If Android had violated (or stolen since that's what many people here are implying) that many of Apple's patents, then why are we not seeing a single lawsuit by Apple against Google? It would make more sense would it not?
Because Google were careful to craft a tale and stick to it about how they happened to acquire Android and get into the phone business. And, clearly, the tale of the acquisition of Android is a just so story that strains credibility.
First of all, the "fact", so often pointed to by Google apologists that Google acquired Android a couple of years (really about 1.5 years) before Apple announced the iPhone is a pretty weak defense at best. It implies that Apple didn't actually start development of the iPhone until the announcement, which is, of course, absurd.
Clearly (and supported by statements made by Steve Jobs) they were working on the technology that became the iPhone for years before its announcement. In fact, a little more than two years seems about the right amount of lead time between deciding they were going to release a phone and having it ready to release.
Clearly, this would have been something that the Board, including Schmidt, would have had knowledge of.
Then they should be able to prove this in a lawsuit...along with your statements above this should be a slam dunk for Apple....
So, the evidence that Google acquired Android because Schmidt, while on the Apple Board, learned that Apple was going into the phone business, while circumstantial, is pretty damning. That's not to say that Apple would have a case in court. For that, they'd need documentation of what were likely private, verbal, unrecorded, undocumented discussions at Google. Everything the board does it recorded. Some of this is required in the meeting minutes by the companies themselves so of it is regulated by publicly traded companies.
Yet, the idea that Google's acquisition of Android around that time was merely coincidental, simply isn't credible.
Then, if we look at that early version of Android, it was clearly a copy of the Blackberry. That makes sense too, since the Apple Board would not have been given all the details of what the new phone would be like. The abrupt change to mimic iPhone after the announcement shows that Google realized they had gone down the wrong road.
It's also clear that, since the announcement of the iPhone, Google's strategy has been essentially the same as Samsung's: To copy the iPhone as closely as they can, to the point were they begin to throw things into it, like NFC, simply because it's rumored that Apple will be including it.
And this really shouldn't surprise anyone. It fits Google's MO exactly: Steal from others and give it away for free, using their dominance and revenues from search to leverage themselves into an ever widening circle of markets by destroying profitability for anyone else in those markets -- i.e., basic product dumping.
Anyone who thinks the reality of the situation is any different than described above, is drinking some powerful kool-aid, or being paid to pretend they believe Google's Android fairy tale story.
I am not a huge Google fan. I am just amazed at some of the outlandish statements made without any facts. I highlighted some of the things in your statements. I agree with you that Apple was working on the iPhone and IOS long before they released the product.....probably some years of R&D went into the finished product. Steve Jobs has been quoted as saying he felt Android was stolen product. That he would destroy it with all of Apple's cash reserves if that what it took. So if they had one iota of proof they would be in court suing Schmidt/Google.
I thought it was common practice or requirement for recording to be done anytime a board was in session. So it would make it easy for Apple to establish what information Schmidt knew and when he knew it and then what his actions were after he obtained this info. Even if it was not recored they would have documentation of ALL things he knew. I am sure that Apple would have had Schmidt/Google under a very powerful microscope as far as their actions were concerned. Apple has taken to the courts for just about everything where they feel slighted in anyway and to protect their IP or copyrights. They have sued have sued Mac clone makers to small companies using product likeness to Samsung with a shape and feel complaint. Why then would they not go after Schmidt/Google? They could with one action kill Android or at least have and injunction upon devices being released with it until the suit was heard in effect killing Android.
Ok so according to one of your previous posts, Apple is going after Android OEMs instead of Google themselves because it would be "easier" and faster. But it still doesn't make sense though. Android is clearly a stolen product (Jobs and his legion said so) and had violated countless Apple's touch input and other mobile software patents. It would be an easy win for Apple if that's the case. Why waste time and go after proxies when you can kill off Android in one giant lawsuit?
Wow, I guess you haven't been following FOSS, AI, other Apple news sites, bloggers and the press on this issue.
Apple has made a strategic decision to go after the manufacturers, who have a lot more to lose than Google, and often (like with HTC) have far fewer resources in terms of $$ and IP. Many if not most of Apple's IP suits against the manufacturer are in fact against Google's IP. Also, Apple can use the ITC which acts much quicker than the courts and will ban imports. Of course Google does not import anything so you can't use the ITC against them.
