Apple countersues Motorola over multi-touch iPhone patents

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 99
    einein Posts: 1member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sippincider View Post


    Why WI?



    Speed and favorable to plaintiffs







    http://wistechnology.com/articles/3771/
  • Reply 22 of 99
    steve-jsteve-j Posts: 320member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post




    Heck, if you want to talk about copying, you might as well include all the GUI elements that Apple blatantly ripped off PalmOS.



    Personally, I wish that they had ripped off a few more...
  • Reply 23 of 99
    steve-jsteve-j Posts: 320member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bartfat View Post


    In that case, well, Palm OS to be frank, sucked balls. I mean the interface was clunky, the RAM was limited, and the colors... well there wasn't any. .





    This comment seems to be rooted in ignorance.











    There is color. There are also folders, which apple added just recently. The OS was way ahead of its time, and Apple is just catching up in certain important respects.
  • Reply 24 of 99
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    Apple copied its competitors with including a front-facing camera and dual microphones for noise cancellation.



    Oh please. Then I can call pretty much every notebook maker an Apple copier because macbooks were the first notebooks with cameras



    Front-facing camera and noise cancellation are additional, supplementary features, so that's like saying everyone also copied Apple with ambient light sensors on phones... that's just a logical step to take.



    Multitouch defines the very essence of the product. It's completely different



    Quote:

    Heck, if you want to talk about copying, you might as well include all the GUI elements that Apple blatantly ripped off PalmOS.



    That OS made by former Apple engineers?
  • Reply 25 of 99
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Steve-J View Post


    There are also folders, which apple added just recently. The OS was way ahead of its time, and Apple is just catching up in certain important respects.



    God nonononononononononononononono not another troll to this board. By your logic Windows Mobile 6 was "ahead of its time" just because it included folders before iOS. Which is downright batshit insane
  • Reply 26 of 99
    if only they could cancel each other out and we not hear from either company regarding legalities for a few years. sick of seeing and hearing about these legal thugs and their bull****.
  • Reply 27 of 99
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    1)

    3) The Sprint Evo 4g had the front-facing camera before the iPhone 4. The front-facing camera on the Evo is incredibly easy to use, arguably much easier to use than the FaceTime app on the iPhone.



    Funny I never heard of this incredible camera before. Pretty much everyone says iPhone 4's camera blows other smartphones out of the water, or at the very least gets even.

    And how is FaceTime not easy to use?



    Quote:

    And, I guarantee you that Apple will rip-off the idea of using 4g data speeds in a phone from competitors once Apple releases the next version. But, I'm sure you'll turn a blind eye to that one as well.



    Moderator, is this enough proof to you that he's a troll and you should.... you know.... BAN him?
  • Reply 28 of 99
    macnycmacnyc Posts: 342member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post


    So what you are saying is if you want a rational, intelligent discussion, an Apple forum is not the place to have it?



    I think it's obvious that there is no place to have a rational, intelligent discussion with you.
  • Reply 29 of 99
    macnycmacnyc Posts: 342member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    "If you can't compete, litigate."



    Sounds like a familiar quote from all the forum topics defending Apple when they got sued. Oh, how hilarious it is when the tables are turned! Hypocrites.



    Oh great, you're back?...
  • Reply 30 of 99
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Steve-J View Post


    There are also folders, which apple added just recently.



    As recent as 25 years ago.



  • Reply 31 of 99
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post


    Oh please. Then I can call pretty much every notebook maker an Apple copier because macbooks were the first notebooks with cameras



    Front-facing camera and noise cancellation are additional, supplementary features, so that's like saying everyone also copied Apple with ambient light sensors on phones... that's just a logical step to take.



    Multitouch defines the very essence of the product. It's completely different







    That OS made by former Apple engineers?



    apple engineers didn't make touch technology. apple aquired the company and the engineers. so what is your point regarding palm os?

    oh right, you are under the delusion that apple builds and invents/ codes everything in house and has never stolen/borrowed/used any idea/software/hardware that originated outside of infinite loop.
  • Reply 32 of 99
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Steve-J View Post


    This comment seems to be rooted in ignorance.











