Actually, I think you might be. I made a pretty clear distinction.
Quote:
It's not illegal, but I would certainly argue that it's unethical (or immoral, if you like)
So the owner of a patent needs to bring a product to market? Holding patents alone in immoral? Is that what you're saying?
Quote:
to file and/or buy up vaguely worded patents
Stop right there, because "vaguely worded patent applications" are not approved. I know this from a former US patent examiner (as I said, my brother, who now is an intellectual property lawyer). Patent apps must be INCREDIBLY detailed, and even then they usually take 2-3 submissions to be approved. The US Patent Office goes out if its way to deny patents, actually.
Quote:
not with the intention of using them directly, but solely to sit back and wait for someone to implement something that could possibly fall under the vague wording, see if they make any money and then demand licensing fees and/or sue.
So you're saying that it's immoral to own ideas? I don't really LIKE it, but it's part of our system of ownership.
Approve the Apps and let the developers work it out.
Its not Apples job to play patent judge.
Considering the fact that developers are required to include the ability to make make in-app purchases, you can see why it is in Apple's best interest to look into the matter. I see three options happening here and they are:
Developers pay the licensing fee and continue business as usual, with Pandora's Box getting opened.
Developers stop developing for iOS and move to another platform (Android/Windows Phone OS), which will affect their cash cow.
Apple removes the requirement for in-app purchases, which will affect their cash cow.
Apple is on a roll and the last thing they want is a wrench tossed into their gears.
Comments
I think you are confusing legality and morality.
Actually, I think you might be. I made a pretty clear distinction.
It's not illegal, but I would certainly argue that it's unethical (or immoral, if you like)
So the owner of a patent needs to bring a product to market? Holding patents alone in immoral? Is that what you're saying?
to file and/or buy up vaguely worded patents
Stop right there, because "vaguely worded patent applications" are not approved. I know this from a former US patent examiner (as I said, my brother, who now is an intellectual property lawyer). Patent apps must be INCREDIBLY detailed, and even then they usually take 2-3 submissions to be approved. The US Patent Office goes out if its way to deny patents, actually.
not with the intention of using them directly, but solely to sit back and wait for someone to implement something that could possibly fall under the vague wording, see if they make any money and then demand licensing fees and/or sue.
So you're saying that it's immoral to own ideas? I don't really LIKE it, but it's part of our system of ownership.
What does this have to do with Apple?
Approve the Apps and let the developers work it out.
Its not Apples job to play patent judge.
Considering the fact that developers are required to include the ability to make make in-app purchases, you can see why it is in Apple's best interest to look into the matter. I see three options happening here and they are:
- Developers pay the licensing fee and continue business as usual, with Pandora's Box getting opened.
- Developers stop developing for iOS and move to another platform (Android/Windows Phone OS), which will affect their cash cow.
- Apple removes the requirement for in-app purchases, which will affect their cash cow.
Apple is on a roll and the last thing they want is a wrench tossed into their gears.