The effect will be the same with less effort, more speedy resolution, and greater likelihood of success for Apple.
Re proxy, the USA and USSR were bitter enemies for decades but never once fought a single battle against each other. However there were dozens of real wars by proxy that killed millions. The analogy is perfect.
I disagree with you...... Apple has alway gone after ANYONE that they felt violated their IP or copyrights. They have sued large and small companies alike. Apple has one of the largest legal staffs in the world for just these types of issues. Steve has come out and said he felt Android was stolen product. Why not sue then?
The highlight above does not fit this issue/thread at all.....a nuclear war between the US and Russia would have destroyed the WORLD! A lawsuit between Apple and Google does not even come close to rising to that level!
I thought it was common practice or requirement for recording to be done anytime a board was in session.
NOT a common practice, in fact, most companies and boards do not want their deliberations recorded. Only the minutes are the record.
In addition, it is very easy to imagine Jobs and Schmidt touring the labs (they were great friends, right?) while Jobs showed off all the new tech under development. Schmidt was on the board and a friend and peer of Steve's. Of course this wold never be recorded.
It was going to be a great partnership, almost a marriage. Thus Jobs' bitter hatred after the break-up.
Your entire post misses the point. I wasn't referring to lack of documentation of Apple Board meetings, but of internal discussions at Google.
Google have publicly admitted that they got into the phone business because Apple did and they were afraid they would be shut out of search.
With that context I agree with you. But saying that Google stole so much from Apple without some kind of legal response does not fit what what Apple has historically done.
I disagree with you...... Apple has alway gone after ANYONE that they felt violated their IP or copyrights. They have sued large and small companies alike. Apple has one of the largest legal staffs in the world for just these types of issues. Steve has come out and said he felt Android was stolen product. Why not sue then?
The highlight above does not fit this issue/thread at all.....a nuclear war between the US and Russia would have destroyed the WORLD! A lawsuit between Apple and Google does not even come close to rising to that level!
So, hello, what is your explanation?
Apple is suing over Google's IP. It will be more effective to sue the manufacturers. Who give a f*** how Apple goes after Google? What does it matter?
Oh, sure, and Apple wasn't working with Google (probably with Schmidt directly as he was Jobs' friend) on Maps, etc. for months if not years prior?
I agree with you. Google did wholesale theft of Apple's technology. I just pointed that out because it seemed that some people think that Schmidt had been in the board for years before the iPhone announcement.
NOT a common practice, in fact, most companies and boards do not want their deliberations recorded. Only the minutes are the record.
In addition, it is very easy to imagine Jobs and Schmidt touring the labs (they were great friends, right?) while Jobs showed off all the new tech under development. Schmidt was on the board and a friend and peer of Steve's.
It was going to be a great partnership, almost a marriage. Thus Jobs' bitter hatred after the break-up.
It is a requirement anytime a board is in session for everything to be recored. This is done either by video/audio or by a admin assistant in person at the meetings. Afterward the meeting minutes are distributed and posted for the all the board to see for clarity and context. Then the next meeting they review the minutes of the last meeting for context and to keep the discussions on point.
Again....if Apple had any evidence they would sue. They have done this over and over again.
Steve said he would spend Apple's billions destroying Android. If they had one shred of proof or discussion they could bring to court then they would.
If Android had violated (or stolen since that's what many people here are implying) that many of Apple's patents, then why are we not seeing a single lawsuit by Apple against Google? It would make more sense would it not? Why the need to waste time and go for proxies? It's Google themselves whom developed Android after all. It would be an easy win too since Android is clearly without a doubt, a stolen product according to Lord Jobs. And why isn't Schmidt prosecuted for violating his NDA and what amounts to corporate espionage from his stint at the Apple Board?
I keep hearing the same lines over and over again revolving around how Android stole everything from Apple. But until one of you can satisfactory explain to me as to why Apple isn't going after Google directly after basically copying everything, it will always be a baseless and unsubstantiated claim.
Your original question was "What did they steal exactly?" So I pointed that out to you in my previous post. Now you are asking a very different question. You are asking about Apple's legal strategy of attacking manufacturers instead of Google. Legal strategy is something I know nothing about. Apple's lawyers probably determined that the best way to attack Android was by going after the people who actually sell it. I don't know for sure.
Apple is suing over Google's IP. It will be more effective to sue the manufacturers. Who give a f*** how Apple goes after Google? What does it matter?
