. These deals were kept secret until some furshlugginer so'n'so went >>>> whinging to the EU Commission about it. That's when the shit hit the >>>> fan. The Irish Parliamentarians are covered in it. >>>> >>>> Have a good day, >>> >>> Ireland disagrees with you. >> >> The Irish Government does. Of course. So what? >> > > So they're in a far better position to know what is an is not legal in > Ireland. > > :-) Erm, what's legal in Ireland may not be legal in the EU, of which Ireland is a part. That's the nub of the legality issue. Of course the Irish Gov't is contesting the EU Commission's ruling. To accept it would be an admission of guilt. Hence my So what? As in "Do you really expect them to accept the ruling?" BTW, there is some doubt whether the Apple deal is legal in Ireland, since it amounts to an exception to the tax laws that apply to small businesses. But "We don't pay taxes, small businesses pay taxes", to paraphrase Helmsley. Prediction: there will be a lot of argy-bargy, Apple will "settle" with no "admission of guilt", and Ireland will get a small fraction of the taxes evaded by violation of the illegal state aid regulations. In future, Apple will pay more tax, somewhat above 1%. And everyone can go back to sleep. Have a good day, -- Best, Wolf K kirkwood40.blogspot.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 22:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <SlZIz.7627$pE2.5158@fx16.iad> |
| In reply to | #95250 |
On 2016-10-04 18:41, Nathan Hale wrote: > In article <sqSIz.14554$SE2.8225@fx20.iad> Absolutely nothing from Nathan Hale showed up here. Nathan apparnetly doesn't know how to post to a newsgroup. -- Best, Wolf K kirkwood40.blogspot.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 23:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nt1r60$ro$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #95270 |
Wolf K wrote: > On 2016-10-04 18:41, Nathan Hale wrote: >> In article <sqSIz.14554$SE2.8225@fx20.iad> > > Absolutely nothing from Nathan Hale showed up here. Nathan apparnetly > doesn't know how to post to a newsgroup. > He regrets that he has only zero lines to give to this thread ;-) -- Take care, Jonathan ------------------- LITTLE WORKS STUDIO http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 16:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nsuo9e$644$2@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #95143 |
On 2016-10-03 2:30 PM, Anonymous wrote: > In article <031020161316422259%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam wrote: > >> now look up that it's not a sweetheart deal nor is it specific to >> apple, but rather it's part of the tax code itself and completely >> legal. >> >> also look up that apple isn't the only company to legally use the tax >> code in that manner. google, microsoft, facebook, intel and others do >> the same thing. >> >> after that, look up that ireland is siding with apple, *not* the eu. >> >> in other words, ireland doesn't want apple to pay and it's questionable >> whether the eu has any say in the matter in the first place. >> >> <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-ireland-idUSKCN >> 1180WR> > > The bad guys are sitting in the Irish parliament. For centuries Ireland > tried to convert from an agricultural country to a worthless > nonproductive banking nation at the EU's expense. And that plan was > paid by the EU twice, by direct funding and by a big loss of taxes due > to Ireland's irresponsibe tax dumping strategy, which allowed companies > to avoid payments on a large scale. On top of that, when in 2008 the > economic bubble burst, they once again held out their hands to be bailed > out by the EU and the IMF with additional multi-billion Euro benefits. "Centuries"? What harm does it do Ireland to accept businesses that would not otherwise have a presence there, and get taxes from them? > > When will EU representatives recognize that it's time to end that farce, > time to make the spalpeens understand that solidarity has to be mutual. > > http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/how-apples-irish-subsidiaries-paid-a-0005-percent-tax-rate-in-2014.html >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 22:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <UtEIz.46341$Vf2.37142@fx04.iad> |
| In reply to | #95163 |
On 2016-10-03 19:06, Alan Baker wrote: [...] > What harm does it do Ireland to accept businesses that would not > otherwise have a presence there, and get taxes from them? [...] A whore solicits customers. -- Best, Wolf K kirkwood40.blogspot.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 10 [1] 2 3 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web