I has nothing to do with the time the 'patent' is issued.
Software patents should never be allowed.
They stifle innovation and prevent independent software makers from writing great software.
With software patents you can only write software if you are protected by a large corporation.
Software - and thereby the investment in it - is already protected by copyright and that is sufficient.
I am not at all impressed from what I read from the patent you mention.
J.
It is arguable. If a small programmer invents a new useful software, and it were un-patentable, then the mega-corporation would simply reinvent it and with their greater marketing resources put the small firm out of business. Under the current system the mega-corporation would have to buy out the small developer in order to obtain the rights to use the program functionality.
Of course in this case we have two mega-corporations.
You are probably right about the patent though. The only thing unique about Motorola's claim is that it is for a mobile device. Apple most likely has earlier patents on similar technology but perhaps not with the description for use with a mobile device.
I have to laugh, though.
Is that the same "mighty" firm that has been sanctioned 4 times by the judge in just one trial and who keeps violating direct judicial orders? And the one who managed their time so badly that Apple had hours to present the final evidence in the case without any rebuttal from Samsung? And the one where they voluntarily provided the evidence Apple needed to demonstrate that consumers were being confused?
I'm not at all impressed with this "mighty" law firm.
Not to mention, of course that their facts are all wrong. They claim that Apple started this by going thermonuclear on Google. In reality, Apple has NEVER filed suit against Google. Even the Motorola suits were started by Motorola, not Apple.
So much for 'don't be evil'.
Regardless of Quinn's performance on the Samsung case, which I admit has been less than stellar, they are considered among the best in the industry. So its not that surprising that a law blog is praising them.
And where did they say that Apple started this against Google first? All that was mentioned was that Apple decided on going thermonuclear; something parroted by most people on this site.
The question to ask is can the US withstand the unemployment created by the destruction of the Apple ecosystem of business partners due to the banning of Apple products.
Oops, guess I hit Skil right in the feelings again.
After all the anti-anything-not-Apple bashing that goes on here, we really wouldn't want you to feel the same things you project. That'd just be wrong.
The question to ask is can the US withstand the unemployment created by the destruction of the Apple ecosystem of business partners due to the banning of Apple products.
Is the ITC that stupid, I don't think so.
You mean all 47k of them? If EVERY single Apple employee in the US was let go today, the unemployment rate would tick up 0.03%. I realize that there are others employed indirectly, but why would they be losing their jobs? For example, if a retail store couldn't sell iPhones, they would simply sell something else.
After all the anti-anything-not-Apple bashing that goes on here, we really wouldn't want you to feel the same things you project. That'd just be wrong.
Apple is nearly continuously on the defensive regarding patent suits, everyone wants a piece of Apple. Started way back with the Apple ][, when the Beatles decided to pad their pockets with Apple's cash. Maybe Samsung would like to cease copying the icons on the iPhone & the bounce effect when the end of a document is reached. It's blatant copying like that that Apple is trying to stop. Since before Apple sought court remedies, they have offered Samsung the chance to license Apple's patents & avoid this mess
What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment?
More like paid Apple off. That $150 was a silent settlement so it wouldn't come out in a courtroom how blatantly they stole everything from Apple & screwed them over.
People don't want to know more than what helps their argument. There is a reason Apple goes after everyone over patents, it's cause for years they've repeatedly been ripped off & doing nothing just about bought them bankruptcy.
All that aside I don't know enough about the Motorola patents to know if they have a legitimate claim or not. If the infringement is legit it should be recognized as such by lovers & haters alike. I know I can't agree enough though with the statements that we need serious patent reform, it's just a massive train wreck out there and it's only getting worse.
Here is the thing. Apple is trying to get some leverage going forward for the coming battle over 4G, in which they are at a monumental disadvantage. Do you really think Apple can go head to head with Samsung or Moto in regards to this? They will lose that battle and they know it so they're trying to gain the upper hand first. Also, did someone on here really try to claim Apple invented swipe to unlock? Really? C'mon guys, if you wanna be fanboys that's fine but at least be a bit honest!
Here is the thing. Apple is trying to get some leverage going forward for the coming battle over 4G, in which they are at a monumental disadvantage.
