DoJ ramping up antitrust probe of $4.5B Nortel patent purchase by Apple, others

24

Comments

  • SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 24,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    I think your prediction is a sound one.



    It's the typical government tap dance to make sure everyone remembers that they are more powerful and important than everyone else. ...and so they remain 'painfully' employed.
  • adamcadamc Posts: 481member
    When will the DOJ start looking into the manipulation of Apple's share by the street big boys.



    No one is killing android, everyone is just protecting their IP and collecting royalties - who want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg - ask Nokia, Kodak, MS, etc.
  • cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AdamC View Post


    When will the DOJ start looking into the manipulation of Apple's share by the street big boys.



    That would be the SEC's job, in general.
  • eideardeideard Posts: 274member
    So, uh, no one here noticed a small group of corporations now holds the patents previously held by one corporation - and the question is "is this less competitive?"



    Duh?
  • inkswampinkswamp Posts: 337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    Hope those $2 Billion + was worth it for Apple. Lets be honest here, its intent in jumping into the patent race was to stifle competition.



    You have no way of knowing that, and it seems far less convoluted an argument to say Apple was buying these as a preemptive measure to avoid future patent trolls suing them. If you think it's about competition, then why did they buy these patents with some of the very companies who are their competition? Hard one to answer, huh?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    This is what is meant by "stifling competition": malicious intent on using patents to kill off a competitor.



    Apple has historically only initiated patent lawsuits where their ideas were taken wholesale by a competitor. Apple invests heavily in their R&D to produce their products. If you're so concerned about stifling competition, perhaps you should worry about companies who don't actually compete by developing their own ideas, but rather, by cloning Apple products and stealing ideas. Is that competition in your book? It's not in mine.
  • kreshkresh Posts: 379member
    Hopefully this will lead to the DOJ breaking Apple up.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 14,337member
    I agree with a couple others here that the deal will probably go thru. But I will also be surprised if there aren't some conditions attached.



    Had MS not been part of the group, the questions about possible anti-competitive actions would not have come up at the DoJ in my opinion. They had nothing to gain from this except keeping them out of Google's hands. Pair that with tag-team-like patent suits filed by Apple and MS against Android players and it's clear to me why an investigation was deemed appropriate.
  • orlandoorlando Posts: 601member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by inkswamp View Post


    You have no way of knowing that, and it seems far less convoluted an argument to say Apple was buying these as a preemptive measure to avoid future patent trolls suing them.



    Patent trolls don't make anything, so buying these patents won't protect Apple. They can only be used against companies that do actually make something and therefore could have violated one or more of these patents (ie not the trolls and right now the most likely target is Android).
  • jcozjcoz Posts: 251member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Orlando View Post


    Patent trolls don't make anything, so buying these patents won't protect Apple. They can only be used against companies that do actually make something and therefore could have violated one or more of these patents (ie not the trolls and right now the most likely target is Android).



    There is no "target" these patents, or at least some of them, had to do with 4g, which apple doesn't have patents for, and will be making a phone soon incorporating that technology.



    Gosh, call the po-lice, clearly Apple has only bought these as a weapon, and poor Google was bidding only to make those Patents free and open to everyone, just like their patent infringing, lawsuit inducing OS that they give away like the clap.
  • cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jcoz View Post


    There is no "target" these patents, or at least some of them, had to do with 4g, which apple doesn't have patents for, and will be making a phone soon incorporating that technology.



    Gosh, call the po-lice, clearly Apple has only bought these as a weapon, and poor Google was bidding only to make those Patents free and open to everyone, just like their patent infringing, lawsuit inducing OS that they give away like the clap.



    Now you're being ridiculous. Apple doesn't need to own LTE patents to make an LTE phone, any more than they needed 3G patents or GSM patents in the past. Apple needs them for offence or it needs them for defence, probably a mix of the two - and don't be surprised if the really important patents turn out not to be the LTE ones.
  • suddenly newtonsuddenly newton Posts: 13,038member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    Wow, major win for Google.



