I don't see the current "patent wars" as the end of innovation or anything to be depressed over. It's obvious that the laws weren't quick enough to catch up (as always) and these court cases will resolve the issues (or at least begin to set precedent). Eventually the industry will settle down. This is a good thing in the long run.
Wait - Apple accused Windows of violating their "look and feel" via litigation. They lost badly.
Now they are accusing Samsung of violating their "look and feel" via litigation.
What makes you think that their strategy has changed, or that they learned anything from their prior drubbing?
You need a history lesson. Apple sued Microsoft for copying Apple's code. Yes, the GUI was part of it, but not just for the look and feel. Apple had supplied the code to MS so that MS could develop Microsoft Office for Mac. Microsoft then took the code and used it to develop Windows.
The reason Apple lost in court is because some of the wording of the agreement between Apple and Microsoft was ambiguous - it apparently didn't specifically prohibit all instances of MS using the code for its own products. MS found a loophole in the language.
That's the lesson Apple learned - get good lawyers, and strongly protect all your inventions.
Although this *patent war* is creating uneasy tension even amongst a segment of consumers, perhaps it is what's needed to change patent laws. Often without a crisis, the motivation for change just isn't there. All to say, I am hoping this will get worse before it gets better. If all the companies simply shake hands and effect their own detente, the impetus for an overhaul will be lost.
Let escalation begin. When the dust finally settles, we can thank Apple once again for another revolution.
This could definitely take an ugly turn for Apple fans. I hope not. Apple's plans in the patent war could backfire horribly.
Time to shake hands, Steve, and move onto plan B... tight control is great... too controlling might not be. It only works until it doesn't... and then you're fucked.
This is predicated on the idea that nobody sues Apple unless Apples sues them, which is demonstrably untrue.
When apple sues someone its all "that's their right, and the others just should innovate themself and not steal from apple".
when someone else sues apple its all "the patent system is broken".
Less funny when you consider that different people say different things here on the internet. "It's all" is not a real description of anything in particular, other than your determination to see hypocrisy.
You need a history lesson. Apple sued Microsoft for copying Apple's code. Yes, the GUI was part of it, but not just for the look and feel. Apple had supplied the code to MS so that MS could develop Microsoft Office for Mac. Microsoft then took the code and used it to develop Windows.
The reason Apple lost in court is because some of the wording of the agreement between Apple and Microsoft was ambiguous - it apparently didn't specifically prohibit all instances of MS using the code for its own products. MS found a loophole in the language.
That's the lesson Apple learned - get good lawyers, and strongly protect all your inventions.
Apple didn't invent anything from the GUI. Xerox did. The GUI was plainly stolen.
I think we need to update the Patent Laws. Yes, companies have a right to protect their inventions and get reimbursed when other companies utilize them. However, it appears that every company out there is accused of stealing someone's else's ideas....whether by mistake or intent.
Maybe we need to shorten the patent protection period. Maybe there can be some law that fully defines the penalties for each abuse. It seems the only ones that are benefiting from all this litigation are, once again, the lawyers.
I think we should further simplify the law: Only Apple Inc is allowed to litigate, for whatever reason, any company for whatever reason, for example: bringing out rectangular tablets!!! (can you believe anyone had the nerve to steal the idea of bringing out a rectangular tablet). All claims from companies against Apple Inc are invalid. Especially concerning core technology like antenna's, 802.11, LTE, 3G, ...
This is predicated on the idea that nobody sues Apple unless Apples sues them, which is demonstrably untrue.
Actually, that's demonstrably untrue. This is not predicated upon that assumption at all. What it is predicated upon is something I already know you do not believe (past comments) .
... and I'm not here to argue something that cannot be proven by either side. Only time and the courts will tell.
Apple didn't invent anything from the GUI. Xerox did. The GUI was plainly stolen.
<headslap>
The GUI was plainly demonstrated and licensed by those who had no idea of its future importance. The fact Xerox gave away the farm and didn't get value for the vast majority of groundbreaking research at PARC doesn't mean it was stolen.
I think we should further simplify the law: Only Apple Inc is allowed to litigate, for whatever reason, any company for whatever reason, for example: bringing out rectangular tablets!!! (can you believe anyone had the nerve to steal the idea of bringing out a rectangular tablet). All claims from companies against Apple Inc are invalid. Especially concerning core technology like antenna's, 802.11, LTE, 3G, ...
