Hacker News Reader

Comment by kwyjibo | Hacker News Reader

They should sue Apple for false claims.

It isn't false. RIM didn't deny it loses bars when held a certain way. They were just pissed that that Apple showed it to be true. Apple did show it to be true so there is no false claim.

They are really comparing apples to oranges in the sense that they didn't talk about the iPhone's design flaw, just RF shadowing which is obvious.

There isn't any phone other than iPhone that loses the signal altogether by just touching one point on the phone.

> There isn't any phone other than iPhone that loses the signal altogether by just touching one point on the phone.

Perhaps, but I'm not entirely convinced that is true. It may be, but it may also be true that other phones do have a one point weakness which isn't marked by a visual cue. It's just that no one has tested a large selection of phones to locate that one point.

Of course, I'm not sure why it matters whether a pinky can drop dB ... you can't hold a phone with just 1 finger touching the side. This is just as much of an issue as arguing all phones have a major weakness because they drop dB when wrapped in aluminum foil.

and libel, there is clear intent to damage RIM's brand name and profitability. Steve is a dirty bird like that.

Huh? Were I to find out that Big Mac is people I would tell the press with the clear intent to damage McDonald’s brand name and profitability. Is that also libel? I would hope, anyway, that true claims are never libel.

In the US, truth is usually considered a defense against claims of libel. Not so elsewhere, such as the UK, if I recall correctly. (IANAL)

I would at least hope there's a legal difference between true-and-in-the-public-interest claims like "Big Macs are made of people" and true-but-scurrilous claims like "<closeted gay celebrity> has gay threesomes with rent boys".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com