Apple and Google agree to drop all ongoing lawsuits, will work toward patent reform

124678

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 148
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member

    Apple should offer an explanation as to why they decided to take this step, because this seems to be a complete turnaround from what Tim Cook was saying in 2012. I'm sure that somebody will ask him about it in some future interview. The timing is also suspicious, because usually it's shady politicians and bad governments who like to drop news on a Friday evening.

     

    Motorola Mobility sued Apple first, and they were trying to use FRAND patents against Apple.

     

    I wonder what kind of totally unexpected Apple news will happen next week? Nobody expected this Apple-Google news and nobody expected the rumored Beats deal. Are Apple and Samsung going to kiss and make up next week? I would not be a happy camper if that were to happen.

     

    I like surprises and all, but I'm not so sure if I like what's happened this past week, on multiple fronts.

  • Reply 62 of 148
    phone-ui-guyphone-ui-guy Posts: 1,019member
    "Apple wrote:
    [" url="/t/179735/apple-and-google-agree-to-drop-all-ongoing-lawsuits-will-work-toward-patent-reform#post_2535334"]
     
    Peace treaties are only worth as much as the integrity of both parties signing that agreement.

    Does anybody really think that if Apple were to introduce a new revolutionary device, that Google wouldn't be scrambling to copy that device as soon as they could?

    What would Apple do then? Stick to the "peace treaty" and pretend like nothing's happened or would they declare war? 

    Look at what happened to naive Europe when certain countries signed the Munich agreement. Look at what happened to foolish Russia when they made a pact with Germany. Certain terrorist groups are also known for wanting a peace treaty (when things are going badly for them), but it's merely a ploy to grant a temporary halt in fighting, so that they can regroup and continue on with their main goal, which is the opposite of peace.

    I don't believe this will have any effect on future inventions or patents. I could be wrong, but that would be an unusual arrangement especially with no cross-licensing agreement.

    Perhaps they got Google to agree to anti-cloning of Apple's IP for dropping the charges. Having Apple's IP coming out of Android would be enough for Apple at this point IMHO. We shall see.
  • Reply 63 of 148
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Chipsy View Post



    Nice to see. And if they are able to agree on a cross license that would be even better.

    They have reached an agreement about it. "The agreement does not include a cross license".

    And I hope they don't cross license.

  • Reply 64 of 148
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    apple ][ wrote: »
    Apple should offer an explanation as to why they decided to take this step, because this seems to be a complete turnaround from what Tim Cook was saying in 2012. I'm sure that somebody will ask him about it in some future interview. The timing is also suspicious, because usually it's shady politicians and bad governments who like to drop news on a Friday evening.

    Motorola Mobility sued Apple first, and they were trying to use FRAND patents against Apple.

    I wonder what kind of totally unexpected Apple news will happen next week? Nobody expected this Apple-Google news and nobody expected the rumored Beats deal. Are Apple and Samsung going to kiss and make up next week? I would not be a happy camper if that were to happen.

    I like surprises and all, but I'm not so sure if I like what's happened in the past week, on multiple fronts.
    what have these patent wars actually gotten Apple? If anything they just made Samsung way more popular than they should be. None of their devices have been banned and the amount they owe a Apple is essentially pocket change.
  • Reply 65 of 148
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    what have these patent wars actually gotten Apple? If anything they just made Samsung way more popular than they should be. None of their devices have been banned and the amount they owe a Apple is essentially pocket change.

     

    I agree that Samsung has gotten away very cheap, and I did recently say in another thread that I guess that crime does pay for these companies that copy Apple, but does this mean that Apple is just giving up and letting the criminals win?

     

    I sure hope that that is not the case.

  • Reply 66 of 148
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post



    We shall see.

     

    Indeed we will.

  • Reply 67 of 148
    bugsnwbugsnw Posts: 717member

    Maybe Apple has something pretty revolutionary in the lab and doesn't feel the costs justify protecting 'old' technology. Some kind of cost/benefit analysis was done and I, too, wonder what they're thinking.

  • Reply 68 of 148
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

     

    Crap.

     

    So Google won.

     

    Waiting for Google and Comcast to combine and screw us all.


    DOJ would never approve of such a merger.

  • Reply 69 of 148
    arlorarlor Posts: 532member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hmm View Post

     

    DOJ would never approve of such a merger.


     

    Sure they would. Google and Comcast are in almost no overlapping lines of business (Google's fiber operation is comparatively tiny). 

     

    That said, I can't see why Google would be interested in such a merger. (Comcast might be.)