There will be no battle over a standard. Any patents therein will be licensed legally and fairly, period. Worldwide. It's just about the only thing we as a species can agree on. At least in the countries fortunate enough to have these standards.
I don't see what all the fuss is about. A modern smartphone utilizes roughly 9938273478392 technologies that neither Apple nor Google invented.
Apple patented making the phone in a usable shape, as well as touching it. (Touch... Swipe... whatever)
Anyone is free to make a smartphone that uses the useful 9938273478392 technologies, as long as it doesn't come in the highly inovative usable shape or use the amazing breakthrough of being able to touch it.
Google/Motorola it appears, has the patent on the breakthroughs of talking into a phone, as well as the technology of having your *smart* phone actually display usable information (woah, who came up with that?)
Based on those amazing inovations, these companies are completely encouraging other companies to compete using the 9938273478392 technologies- just as long as their users can't touch them, speak into them, come in a usable shape, or display any information.
Whats the problem?
The patent system is encouraging innovation as it is supposed to. As we speak (errr... type) I'll bet Google is hard at work innovating new technologies that will enable them to compete developing a 'shapeless blob' technology as well as elite 'hover' technologies so that your shapeless phone can hover near you so you won't have to touch it.
Apple is no doubt hard at work developing technology that can both read your mind, and inject information directly into your brain. That way you won't have to talk into your phone or have it display any information to you.
That would be some serious innovation. So clearly our patent system isn't the problem and everything is working as intended.
I laughed at your comment almost as hard as when i laughed when Tim Cook claimed Apple innovates and everyone else copies. Then brings out a phone with 4G TWO YEARS LATER THAN EVERYONE ELSE
But your comment was pretty funny too, i ROFL'd, LOL! Good one! You crack me up.
You know what, i bet they BINGED IT!!! HAHAA. Oh man, Good stuff Skil.
There will be no battle over a standard. Any patents therein will be licensed legally and fairly, period. Worldwide. It's just about the only thing we as a species can agree on. At least in the countries fortunate enough to have these standards.
But in the current patent environment there is little incentive to patent a standard. What happens when Google and Motorola develop that next gen wireless technology that has way more bandwidth and is the equivalent of going from dialup to broadband? Are they going to seek a '5G' patent and license under a FRAND patent? Maybe if there were 10,000 competing companies who all could benefit and Google could make a little money off each. In our current environment Google is around 60% of the market and Apple is a little over 30%. Google will just file it as a proprietary patent and not license it to Apple at all.
No one is going to want a smart phone that still runs on 'dialup'. If Google were to develop that patent first they could pretty easily see any viable alternative design and patent the bejesus out of anything similar. No one could head in that direction without a 90ton lawsuit. That is what our patent system encourages today. Look at technology. Look at the obvious direction it is heading. Spend a lot of money to punch a tunnel to get a little bit ahead. Patent the crap out of where you are. When the others get there- Roadblock! Do something goofy and awkward to go around or pay me a ton of money *IF* I choose to let you through.
The patent system in the technology sector does not protect innovation. It thwarts competition. The only patents that should stand are FRAND patents and the filer needs to include their terms. If deemed unreasonable they dont get the patent issued. If reasonable everyone has to actually pay. Under the current rules companies can just offer to pay half a penny for any FRAND license and when the holder refuses you call them unreasonable and don't pay unless they sue you :-/
Innovation in technology is its own reward because consumers demand it. But then how will Apple be rewarded for its innovation? Ermm.... I'd say 100billion in the bank and the mongo market cap are pretty good incentives. Its an enviable spot and a great job by Apple. They could choose to copy what everyone else that has been in their shoes has done- which is to try to lock out competition and kick everyone else down the hill (and every company that has done that has both failed and only generated ill will.... I mean seriously do you know anyone that really wants Windows phone to do well?) or they could be innovative and grow to a trillion dollar company by innovating more and just leaving everyone in their dust
lol oh yeah I forgot about that bit of sillyness, until I start seeing down speeds over a mb im gonna go ahead and sort of disagree on the "4g" capabilities of my 4S on AT&T.