Hey, when a company loses round one of a patent battle (ITC case preliminary judgement), then sues you with patents (2008+) that post-date your shipped hardware (2007) and cite a device-class that you invented nearly two decades ago (work in 1992), before the suing company even existed (1997), it might be smart to be a bit skeptical of the likelihood that the new patent case is anything other than a desperate delaying tactic.
Comments
Wait - Apple accused Windows of violating their "look and feel" via litigation. They lost badly.
Now they are accusing Samsung of violating their "look and feel" via litigation.
What makes you think that their strategy has changed, or that they learned anything from their prior drubbing?
You need a history lesson. Apple sued Microsoft for copying Apple's code. Yes, the GUI was part of it, but not just for the look and feel. Apple had supplied the code to MS so that MS could develop Microsoft Office for Mac. Microsoft then took the code and used it to develop Windows.
The reason Apple lost in court is because some of the wording of the agreement between Apple and Microsoft was ambiguous - it apparently didn't specifically prohibit all instances of MS using the code for its own products. MS found a loophole in the language.
That's the lesson Apple learned - get good lawyers, and strongly protect all your inventions.
Let escalation begin. When the dust finally settles, we can thank Apple once again for another revolution.
This could definitely take an ugly turn for Apple fans. I hope not. Apple's plans in the patent war could backfire horribly.
Time to shake hands, Steve, and move onto plan B... tight control is great... too controlling might not be. It only works until it doesn't... and then you're fucked.
This is predicated on the idea that nobody sues Apple unless Apples sues them, which is demonstrably untrue.
Kinda funny.
When apple sues someone its all "that's their right, and the others just should innovate themself and not steal from apple".
when someone else sues apple its all "the patent system is broken".
Less funny when you consider that different people say different things here on the internet. "It's all" is not a real description of anything in particular, other than your determination to see hypocrisy.
You need a history lesson. Apple sued Microsoft for copying Apple's code. Yes, the GUI was part of it, but not just for the look and feel. Apple had supplied the code to MS so that MS could develop Microsoft Office for Mac. Microsoft then took the code and used it to develop Windows.
The reason Apple lost in court is because some of the wording of the agreement between Apple and Microsoft was ambiguous - it apparently didn't specifically prohibit all instances of MS using the code for its own products. MS found a loophole in the language.
That's the lesson Apple learned - get good lawyers, and strongly protect all your inventions.
Apple didn't invent anything from the GUI. Xerox did. The GUI was plainly stolen.
I think we need to update the Patent Laws. Yes, companies have a right to protect their inventions and get reimbursed when other companies utilize them. However, it appears that every company out there is accused of stealing someone's else's ideas....whether by mistake or intent.
Maybe we need to shorten the patent protection period. Maybe there can be some law that fully defines the penalties for each abuse. It seems the only ones that are benefiting from all this litigation are, once again, the lawyers.
I think we should further simplify the law: Only Apple Inc is allowed to litigate, for whatever reason, any company for whatever reason, for example: bringing out rectangular tablets!!! (can you believe anyone had the nerve to steal the idea of bringing out a rectangular tablet). All claims from companies against Apple Inc are invalid. Especially concerning core technology like antenna's, 802.11, LTE, 3G, ...
This is predicated on the idea that nobody sues Apple unless Apples sues them, which is demonstrably untrue.
Actually, that's demonstrably untrue. This is not predicated upon that assumption at all. What it is predicated upon is something I already know you do not believe (past comments) .
... and I'm not here to argue something that cannot be proven by either side. Only time and the courts will tell.
Apple didn't invent anything from the GUI. Xerox did. The GUI was plainly stolen.
<headslap>
The GUI was plainly demonstrated and licensed by those who had no idea of its future importance. The fact Xerox gave away the farm and didn't get value for the vast majority of groundbreaking research at PARC doesn't mean it was stolen.
I think we should further simplify the law: Only Apple Inc is allowed to litigate, for whatever reason, any company for whatever reason, for example: bringing out rectangular tablets!!! (can you believe anyone had the nerve to steal the idea of bringing out a rectangular tablet). All claims from companies against Apple Inc are invalid. Especially concerning core technology like antenna's, 802.11, LTE, 3G, ...
Hey, when a company loses round one of a patent battle (ITC case preliminary judgement), then sues you with patents (2008+) that post-date your shipped hardware (2007) and cite a device-class that you invented nearly two decades ago (work in 1992), before the suing company even existed (1997), it might be smart to be a bit skeptical of the likelihood that the new patent case is anything other than a desperate delaying tactic.
The judges and juries will hash it out. Let them.