Really. Name a few of these Apple patent suits. Remember, you said everybody so it should be easy for you to give a few examples. I personally can't think of one recent patent suit unless you count Apple counter suing Creative a few years ago. That shouldn't count though, as that was a defensive move in response to Creative suing Apple first.
italiankid is probably thinking of Cook saying they will vigorously defend their patents - and how the media assumed this might mean a suit in the direction of Palm.
As it hasn't happened yet, just another example of someone who only knows half the story.
It's really very simple. All laws pertaining to business were created by lawyers to allow other lawyers to make money. It has nothing to do with justice, fairness, or anything else. It's just about lawyers making money.
I couldn't agree more. Who are the guaranteed winners in any lawsuit? The lawyers of both parties. I once heard that there are more lawyers in Michigan alone than in all of Japan. They all want to make money. There you have it, no surprise.
Actually, Apple has always been ready to point out that iTunes does NOT make use of WebKit for its rendering of the iTunes Store content.
Does a browser need to use WebKit to be a browser? I remember when Apple released Safari for Windows it was said that Safari was already on Windows before in iTunes.
The more I see these laughable lawsuits - I start to think that lawsuits are the next huge debacle begging for a collapse after the sub-prime mortgage and financial market debacles are resolved. It really is pitiful how everybody and anybody is allowed to raise such weak lawsuits with such regularity. And even worse - make money off of it. And worse than that, the regularity and money involved seems to be expanding the market for these kinds of IP lawsuits.
How do you sue someone for infringing on a method of distributing content that is so obvious and ubiquitous. This company's patent diagram looks roughly like almost every website in the world - practically every interface in the Web-based world uses some configuration of columns, rows, tabs and buttons to manage assets, hierarchy and database input/output.
Does a browser need to use WebKit to be a browser? I remember when Apple released Safari for Windows it was said that Safari was already on Windows before in iTunes.
There are several rendering engines available, but for each engine, there may be about four somewhat commonly used browsers.
Really. Name a few of these Apple patent suits. Remember, you said everybody so it should be easy for you to give a few examples. I personally can't think of one recent patent suit unless you count Apple counter suing Creative a few years ago. That shouldn't count though, as that was a defensive move in response to Creative suing Apple first.
As was noted below, Apple has threatened anyone and everyone who attempts to make use of multi-touch or gestures on mobile phones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
Mr. Italiankid is one of those wretched souls who spends his time on an Apple discussion board endlessly belittling Apple and its users.
Why anyone would feel compelled to do this I cannot say, but the type seems truly pathological and more than a little pathetic.
I guess you just ad-hom people everywhere you post. You should stop projecting onto others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDreamworx
italiankid is probably thinking of Cook saying they will vigorously defend their patents - and how the media assumed this might mean a suit in the direction of Palm.
As it hasn't happened yet, just another example of someone who only knows half the story.
What else is there to know. Apple claims it invented the gesture of moving your fingers apart to make something bigger and squeezing them together to make it smaller and has declared that they will protect them. You reap what you sow. Apple patented how we all use spatial reasoning. It is like them patenting a part of all our brains and declaring other devices should work contrary to that.
I stay to stay out of those comments. I agree that they are, but I have no ideas on how to correct it... and I don't think anyone else on these boards do either.
Given the filings that are accepted, a pragmatic approach maybe that the patent should stop scrutinizing all filings and just be a registrar for anything anyone wants to file. The patent office could make a lot if fees, reduce staff with no one needed to do research and would not in anyway be a validation of the claim for court purposes. That would be for the courts. Also law suits would need to be filed in Federal court before a panel of knowledgeable patent judges (outside of East Texas) that can review both sides of a dispute before a patent is validated. Let the first appeal go to a federal jury if requested.
I guess you just ad-hom people everywhere you post. You should stop projecting onto others.
What's the matter, Nick, now that you've single handedly killed an entire forum by filling it with your shit, you're forced to come looking for a fight?
Affinity Labs builds online communities to improve the lives, careers and education of our members. Affinity Labs is based in San Francisco, CA and is led by an accomplished management team. In January 2008, Affinity Labs was acquired by Monster Worldwide.
Our Sites:
AdminSecret for Administrative Assistants
AllHealthcare for Healthcare Workers
ArtBistro for Artists
FireLink for Fire Fighters
GovCentral for Government Workers
HRGuru for HR Professionals
InsideTech for Technology Professionals \tNursingLink for Nurses
I was having a look at their patent it seems to cover specifically listening to music via a wifi stream which is buffered on a cellphone's memory, songs can be organized and then STREAMED to the device for listening to in a car.
They have also covered interrupting the STREAM to take a call and buffering to resume once the call has ended.
I guess if you listen to radio streams this patent would cover it but I don't know of any where you can arrange your own playlist.
Otherwise the patent seems too broad and obvious.
I think they would have a better case against Nokia with it's "Comes with Music" service.
Comments
Actually, Apple has always been ready to point out that iTunes does NOT make use of WebKit for its rendering of the iTunes Store content.
It appears to be WebObjects on the server side and Java within iTunes on the client side.
