or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple and Google agree to drop all ongoing lawsuits, will work toward patent reform
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple and Google agree to drop all ongoing lawsuits, will work toward patent reform - Page 4

post #121 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


How about DirectTV being bought by ATT?

...an that's a fact!

EDIT: It's now official if regulators agree and the $48.5B check clears.
http://about.att.com/story/att_to_acquire_directv.html

 

Massive. Just massive. Unbelievable.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #122 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
 

Quit it with Samsung's "innovate don't litigate" brainwashing.

 

Of course Apple should defend itself when it's sued, but the main thing to be said against Apple's offensive patent strategy (against, eg, Samsung) is that it's not working. Apple has invested tremendous top level attention in lawsuits that are offering meager payoffs and doing nothing substantive to hinder its competitors. There's always the possibility that one of these suits will hit the jackpot, but so far the strategy hasn't borne much fruit. 

post #123 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


How about DirectTV being bought by ATT?

...an that's a fact!

EDIT: It's now official if regulators agree and the $48.5B check clears.
http://about.att.com/story/att_to_acquire_directv.html

 

Blah that will be another bloated mess of a company. I'm not sure how they gain regulatory approval for such a significant consolidation of their competition.

post #124 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

How about DirectTV being bought by ATT?

...an that's a fact!

EDIT: It's now official if regulators agree and the $48.5B check clears.
http://about.att.com/story/att_to_acquire_directv.html

I keep waiting for an "AT&TV" punchline.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #125 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Huh?! Can you explain how that would be the case?

What would be the point of licensing a way to send 1's and 0's over a network if they aren't patent protected?

If everybody had taken your view, there would not be an internet. There are other goals than putting money to rot in a bank.

post #126 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

59 cases.

2013.

59 times Apple was sued by patent trolls last year alone.

A strong legal team and investment in legal resources is essential for Apple.

Where did you ever get the idea that I think Apple shouldn't defend itself? 1oyvey.gif
Quote:
Quit it with Samsung's "innovate don't litigate" brainwashing.

Don't assume that I think that: I don't in the least!

However I do believe that Apple "could have" went about this with a different strategy and without the childish "war mongering" statements. Steve Jobs' very own beliefs and training were thrown to the curb when he allowed himself a moment of undisciplined reaction to his extreme disappointment with.... yes... being ripped off. I also said I think i would have succumbed (and said far worse) than he even did. It still doesn't... and didn't... play well to the public (yeah who cares!) and didn't get Apple one step closer to bringing that criminal enterprise to their knees.
Quote:
Apple has 64bit mobile devices, leading the market.

No shit Fred?! As well as Touch ID that works among a list of other advances that will take a long time for Samsung or anyone else to copy. So yes... thanks for agreeing with me that Apple should continue along that path.

As to fighting against the Copy Cats: patience, silence, surprise and subterfuge can also work wonders.

Going in Gung-Ho Marine-style makes you look like a bully, a) even if you're fighting the good fight or trying to defend yourself by going on the offensive before needing to be on defense; and b) you rarely if ever "win" decisively without casualties. In Apple's case, there have been assorted unmeasurable casualties amid the "winnings" which to them is peanuts, because they're fighting over principles first and foremost. Well aren't they?

Working with Google behind the scenes to get Samsung thrown out of the OHA before they're ready, is not "bending over" nor calling for "innovate don't litigate" by any stretch of the imagination. I call it "cleverness" in The Art of War.... a title that you may find enjoyable and applicable in business if you ever find the time.
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #127 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

59 cases.

2013.

59 times Apple was sued by patent trolls last year alone.

A strong legal team and investment in legal resources is essential for Apple.

Where did you ever get the idea that I think Apple shouldn't defend itself? 1oyvey.gif
Quote:
Quit it with Samsung's "innovate don't litigate" brainwashing.

Don't assume that I think that: I don't in the least!

However I do believe that Apple "could have" went about this with a different strategy and without the childish "war mongering" statements. Steve Jobs' very own beliefs and training were thrown to the curb when he allowed himself a moment of undisciplined reaction to his extreme disappointment with.... yes... being ripped off. I also said I think i would have succumbed (and said far worse) than he even did. It still doesn't... and didn't... play well to the public (yeah who cares!) and didn't get Apple one step closer to bringing that criminal enterprise to their knees.
Quote:
Apple has 64bit mobile devices, leading the market.

No shit Fred?! As well as Touch ID that works among a list of other advances that will take a long time for Samsung or anyone else to copy. So yes... thanks for agreeing with me that Apple should continue along that path.

As to fighting against the Copy Cats: patience, silence, surprise and subterfuge can also work wonders.