Well this has been a long thread and it is getting fragmented. It was originally stated that Schmidt stole Apple's IP and went then produces Android. That Apple was suing to stop Android. So why not go after the source? Why not Schmidt and Google? So why not kill Android at the source? They could in one fell swoop stop Android forever.
So if there was a MAC clone maker out there making clones of MacPros or installing OSX non Apple hardware.....would it make sense to go after the people that bought they clones? Or go after the company that was making the clones? For reference see the suit Apple made against Pystar. they shut the company down for making clones. they didn't sue the people who bought the clones. So why would they not go after Google for Android instead of going after Samsung, HTC, et al?
Why not go after the company (Google) that was making the infringing product?
Well this has been a long thread and it is getting fragmented. It was originally stated that Schmidt stole Apple's IP and went then produces Android. That Apple was suing to stop Android. So why not go after the source? Why not Schmidt and Google? So why not kill Android at the source? They could in one fell swoop stop Android forever.
So if there was a MAC clone maker out there making clones of MacPros or installing OSX non Apple hardware.....would it make sense to go after the people that bought they clones? Or go after the company that was making the clones? For reference see the suit Apple made against Pystar. they shut the company down for making clones. they didn't sue the people who bought the clones. So why would they not go after Google for Android instead of going after Samsung, HTC, et al?
Why not go after the company (Google) that was making the infringing product?
Because Apple decided there was a better way. More effective, more timely and less dangerous to Apple. Read FOSS on this topic.
Because Apple decided there was a better way. More effective, more timely and less dangerous to Apple. Read FOSS on this topic.
That does not make sense.......bringing multiple suits in multiple countries against multiple companies and exposes yourself to one bad ruling and jeopardize all of the other suits? They would lose millions upon millions with just one bad ruling from an un sympathetic judge. If they had evidence they would go after the source of the whole thing and stop Android at the source with Schmidt and Google.
So are we to assume this will come out with iOS 6.0 or will they debut it mid-iOS-cycle with the iPad 3? This would look mighty impressive on an iPad 3 with or without a HiDPI display, but this seems more like a feature for a new version of iOS.
Ok so according to one of your previous posts, Apple is going after Android OEMs instead of Google themselves because it would be "easier" and faster. But it still doesn't make sense though. Android is clearly a stolen product (Jobs and his legion said so) and had violated countless Apple's touch input and other mobile software patents. It would be an easy win for Apple if that's the case. Why waste time and go after proxies when you can kill off Android in one giant lawsuit?
Apple has a very talented legal team and they determined that this is the best way to start the war. It's like bombing the radar towers before you hit command & control. I am reasonable certain that the front lines will eventually arrive at Google's doorstep.
I will be interesting to see how smoothly the remotely sensed (aircraft) images transition to local (vehicle) images when zooming in on a subject, assuming Apple goes for a continuous zoom rather than a specific transition to a street view.
Apparently, C3 fleshes out its 3D arial views with 2D static images to make the total effect look realistic from any angle.
While watching some of the C3 overhead videos at macrumors I got the feeling:
Wouldn't it be cool to enhance the panning/zooming of still photos by adding animation: things like cars moving, people walking, waves on water... running a play in a soccer or football stadium... cheering crowds...
Think of the video game potential of this technology -- or for pilot training in flight simulators.
...maybe even add realism and animation to the Republican presidential debates...
Comments
Schmidt joined Apple's board 4 months before the iPhone was announced.
Oh, sure, and Apple wasn't working with Google (probably with Schmidt directly as he was Jobs' friend) on Maps, etc. for months if not years prior?
If Android had violated (or stolen since that's what many people here are implying) that many of Apple's patents, then why are we not seeing a single lawsuit by Apple against Google? It would make more sense would it not?
No it would not.
Because Google were careful to craft a tale and stick to it about how they happened to acquire Android and get into the phone business. And, clearly, the tale of the acquisition of Android is a just so story that strains credibility.
First of all, the "fact", so often pointed to by Google apologists that Google acquired Android a couple of years (really about 1.5 years) before Apple announced the iPhone is a pretty weak defense at best. It implies that Apple didn't actually start development of the iPhone until the announcement, which is, of course, absurd.
Clearly (and supported by statements made by Steve Jobs) they were working on the technology that became the iPhone for years before its announcement. In fact, a little more than two years seems about the right amount of lead time between deciding they were going to release a phone and having it ready to release.