Really. Name a few of these Apple patent suits. Remember, you said everybody so it should be easy for you to give a few examples. I personally can't think of one recent patent suit unless you count Apple counter suing Creative a few years ago. That shouldn't count though, as that was a defensive move in response to Creative suing Apple first.
italiankid is probably thinking of Cook saying they will vigorously defend their patents - and how the media assumed this might mean a suit in the direction of Palm.
As it hasn't happened yet, just another example of someone who only knows half the story.
It's really very simple. All laws pertaining to business were created by lawyers to allow other lawyers to make money. It has nothing to do with justice, fairness, or anything else. It's just about lawyers making money.
I couldn't agree more. Who are the guaranteed winners in any lawsuit? The lawyers of both parties. I once heard that there are more lawyers in Michigan alone than in all of Japan. They all want to make money. There you have it, no surprise.
Actually, Apple has always been ready to point out that iTunes does NOT make use of WebKit for its rendering of the iTunes Store content.
Does a browser need to use WebKit to be a browser? I remember when Apple released Safari for Windows it was said that Safari was already on Windows before in iTunes.
How do you sue someone for infringing on a method of distributing content that is so obvious and ubiquitous. This company's patent diagram looks roughly like almost every website in the world - practically every interface in the Web-based world uses some configuration of columns, rows, tabs and buttons to manage assets, hierarchy and database input/output.
This has gotten so ridiculous!
Does a browser need to use WebKit to be a browser? I remember when Apple released Safari for Windows it was said that Safari was already on Windows before in iTunes.
There are several rendering engines available, but for each engine, there may be about four somewhat commonly used browsers.
Really. Name a few of these Apple patent suits. Remember, you said everybody so it should be easy for you to give a few examples. I personally can't think of one recent patent suit unless you count Apple counter suing Creative a few years ago. That shouldn't count though, as that was a defensive move in response to Creative suing Apple first.
As was noted below, Apple has threatened anyone and everyone who attempts to make use of multi-touch or gestures on mobile phones.
Mr. Italiankid is one of those wretched souls who spends his time on an Apple discussion board endlessly belittling Apple and its users.
Why anyone would feel compelled to do this I cannot say, but the type seems truly pathological and more than a little pathetic.
I guess you just ad-hom people everywhere you post. You should stop projecting onto others.
italiankid is probably thinking of Cook saying they will vigorously defend their patents - and how the media assumed this might mean a suit in the direction of Palm.
As it hasn't happened yet, just another example of someone who only knows half the story.
What else is there to know. Apple claims it invented the gesture of moving your fingers apart to make something bigger and squeezing them together to make it smaller and has declared that they will protect them. You reap what you sow. Apple patented how we all use spatial reasoning. It is like them patenting a part of all our brains and declaring other devices should work contrary to that.
All of it needs to stop.
I stay to stay out of those comments. I agree that they are, but I have no ideas on how to correct it... and I don't think anyone else on these boards do either.
Given the filings that are accepted, a pragmatic approach maybe that the patent should stop scrutinizing all filings and just be a registrar for anything anyone wants to file. The patent office could make a lot if fees, reduce staff with no one needed to do research and would not in anyway be a validation of the claim for court purposes. That would be for the courts. Also law suits would need to be filed in Federal court before a panel of knowledgeable patent judges (outside of East Texas) that can review both sides of a dispute before a patent is validated. Let the first appeal go to a federal jury if requested.
I guess you just ad-hom people everywhere you post. You should stop projecting onto others.
What's the matter, Nick, now that you've single handedly killed an entire forum by filling it with your shit, you're forced to come looking for a fight?
Go back to your cave.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marke...43504920090325
(from Fudzilla)
I'm not sure what reforms are being proposed
- anyone know?
And where is Apple?
I don't know what to make of this:-
Is this the same Affinity Labs?
http://www.affinitylabs.com/
Affinity Labs builds online communities to improve the lives, careers and education of our members. Affinity Labs is based in San Francisco, CA and is led by an accomplished management team. In January 2008, Affinity Labs was acquired by Monster Worldwide.
Our Sites:
AdminSecret for Administrative Assistants
AllHealthcare for Healthcare Workers
ArtBistro for Artists
FireLink for Fire Fighters
GovCentral for Government Workers
HRGuru for HR Professionals
InsideTech for Technology Professionals \tNursingLink for Nurses
PoliceLink for Police
SalesHQ for Sales
TheApple for Teachers <------- THIS ONE HERE!
TestQ for Quizzes
WomenCo for Professional Women
ChefsBlade for Culinary Professionals
The link for teachers ends up here:-
http://www.theapple.com/
Probably irrelevant, but interesting nonetheless.
Maybe Apple improves their lives too much!
hmmm...
I suppose they have to get a return on their investment somehow:-
http://venturebeat.com/2008/01/04/ju...-labs-for-61m/
This is the same company, right?
I was having a look at their patent it seems to cover specifically listening to music via a wifi stream which is buffered on a cellphone's memory, songs can be organized and then STREAMED to the device for listening to in a car.
They have also covered interrupting the STREAM to take a call and buffering to resume once the call has ended.
I guess if you listen to radio streams this patent would cover it but I don't know of any where you can arrange your own playlist.
Otherwise the patent seems too broad and obvious.
I think they would have a better case against Nokia with it's "Comes with Music" service.