Going in Gung-Ho Marine-style makes you look like a bully, a) even if you're fighting the good fight or trying to defend yourself by going on the offensive before needing to be on defense; and b) you rarely if ever "win" decisively without casualties. In Apple's case, there have been assorted unmeasurable casualties amid the "winnings" which to them is peanuts, because they're fighting over principles first and foremost. Well aren't they?

Working with Google behind the scenes to get Samsung thrown out of the OHA before they're ready, is not "bending over" nor calling for "innovate don't litigate" by any stretch of the imagination. I call it "cleverness" in The Art of War.... a title that you may find enjoyable and applicable in business if you ever find the time.

It's very simple: if justice had been carried out in the courts, Samsung would have had a huge fine and many products banned. Steve Jobs and Tim Cook were wholly right to seek that justice.
iPad a Dream.
Reply
iPad a Dream.
Reply
post #128 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

59 cases.

2013.

59 times Apple was sued by patent trolls last year alone.

A strong legal team and investment in legal resources is essential for Apple.

Quit it with Samsung's "innovate don't litigate" brainwashing.

Apple has 64bit mobile devices, leading the market.

Back up there sparkles. Yes Apple was sued 59 times but the total for the top ten combined is 410 with Amazon sued 50 times, AT&T 45 and Google 39. In that perspective, you can see that all companies get sued and Apple isn't that much more.
post #129 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

It's very simple: if justice had been carried out in the courts, Samsung would have had a huge fine and many products banned. Steve Jobs and Tim Cook were wholly right to seek that justice.

Justice was carried out in the courts. Apple won some and lost some. Doesn't matter if you agree with them or not, the courts did the job.
post #130 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

It's very simple: if justice had been carried out in the courts, Samsung would have had a huge fine and many products banned. Steve Jobs and Tim Cook were wholly right to seek that justice.

What a huge blunder IF Apple didn't consider the fact before hand that they might lose, regardless of evidence to the contrary which was on display for all to see and witness.

ALSO... who in their right mind thought this case was going to be pushed up to the front of the docket to make a difference in the short... or as we have witnessed... the long term. Apple knows (don't they?) that tech changes so rapidly that there was no way that this case was going to meander through the courts and get ANYTHING banned that would make a difference to their bottom line or to level the playing field for those that follow the rules.

Yes... it was Apple's right to pursue justice... no doubt about that. I have problems accepting that it was the best way, considering all of the kangaroos posing as judges jumping around in court rooms around the world. Expecting justice from any of them is as folly as wishing for a time machine to go back and right the IFs gone wrong.

At the end of the day, you need to answer the question regarding going to and putting faith in the court system, and what you had to give up to do it: was it worth it?

IMHO: no.... because the beast called IF raised it's unfair, lengthy and Medusa-like head.

Apple won on principle as they should have. Although they lost the ability to stand to the side as an adult and laugh at the Copy Cats, knowing those Copy Cats were always going to be chasing a moving goal like children on the playground. Also, criminals ALWAYS slip up somewhere given time. We're seeing it with Samsung as I write: their stock, products, factories, blogs, blitz advertising, and guessing where Apple is going to be next (Gear) is pure comedy.

As for Google?
"Welcome back... on our terms biotch! Who's your (sugar) daddy? Who pays the mobile-search bills around here? Thought so. Kick that ugly Asian Copy Cat under the bus and the bus driver (Andy Rubin) with 'em... and we'll talk about we can do to get along in the future. You obviously need us, more than we need you. (ya Friggin' One-trick Pony Poseur)".... 1smoking.gif
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #131 of 136
I'd also like to add that IMHO, Tim Cook is the guy that everyone should be afraid of in tech and is far more dangerous than Steve Jobs ever was. Steve wore his heart and emotions on his sleeve as they say. Tim: what's behind those steely-blue eyes really? We're talking about a slow-talking Southern Gentleman on the outside and a what I think is a very sharp and keen strategist internally.

He's not the kind to stoop and play "Little ADS Boys Playing Business" games. He'll make his mistakes (Bowers), but he knows where he's taking Apple, how to do it, and he is going to surprise the "poop" out of the kids out there that think they can keep up with him. 1smoking.gif
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #132 of 136
Quote:
The background as to why the two companies decided to the peace treaty is unclear, though the step forward does not impact Apple's ongoing lawsuits with other handset makers that use Google's Android operating system, including Samsung.

 My guess on this, Google was probably running into issue selling Motorola to Lenovo. Levono was probably looking for guaranties from Google if Apple won its cases that Google would pay the costs. Google was seeing that Apple was winning it cases against anyone using Android and it was not looking good for them long term. When Google sold the Motorola home division that has to settle a long standing lawsuit Tivo had against the STB business before ARRIS would buy them. It probably the same thing is happening here and Google needs to get Motorola off the books fast or it is going to be an issue for them. I also suspect they can not just shut it down either.