    There is color. There are also folders, which apple added just recently. The OS was way ahead of its time, and Apple is just catching up in certain important respects.



    "Certain important respects" being "whatever irrelevant similarities I can pull out of my ass to play to the tiresome Apple never innovates game."



    After all, painters had put pigment to canvas and framed it long before that pompous fool da Vinci thought of doing it, so I LOL at the Last Supper and it's so called "uniqueness."



    Also: every single thing ever made by man that has some attribute in common with something previous. I guess the discovery of how to make a fire might count as "inventive", except they obviously copied it from nature.
  • Reply 33 of 99
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by piot View Post


    As recent as 25 years ago.







    lovely idea. good thing they took a look over a PARC and saw the ALTO.
  • Reply 34 of 99
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Not at all.



    Nokia sued for patents that by all reports they refused to license under the fair and nondiscriminatory terms that they are obligated to offer. That's why Apple refused to license them.



    Nokia's report essentially confirms that. If they were using 'fair and nondiscriminatory' terms, as required by their membership in the cell phone consortium, there would be no need for lengthy negotiations. Simply "these are the terms that everybody in the industry receives."



    They were clearly trying to extract extra money from Apple and Apple exercised their rights to decline to pay illegally requested license fees.



    Unless I'm completely off base, patent holders are under zero obligation to license their patents to competitors, nor are they legally required to do so in a non-discriminatory way. A patent is a government-approved form of monopoly for a limited time period.
  • Reply 35 of 99
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post


    lovely idea. good thing they took a look over a PARC and saw the ALTO.



    Ooh, you mean the Alto that didn't have drop down menus, drag and drop, double clicking, one to one icon to file mapping, Finder, dynamic window refresh, check-box selectable items, or a Trash Can and never saw the light of day as a commercial product outside of a $17,000 word processing station? Because they couldn't figure out a way to make all that neat GUI stuff happen within constrained hardware?



    Mentioning Alto is a sure sign of reflexive, ignorance based Apple slapping.
  • Reply 36 of 99
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sippincider View Post


    Why WI?



    Probably due to a lack of back log?
  • Reply 37 of 99
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post


    lovely idea. good thing they took a look over a PARC and saw the ALTO.



    And PARC got $125 Million in stock sales for that look and license.
  • Reply 38 of 99
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post


    apple engineers didn't make touch technology. apple aquired the company and the engineers. so what is your point regarding palm os?

    oh right, you are under the delusion that apple builds and invents/ codes everything in house and has never stolen/borrowed/used any idea/software/hardware that originated outside of infinite loop.



    Apple acquired the IP, Engineers and all assets, just like Apple didn't developer NeXTSTep, but acquired all the IP, assets and Engineering talent.



    That's how it works.
  • Reply 39 of 99
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Unless I'm completely off base, patent holders are under zero obligation to license their patents to competitors, nor are they legally required to do so in a non-discriminatory way. A patent is a government-approved form of monopoly for a limited time period.



    Patent holders are not obligated to license their technologies, that part is correct.



    HOWEVER, a number of years ago when the lawsuits in the cell phone business got out of hand, all the major cell phone manufacturers got together and formed a group where each member of the group (including Nokia and Motorola) agreed to license all of their cell phone technologies to all comers for reasonable and nondiscriminatory rates.



    By refusing to license to Apple at the same rates, Nokia is in violation of the agreement.
  • Reply 40 of 99
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Patent holders are not obligated to license their technologies, that part is correct.



    HOWEVER, a number of years ago when the lawsuits in the cell phone business got out of hand, all the major cell phone manufacturers got together and formed a group where each member of the group (including Nokia and Motorola) agreed to license all of their cell phone technologies to all comers for reasonable and nondiscriminatory rates.



    By refusing to license to Apple at the same rates, Nokia is in violation of the agreement.



    I see, so it's a voluntary industry-wide agreement... sounds suspiciously like collusion to me.
Sign In or Register to comment.