    A conditional patent portfolio buyout.



    Hope those $2 Billion + was worth it for Apple. Lets be honest here, its intent in jumping into the patent race was to stifle competition.



    This is what is meant by "stifling competition": malicious intent on using patents to kill off a competitor.



    Yup, fits the bill of anti-competitive measures to me.



    The DOJ is doing the work for Google.



    Actually, it's the smaller players in the industry coming together to prevent Google from become too powerful. Sounds like the free market is doing what it's supposed to do: keep competition alive. Of course, in I-love-google land, it means Google is the "underdog" and this was meant to "kill off a competitor"
  • island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jcoz View Post


    Gosh, call the po-lice, clearly Apple has only bought these as a weapon, ...



    Weapons of mass disruption...
  • orlandoorlando Posts: 601member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jcoz View Post


    Gosh, call the po-lice, clearly Apple has only bought these as a weapon, and poor Google was bidding only to make those Patents free and open to everyone, just like their patent infringing, lawsuit inducing OS that they give away like the clap.



    No I think Google was also buying these as a weapon. But the problem is patents are weapons. It is no longer about who makes the better products it is about who has the most weapons (ie who has the biggest patent portfolio). If you have a large portfolio you can copy another company's inventions because t will just end up as a cross licensing deal. If you don't have a large portfolio it almost worth going to work in the mornings because it is virtually impossible not to fall foul of some patent and get sued.
  • wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,477member
    This is about one thing only the sleazy buying of influence in Washington by Google. There is no evidence what so ever that indicates Apple intends to use the patents in the manner you indicate. However the same can not be said for Googgle which has a history of throwing money around to control technology.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    Wow, major win for Google.



    A conditional patent portfolio buyout.



    Hope those $2 Billion + was worth it for Apple. Lets be honest here, its intent in jumping into the patent race was to stifle competition.



    This is what is meant by "stifling competition": malicious intent on using patents to kill off a competitor.



    Yup, fits the bill of anti-competitive measures to me.



    The DOJ is doing the work for Google.



    Unfortunately this appears to be the case, Google got cheap so they decided to pad a few accounts in Washington to influence the Department of Justice. This is very sad considering Google propensity for theft.
  • wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,477member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Patranus View Post


    Schmidt has to get some payback for his vocal support of Obama.



    Spend enough cash in Washington and you can get the government to do the work you can't.
  • wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,477member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kresh View Post


    Hopefully this will lead to the DOJ breaking Apple up.



    I know fat chance. However it would do the nation a world of good to replace the most corrupt io our congressman especially the anti business ones. You can't build a great nation by smacking down success.
  • wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,477member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Uh, but I think Steve supported Obama also... no one's perfect.



    The big difference here is that Apple has not spent money to "influence" Washington the way Google has. I'm left with the impression that Google thinks that it can get away with anything if they spend enough money in Washington. A good portion of Googles operations these days are built around stolen IP.
  • galbigalbi Posts: 968member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


    Actually, it's the smaller players in the industry coming together to prevent Google from become too powerful. Sounds like the free market is doing what it's supposed to do: keep competition alive. Of course, in I-love-google land, it means Google is the "underdog" and this was meant to "kill off a competitor"



    A "Free market" system dont use the legal system to do "business".



    Are yo familiar with the term "invisible hand"? That is called market forces and none of it involves the patent system.



    Brush up on your economics.
  • mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 6,799member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Patranus View Post


    Schmidt has to get some payback for his vocal support of Obama.



    You do realize Apple is a very Pro-Democrat Corporation, right? Steve's not a Republican.
  • mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 6,799member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    The big difference here is that Apple has not spent money to "influence" Washington the way Google has. I'm left with the impression that Google thinks that it can get away with anything if they spend enough money in Washington. A good portion of Googles operations these days are built around stolen IP.



    And yes, Steve doesn't like to curry favor through lobbying ala Google. They lobby the minimum.
Sign In or Register to comment.