What are you going on about? The ONLY statement of facts Apple made is that Rubin worked for them in the early 90's... fact, and his supervisors were working on the "Real-time API patent"... fact.. Exceptionally easy to prove both things.
FWIW if you didn't notice the Apple comments were made in connection with an ITC hearing and not a "full patent infringement trial" and no where did Apple indicate Rubin "stole" anything. It was a simple "hey he worked here about the same time so maybe there's dots to connect" in an attempt to make an HTC statement sound disingenuous . Apparently you didn't read Apple's statement in context. Would you like me to point you to the correct document? I was looking at it a little earlier at EDIS.
Trust me I work with Lawyers all the time, and they made this statement about Rubin for obvious reasons, it was an implied statement, (not fact) but was said to imply he could had access to apple technologies and took technologies from each of the places he worked. Apple wants Rubin to look like he not really an inventor of technologies only a borrower of technologies. I said this a long time ago about him. he played the game of jumping company to company and won big. I seen others do this, they learn a few things at one company then take it to the next company to parlay it into a better job, and before people realize they have no clue they move on to the next higher position.
Google realized too late what they actually got and he became a liability to them, they now stuck him in a room with robots where he can not harm anyone. He being set up to be bounced out, if he can not pull a rabbit out of the hat with the robots he is done. My current prediction for him is he will be a foot note on the history of Android and we will never hear from him again. You do not make a $12B screw up of Motorola purchase and come out smelling good that is for sure.
I worked at Apple in the section where the pixies manufactured the magic dust from unicorn horns, I never saw Rubin there although he may have transferred there later.
Gotta love the Internet.
Your right I could have made it all up, how about if I post a picture of my 5 yr Anniversary plaque, my business cards, my apple name plate, or may pictures of all the Apple prototypes I worked on which sit in my basement collecting dust. Actually if you look back many many yrs ago when I first joined this board I did post some picture of the prototypes I have.
I realize we all can say what we want, but I did specifically say what he knew or did not know, but from my experience a Manufacturing engineers do not have knowledge or access to advance technologies a company is working on, and I have working as now 6 high tech companies both on the R&D, Product Development (which is different than R&D) and the Operations side and know what is available to the design engineers as well as the everyday person.
Trust me I work with Lawyers all the time, and they made this statement about Rubin for obvious reasons, it was an implied statement, (not fact) but was said to imply he could had access to apple technologies and took technologies from each of the places he worked. Apple wants Rubin to look like he not really an inventor of technologies only a borrower of technologies. I said this a long time ago about him. he played the game of jumping company to company and won big. I seen others do this, they learn a few things at one company then take it to the next company to parlay it into a better job, and before people realize they have no clue they move on to the next higher position.
Google realized too late what they actually got and he became a liability to them, they now stuck him in a room with robots where he can not harm anyone. He being set up to be bounced out, if he can not pull a rabbit out of the hat with the robots he is done. My current prediction for him is he will be a foot note on the history of Android and we will never hear from him again. You do not make a $12B screw up of Motorola purchase and come out smelling good that is for sure.
I actually agree with you. Apple did have reasons for attempting to imply it was possible Rubin learned something at Apple that was later used in Android development.. . and that's really all it was intended for, introducing a question and not an assertion. (Some here would call that FUD in a different setting)
I would hope every engineer (or other worker for that matter) becomes a better and more knowledgeable employee with each new work experience. Do you think Tim Cook might have learned any inside tips about managing inventory and production in the computer business during his stints at IBM and Compaq to the benefit of of his current employer Apple? It doesn't mean either Cook or Rubin stole company secrets from previous employers to benefit the one who pays their current salary does it? As I said earlier if Apple knew Rubin stole anything from them it would have been submitted as evidence if not at the ITC at least in the companion civil suit Apple filed in Posner's court. But that wasn't what they were trying to do as you properly noted.
I actually agree with you. Apple did have reasons for attempting to imply it was possible Rubin learned something at Apple that was later used in Android development.. . and that's really all it was intended for, introducing a question and not an assertion. (Some here would call that FUD in a different setting)
I would hope every engineer (or other worker for that matter) becomes a better and more knowledgeable employee with each new work experience. Do you think Tim Cook might have learned any inside tips about managing inventory and production in the computer business during his stints at IBM and Compaq to the benefit of of his current employer Apple? It doesn't mean either Cook or Rubin stole company secrets from previous employers to benefit the one who pays their current salary does it? As I said earlier if Apple knew Rubin stole anything from them it would have been submitted as evidence if not at the ITC at least in the companion civil suit Apple filed in Posner's court. But that wasn't what they were trying to do as you properly noted.
Yep he did, and this is something most company fail to protect, it is called "know how," I have read that most companies loose their competitive advantage because of indirect transfer of "know how." Companies think the know how is less important then the actually IP thus they let is walk out the door of they show it off to others. Apple is guilty of this, especially back in the 80's there use to be tour buses of Japanese who use to show up at Apple Fremont factory for a tour of the facility, after the tour they would show up in Cupertino and the Apple employee store to buy their apple souvenirs and then home to Japan. Apple's Factory at the time was the state of the art and Apple Taught more companies how manufacturing should be done. Obviously Steve saw not IP or Know How value in how they manufacturer, it was cool thing to show off.