  • Reply 70 of 148
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    droidftw wrote: »
    You're projecting your extremist views onto others.  Most Google fans (myself included) don't hate Apple or their products.  Just like most Apple fans don't hate Google or their products.  It's actually a small, vocal minority of people that fall into those extreme categories.

    If it weren't for Apple YOU wouldn't exist.
  • Reply 71 of 148
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cali View Post





    If it weren't for Apple YOU wouldn't exist.

     

    I can't wait to hear the explanation for this little tidbit.

  • Reply 72 of 148
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Arlor View Post

     

     

    Sure they would. Google and Comcast are in almost no overlapping lines of business (Google's fiber operation is comparatively tiny). 

     

    That said, I can't see why Google would be interested in such a merger. (Comcast might be.)




    It's not always about the size of the business. It's a matter of whether the move will lead to over-consolidation of competition. The situation with cable companies in general is one of the more unusual ones. Typically they are leased the rights to a given area in exchange for implementing the necessary infrastructure within that municipality or municipality subsection.

  • Reply 74 of 148
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    macxpress wrote: »
    This entire AI site is a joke anyways so what difference does it make.

    Since you’re beneath it all, I guess the jokes on you(?)

    A 'smart troll' would simply state “one of each” in their sig.
    gtr wrote: »
    Thermonuclear War inverted:


    A mushroom that went belly-up?

    gtr wrote: »
    ;)

    Slurpy is the greatest!

    Nice signature.
  • Reply 75 of 148
    d4njvrzfd4njvrzf Posts: 797member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

     

    Nothing in that legal brief discusses future lawsuits, only current ones.

     

    Any fool with one eye can recognize by 2015 half a dozen more lawsuits will be filed, but not with the current legal differences, but with the past 18 months worth of new Patents.

     

    For example this one will surely be breached:



    http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,724,619.PN.&OS=PN/8,724,619&RS=PN/8,724,619

     

    Android fans will whine about this one:

     

    http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,717,381.PN.&OS=PN/8,717,381&RS=PN/8,717,381

     

    This one is pure scientific genius:

     

    http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,717,345.PN.&OS=PN/8,717,345&RS=PN/8,717,345

     

    This one took for fucking ever to get patented and will bite several OEMs in the ass:

     

    http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,718,620.PN.&OS=PN/8,718,620&RS=PN/8,718,620


    The first patent (the one about routing calls between mobile and voip networks) seems to concern the same functionality that the new Republic Wireless carrier claims to have implemented in-house (http://www.lightreading.com/mobile/carrier-wifi/republic-wireless-revamps-its-wifi-handoff/d/d-id/706570).

  • Reply 76 of 148
    chipsychipsy Posts: 287member
    chris_ca wrote: »
    They have reached an agreement about it. "The agreement does not include a cross license".
    And I hope they don't cross license.
    Do people even read anymore? The word 'if' clearly indicates that I know that there isn't a cross license. But doesn't mean it can't ever happen in the future, just because they were unable to agree on that at this moment in time.
  • Reply 77 of 148
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    This should negate a lot of these distracting court cases. I just wish Samsung would stop copying. They are nothing but a bunch of unoriginal charlatans.

    In other news, I used an s3 yesterday for about 10 minutes; wow, what a terrible experience. I never knew they were such utter junk! Scrolling wouldn't keep up with your finger, the Chrome browser on it is garbage, and their App Store is riddled with crapware and the search function in the store (Google run store; search company) is beyond terrible. Ran back for a glass of ice-water.
  • Reply 78 of 148
    taniwhataniwha Posts: 347member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

     

    I prefer war over peace.

     

    I also think that most people who comment on the internet about patent cases and come with the cliched comment and talking point that the whole patent system needs to be reformed, what they really mean is that it should be made even easier for everybody to steal from Apple, as those people don't really view many of Apple's patents as being valid.


    "I prefer war over peace." Yeah. You're setting new records every post for abject stupidity. Right on /s

  • Reply 79 of 148
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,324member
    Quote:


    ... the step forward does not impact Apple's ongoing lawsuits with other handset makers that use Google's Android operating system, including Samsung.


     

    Good.  Keep hammering the copycats, Apple!

  • Reply 80 of 148
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    Ha, what now to all those who claimed Apple would go for Google after they were done with Samsung. If anything though this makes Samsung look bad. They probably didn't settle on purpose because they wanted Apple to have to take them to court.

     

    That can still happen because:-

     

    a) this only concerns the Motorola cases

     

    and

     

    b) there is no cross license agreement.

     

    It's still game on for Samsung and Google too if they get drawn into it.

Sign In or Register to comment.