"Facebook and Yahoo end patent spat", yeah, whatever

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2190072/facebook-yahoo-patent-spat

Even theinquirer got it wrong as most media. It should have read:

Yahoo: we are so stupid, sorry for everything. [it did get them to lose their high-profile employee in the process, so they got their punishment, yay]

Not sure what you mean. Sueing is normal business practices. Just that they should have sort this out without expensive lawyers.  

I mean that yahoo's patent trolling has gone flat on its face. And the media calls it a "spat" which suggest some symmetry here. There is no symmerty. Yahoo was trolling, and Microsoft too. The only thing to notice is there are no Microsoft employees with balls like Crockford.

So... if Yahoo was just trolling, why did Facebook settled and what did they cross-licensed?

Seems to me that Yahoo sued, Facebook figured out they were in the wrong and preferred to settle with a cross-licensing agreement instead of going to court where they would have probably found guilty and pay a lot of money.

Of course, if you have insider information about the deal that shows how Yahoo had nothing and was simply trying to extort money from those hapless souls at Facebook, feel free to present your evidence.

Well over here in the UK a judge has ruled that Samsung tablets aren't infringing Apple's because they're "not cool".

Apparently understated design and extreme simplicity (which is what the Samsung tablets supposedly do not have) are now Apple's property though...

And I fully agree with Apple - it's no coincidence the design is similar. Of course it's not. They're two smallish rectangular screens. There's not exactly a lot of room for being unsimilar...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18773690