I can also tell you Dell copy much of what Apple did in the way of developing and testing Laptop computers back in the 90's they hired a number for the original Powerbook team and replicated the entire process Apple had in place even down to the test labs and equipment. This stuff us hard to prove since it not always documented or protected and plus you can not patent a method or process so it walks out the door.
Comments
What are you going on about? The ONLY statement of facts Apple made is that Rubin worked for them in the early 90's... fact, and his supervisors were working on the "Real-time API patent"... fact.. Exceptionally easy to prove both things.
FWIW if you didn't notice the Apple comments were made in connection with an ITC hearing and not a "full patent infringement trial" and no where did Apple indicate Rubin "stole" anything. It was a simple "hey he worked here about the same time so maybe there's dots to connect" in an attempt to make an HTC statement sound disingenuous . Apparently you didn't read Apple's statement in context. Would you like me to point you to the correct document? I was looking at it a little earlier at EDIS.
Trust me I work with Lawyers all the time, and they made this statement about Rubin for obvious reasons, it was an implied statement, (not fact) but was said to imply he could had access to apple technologies and took technologies from each of the places he worked. Apple wants Rubin to look like he not really an inventor of technologies only a borrower of technologies. I said this a long time ago about him. he played the game of jumping company to company and won big. I seen others do this, they learn a few things at one company then take it to the next company to parlay it into a better job, and before people realize they have no clue they move on to the next higher position.
Google realized too late what they actually got and he became a liability to them, they now stuck him in a room with robots where he can not harm anyone. He being set up to be bounced out, if he can not pull a rabbit out of the hat with the robots he is done. My current prediction for him is he will be a foot note on the history of Android and we will never hear from him again. You do not make a $12B screw up of Motorola purchase and come out smelling good that is for sure.
I worked at Apple in the section where the pixies manufactured the magic dust from unicorn horns, I never saw Rubin there although he may have transferred there later.
Gotta love the Internet.
Your right I could have made it all up, how about if I post a picture of my 5 yr Anniversary plaque, my business cards, my apple name plate, or may pictures of all the Apple prototypes I worked on which sit in my basement collecting dust. Actually if you look back many many yrs ago when I first joined this board I did post some picture of the prototypes I have.
I realize we all can say what we want, but I did specifically say what he knew or did not know, but from my experience a Manufacturing engineers do not have knowledge or access to advance technologies a company is working on, and I have working as now 6 high tech companies both on the R&D, Product Development (which is different than R&D) and the Operations side and know what is available to the design engineers as well as the everyday person.
I actually agree with you. Apple did have reasons for attempting to imply it was possible Rubin learned something at Apple that was later used in Android development.. . and that's really all it was intended for, introducing a question and not an assertion. (Some here would call that FUD in a different setting)
I would hope every engineer (or other worker for that matter) becomes a better and more knowledgeable employee with each new work experience. Do you think Tim Cook might have learned any inside tips about managing inventory and production in the computer business during his stints at IBM and Compaq to the benefit of of his current employer Apple? It doesn't mean either Cook or Rubin stole company secrets from previous employers to benefit the one who pays their current salary does it? As I said earlier if Apple knew Rubin stole anything from them it would have been submitted as evidence if not at the ITC at least in the companion civil suit Apple filed in Posner's court. But that wasn't what they were trying to do as you properly noted.
I actually agree with you. Apple did have reasons for attempting to imply it was possible Rubin learned something at Apple that was later used in Android development.. . and that's really all it was intended for, introducing a question and not an assertion. (Some here would call that FUD in a different setting)
I would hope every engineer (or other worker for that matter) becomes a better and more knowledgeable employee with each new work experience. Do you think Tim Cook might have learned any inside tips about managing inventory and production in the computer business during his stints at IBM and Compaq to the benefit of of his current employer Apple? It doesn't mean either Cook or Rubin stole company secrets from previous employers to benefit the one who pays their current salary does it? As I said earlier if Apple knew Rubin stole anything from them it would have been submitted as evidence if not at the ITC at least in the companion civil suit Apple filed in Posner's court. But that wasn't what they were trying to do as you properly noted.
Yep he did, and this is something most company fail to protect, it is called "know how," I have read that most companies loose their competitive advantage because of indirect transfer of "know how." Companies think the know how is less important then the actually IP thus they let is walk out the door of they show it off to others. Apple is guilty of this, especially back in the 80's there use to be tour buses of Japanese who use to show up at Apple Fremont factory for a tour of the facility, after the tour they would show up in Cupertino and the Apple employee store to buy their apple souvenirs and then home to Japan. Apple's Factory at the time was the state of the art and Apple Taught more companies how manufacturing should be done. Obviously Steve saw not IP or Know How value in how they manufacturer, it was cool thing to show off.
I can also tell you Dell copy much of what Apple did in the way of developing and testing Laptop computers back in the 90's they hired a number for the original Powerbook team and replicated the entire process Apple had in place even down to the test labs and equipment. This stuff us hard to prove since it not always documented or protected and plus you can not patent a method or process so it walks out the door.