Originally Posted by tt92618
Also, I'm not sure of the validity of the moral argument here, and I'm not sure which side of that argument you are on. Some people here are essentially arguing that Apple ought to allow other companies to infringe their IP simply as a gesture of public goodwill. I'm not sure where you stand in that debate.
These companies can and should just pay license fees for most
of the patents used. Some of (and I will agree) these patents that exist out there that Apple and other companies hold are completely pointless and should not be upheld because they are so broad; "Object-Oriented Graphic System" and "objective framework for managing on screen view elements" are two that come to mind. I mean, I use objects for managing view elements in my own written code when I design websites in PHP (fk yeah, PHP) and it could vaguely
be considered infringing on the design pattern described by the patent.
However, there are others that should be upheld, such as the specific components that go into creating multi-touch mobile devices, (a software patents) "Unlocking A Device By Performing Gestures On An Unlock Image", and "List Scrolling And Document Translation, Scaling, And Rotation On A Touch-Screen Display". These have merit because the same style of conductive-style touch screens were not available at significant quantities until Apple pushed the iPhone into the market AND they were the first to patent (and use) this on mobile devices
(inb4 Microsoft Surface which was patented but not under a "mobile device" category making them separate). Same goes for the unlock-swipe gesture and the gestures for manipulating a screen on touch-screen devices.
The patent system is a mess when it comes to software (and hardware in some cases), I feel like there should be another method in addition to the standard patent system (which works fine for concepts but not software) to manage software patents. Most of these problems with the patent system are obvious whenever there is software involved.