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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
Comments
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.
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.
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.
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.
We shall see.
Indeed we will.
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.
Crap.
So Google won.
Waiting for Google and Comcast to combine and screw us all.
DOJ would never approve of such a merger.
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.)
If it weren't for Apple YOU wouldn't exist.
If it weren't for Apple YOU wouldn't exist.
I can't wait to hear the explanation for this little tidbit.
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.
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
Since you’re beneath it all, I guess the jokes on you(?)
A 'smart troll' would simply state “one of each” in their sig.
A mushroom that went belly-up?
Nice signature.
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).
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.
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
Good. Keep hammering the copycats, Apple!
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.