Perhaps sleepy was referring to the upcoming product launch where Cook brags about being in an innovator and presents a LTE iphone. I am sure that by now all Android phones have the ability to tunnel through time and forsee future apple keynotes to for pre emptive trolling. I mean they are afterall way more advanced.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn
I has nothing to do with the time the 'patent' is issued.
Software patents should never be allowed.
They stifle innovation and prevent independent software makers from writing great software.
With software patents you can only write software if you are protected by a large corporation.
Software - and thereby the investment in it - is already protected by copyright and that is sufficient.
I am not at all impressed from what I read from the patent you mention.
J.
It is arguable. If a small programmer invents a new useful software, and it were un-patentable, then the mega-corporation would simply reinvent it and with their greater marketing resources put the small firm out of business. Under the current system the mega-corporation would have to buy out the small developer in order to obtain the rights to use the program functionality.
Of course in this case we have two mega-corporations.
You are probably right about the patent though. The only thing unique about Motorola's claim is that it is for a mobile device. Apple most likely has earlier patents on similar technology but perhaps not with the description for use with a mobile device.
Originally Posted by Shidell
Apple started the patent wars. This is their fault.
Regardless of Quinn's performance on the Samsung case, which I admit has been less than stellar, they are considered among the best in the industry. So its not that surprising that a law blog is praising them.
And where did they say that Apple started this against Google first? All that was mentioned was that Apple decided on going thermonuclear; something parroted by most people on this site.
Is the ITC that stupid, I don't think so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Oops, guess I hit Skil right in the feelings again.
After all the anti-anything-not-Apple bashing that goes on here, we really wouldn't want you to feel the same things you project. That'd just be wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamC
The question to ask is can the US withstand the unemployment created by the destruction of the Apple ecosystem of business partners due to the banning of Apple products.
Is the ITC that stupid, I don't think so.
You mean all 47k of them? If EVERY single Apple employee in the US was let go today, the unemployment rate would tick up 0.03%. I realize that there are others employed indirectly, but why would they be losing their jobs? For example, if a retail store couldn't sell iPhones, they would simply sell something else.
Originally Posted by Shidell
After all the anti-anything-not-Apple bashing that goes on here, we really wouldn't want you to feel the same things you project. That'd just be wrong.
Particularly when your entire premise is wrong.
Cheers !
War gets ugly. I knew Google will join Samsung fight against Apple. What a mess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
What's next, going back to comments that pretend Microsoft saved Apple with their $150 million investment?
More like paid Apple off. That $150 was a silent settlement so it wouldn't come out in a courtroom how blatantly they stole everything from Apple & screwed them over.
People don't want to know more than what helps their argument. There is a reason Apple goes after everyone over patents, it's cause for years they've repeatedly been ripped off & doing nothing just about bought them bankruptcy.
All that aside I don't know enough about the Motorola patents to know if they have a legitimate claim or not. If the infringement is legit it should be recognized as such by lovers & haters alike. I know I can't agree enough though with the statements that we need serious patent reform, it's just a massive train wreck out there and it's only getting worse.
Here is the thing. Apple is trying to get some leverage going forward for the coming battle over 4G, in which they are at a monumental disadvantage. Do you really think Apple can go head to head with Samsung or Moto in regards to this? They will lose that battle and they know it so they're trying to gain the upper hand first. Also, did someone on here really try to claim Apple invented swipe to unlock? Really? C'mon guys, if you wanna be fanboys that's fine but at least be a bit honest!
Originally Posted by bb321
Here is the thing. Apple is trying to get some leverage going forward for the coming battle over 4G, in which they are at a monumental disadvantage.
There will be no battle over a standard. Any patents therein will be licensed legally and fairly, period. Worldwide. It's just about the only thing we as a species can agree on. At least in the countries fortunate enough to have these standards.
Yeah, sorry, you're wrong dude. I'm not just talking about the standard.
I don't see what all the fuss is about. A modern smartphone utilizes roughly 9938273478392 technologies that neither Apple nor Google invented.
Apple patented making the phone in a usable shape, as well as touching it. (Touch... Swipe... whatever)
Anyone is free to make a smartphone that uses the useful 9938273478392 technologies, as long as it doesn't come in the highly inovative usable shape or use the amazing breakthrough of being able to touch it.