 

Also the reason there was no cross license deal was the fact that Motorola attempted to blackmail Apple in to freely licensing its iOS IP in exchange for the SEP they had. Today it is not the hardware IP is all that important since it the actually GUI IP, and Apple has this and Motorola/Google does not.

post #133 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

 My guess on this, Google was probably running into issue selling Motorola to Lenovo. Levono was probably looking for guaranties from Google if Apple won its cases that Google would pay the costs.

The sale terms are already set AFAIK. The only thing both are waiting on is the regulators to sign off on it. The deal was done otherwise several months ago. Lenovo was already obligated to the purchase.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

 
Also the reason there was no cross license deal was the fact that Motorola attempted to blackmail Apple in to freely licensing its iOS IP in exchange for the SEP they had. Today it is not the hardware IP is all that important since it the actually GUI IP, and Apple has this and Motorola/Google does not.
No one knows really if Motorola has IP just as strong (or weak depending on your view) as Apple's. They filed a handful of cases using SEP's tho I think a few non-SEP's were originally in the mix. The MM case filed at the ITC against Apple using 7 (6?) non-FRAND patents, apparently with Siri in the sights, was pulled before it was ever adjudicated.

So there's really no solid evidence of MM's patents being weak and primarily FRAND-pledged to the best of my knowledge. They haven't asserted enough of them to get any sense of their strength or distribution IMO. SEP's were simply the low-hanging fruit, the fastest and easiest to start with.

Hopefully there won't now be any reason for any of the MM patents, almost all of them being retained by Google, to be used offensively in the future. Chapter closed.
Edited by Gatorguy - 5/19/14 at 7:16am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #134 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


How about DirectTV being bought by ATT?

...an that's a fact!

EDIT: It's now official if regulators agree and the $48.5B check clears.
http://about.att.com/story/att_to_acquire_directv.html

 

Yea, that's no good either.

post #135 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


The sale terms are already set AFAIK. The only thing both are waiting on is the regulators to sign off on it. The deal was done otherwise several months ago. Lenovo was already obligated to the purchase.

This is not true, I can guaranty you the deal is not done, it most likely has contingencies in place specifically about the Apple/Motorola Dispute. There is a due diligence phase which is going on right now which Lenovo is digging through everything that is happening at Motorola both public and not public and as those things are uncover Lenovo has an opportunity to renegotiate the deal. If Lenovo does not like what they see under the covers they probable had an option to walk away as well.

 

I believe Google has to settle the matter with Apple just as they had to settle the Tivo matter before ARRIS would buy the STB business. This is not so uncommon in the acquisition business, is you suing a company and they are being bought this is the best time to get what you want, since most time a buyer does not want to take on this issue.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

No one knows really if Motorola has IP just as strong (or weak depending on your view) as Apple's. They filed a handful of cases using SEP's tho I think a few non-SEP's were originally in the mix. The MM case filed at the ITC against Apple using 7 (6?) non-FRAND patents, apparently with Siri in the sights, was pulled before it was ever adjudicated.

So there's really no solid evidence of MM's patents being weak and primarily FRAND-pledged to the best of my knowledge. They haven't asserted enough of them to get any sense of their strength or distribution IMO. SEP's were simply the low-hanging fruit, the fastest and easiest to start with.

Hopefully there won't now be any reason for any of the MM patents, almost all of them being retained by Google, to be used offensively in the future. Chapter closed.
 
Actually if Motorola had a lot more than SEP they would have used them since Apple was going after them for Non SEP IP. Motorola even attempted prior to Google buying them to force Apple to freely license all of the iOS Non-SEP in exchange for the license on the SEP Motorola had. Remember all the GUI IP was coming from Google, Motorola did not have time to develop and patent their own. On the Siri piece Motorola was trying to claim their prior Voice recognition IP they had in the older phones was valid, the problem is most all voice recognition IP is owned by Nuance Communications Inc in which both Motorola and Apple both license. Siri is beyond just voice recognition.
post #136 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

This is not true, I can guaranty you the deal is not done,
Since Google already reported Motorola operations as discontinued in their April results, and submitted to the SEC, it's a done deal IMHO. Otherwise MM wouldn't list as "discontinued operations" until it was a done deal would it?

"On January 29, 2014, we entered into an agreement with Lenovo Group Limited providing for the disposition of the Motorola Mobile business. As such, financial results of Motorola Mobile are presented as “Net loss from discontinued operations” on the Consolidated Statements of Income for the quarter ended March 31, 2013 and 2014..."
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple and Google agree to drop all ongoing lawsuits, will work toward patent reform