Google/Motorola it appears, has the patent on the breakthroughs of talking into a phone, as well as the technology of having your *smart* phone actually display usable information (woah, who came up with that?)
Based on those amazing inovations, these companies are completely encouraging other companies to compete using the 9938273478392 technologies- just as long as their users can't touch them, speak into them, come in a usable shape, or display any information.
Whats the problem?
The patent system is encouraging innovation as it is supposed to. As we speak (errr... type) I'll bet Google is hard at work innovating new technologies that will enable them to compete developing a 'shapeless blob' technology as well as elite 'hover' technologies so that your shapeless phone can hover near you so you won't have to touch it.
Apple is no doubt hard at work developing technology that can both read your mind, and inject information directly into your brain. That way you won't have to talk into your phone or have it display any information to you.
That would be some serious innovation. So clearly our patent system isn't the problem and everything is working as intended.
Originally Posted by bb321
Yeah, sorry, you're wrong dude. I'm not just talking about the standard.
Then I don't see what they could possibly fight over involving 4G.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
LOL! you know it!
I laughed at your comment almost as hard as when i laughed when Tim Cook claimed Apple innovates and everyone else copies. Then brings out a phone with 4G TWO YEARS LATER THAN EVERYONE ELSE
But your comment was pretty funny too, i ROFL'd, LOL! Good one! You crack me up.
You know what, i bet they BINGED IT!!! HAHAA. Oh man, Good stuff Skil.
Which current apple phone has 4g on it again?
Try harder....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
There will be no battle over a standard. Any patents therein will be licensed legally and fairly, period. Worldwide. It's just about the only thing we as a species can agree on. At least in the countries fortunate enough to have these standards.
But in the current patent environment there is little incentive to patent a standard. What happens when Google and Motorola develop that next gen wireless technology that has way more bandwidth and is the equivalent of going from dialup to broadband? Are they going to seek a '5G' patent and license under a FRAND patent? Maybe if there were 10,000 competing companies who all could benefit and Google could make a little money off each. In our current environment Google is around 60% of the market and Apple is a little over 30%. Google will just file it as a proprietary patent and not license it to Apple at all.
No one is going to want a smart phone that still runs on 'dialup'. If Google were to develop that patent first they could pretty easily see any viable alternative design and patent the bejesus out of anything similar. No one could head in that direction without a 90ton lawsuit. That is what our patent system encourages today. Look at technology. Look at the obvious direction it is heading. Spend a lot of money to punch a tunnel to get a little bit ahead. Patent the crap out of where you are. When the others get there- Roadblock! Do something goofy and awkward to go around or pay me a ton of money *IF* I choose to let you through.
The patent system in the technology sector does not protect innovation. It thwarts competition. The only patents that should stand are FRAND patents and the filer needs to include their terms. If deemed unreasonable they dont get the patent issued. If reasonable everyone has to actually pay. Under the current rules companies can just offer to pay half a penny for any FRAND license and when the holder refuses you call them unreasonable and don't pay unless they sue you :-/
Innovation in technology is its own reward because consumers demand it. But then how will Apple be rewarded for its innovation? Ermm.... I'd say 100billion in the bank and the mongo market cap are pretty good incentives. Its an enviable spot and a great job by Apple. They could choose to copy what everyone else that has been in their shoes has done- which is to try to lock out competition and kick everyone else down the hill (and every company that has done that has both failed and only generated ill will.... I mean seriously do you know anyone that really wants Windows phone to do well?) or they could be innovative and grow to a trillion dollar company by innovating more and just leaving everyone in their dust
Originally Posted by xRCx
Which current apple phone has 4g on it again?
Whoop, better suit up first…
*ahem* "The AT&T iPhone 4S."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Whoop, better suit up first…
*ahem* "The AT&T iPhone 4S."
lol oh yeah I forgot about that bit of sillyness, until I start seeing down speeds over a mb im gonna go ahead and sort of disagree on the "4g" capabilities of my 4S on AT&T.
Perhaps sleepy was referring to the upcoming product launch where Cook brags about being in an innovator and presents a LTE iphone. I am sure that by now all Android phones have the ability to tunnel through time and forsee future apple keynotes to for pre emptive trolling. I mean they are afterall way more advanced.