Clearly, this would have been something that the Board, including Schmidt, would have had knowledge of.
Then they should be able to prove this in a lawsuit...along with your statements above this should be a slam dunk for Apple....
So, the evidence that Google acquired Android because Schmidt, while on the Apple Board, learned that Apple was going into the phone business, while circumstantial, is pretty damning. That's not to say that Apple would have a case in court. For that, they'd need documentation of what were likely private, verbal, unrecorded, undocumented discussions at Google. Everything the board does it recorded. Some of this is required in the meeting minutes by the companies themselves so of it is regulated by publicly traded companies.
Yet, the idea that Google's acquisition of Android around that time was merely coincidental, simply isn't credible.
Then, if we look at that early version of Android, it was clearly a copy of the Blackberry. That makes sense too, since the Apple Board would not have been given all the details of what the new phone would be like. The abrupt change to mimic iPhone after the announcement shows that Google realized they had gone down the wrong road.
It's also clear that, since the announcement of the iPhone, Google's strategy has been essentially the same as Samsung's: To copy the iPhone as closely as they can, to the point were they begin to throw things into it, like NFC, simply because it's rumored that Apple will be including it.
And this really shouldn't surprise anyone. It fits Google's MO exactly: Steal from others and give it away for free, using their dominance and revenues from search to leverage themselves into an ever widening circle of markets by destroying profitability for anyone else in those markets -- i.e., basic product dumping.
Anyone who thinks the reality of the situation is any different than described above, is drinking some powerful kool-aid, or being paid to pretend they believe Google's Android fairy tale story.
I am not a huge Google fan. I am just amazed at some of the outlandish statements made without any facts. I highlighted some of the things in your statements. I agree with you that Apple was working on the iPhone and IOS long before they released the product.....probably some years of R&D went into the finished product. Steve Jobs has been quoted as saying he felt Android was stolen product. That he would destroy it with all of Apple's cash reserves if that what it took. So if they had one iota of proof they would be in court suing Schmidt/Google.
I thought it was common practice or requirement for recording to be done anytime a board was in session. So it would make it easy for Apple to establish what information Schmidt knew and when he knew it and then what his actions were after he obtained this info. Even if it was not recored they would have documentation of ALL things he knew. I am sure that Apple would have had Schmidt/Google under a very powerful microscope as far as their actions were concerned. Apple has taken to the courts for just about everything where they feel slighted in anyway and to protect their IP or copyrights. They have sued have sued Mac clone makers to small companies using product likeness to Samsung with a shape and feel complaint. Why then would they not go after Schmidt/Google? They could with one action kill Android or at least have and injunction upon devices being released with it until the suit was heard in effect killing Android.
No it would not.
Ok so according to one of your previous posts, Apple is going after Android OEMs instead of Google themselves because it would be "easier" and faster. But it still doesn't make sense though. Android is clearly a stolen product (Jobs and his legion said so) and had violated countless Apple's touch input and other mobile software patents. It would be an easy win for Apple if that's the case. Why waste time and go after proxies when you can kill off Android in one giant lawsuit?
I am not a huge Google fan. I am just amazed at some of the outlandish statements made without any facts. ...
Your entire post misses the point. I wasn't referring to lack of documentation of Apple Board meetings, but of internal discussions at Google.
Google have publicly admitted that they got into the phone business because Apple did and they were afraid they would be shut out of search.
Wow, I guess you haven't been following FOSS, AI, other Apple news sites, bloggers and the press on this issue.
Apple has made a strategic decision to go after the manufacturers, who have a lot more to lose than Google, and often (like with HTC) have far fewer resources in terms of $$ and IP. Many if not most of Apple's IP suits against the manufacturer are in fact against Google's IP. Also, Apple can use the ITC which acts much quicker than the courts and will ban imports. Of course Google does not import anything so you can't use the ITC against them.
The effect will be the same with less effort, more speedy resolution, and greater likelihood of success for Apple.
Re proxy, the USA and USSR were bitter enemies for decades but never once fought a single battle against each other. However there were dozens of real wars by proxy that killed millions. The analogy is perfect.
I disagree with you...... Apple has alway gone after ANYONE that they felt violated their IP or copyrights. They have sued large and small companies alike. Apple has one of the largest legal staffs in the world for just these types of issues. Steve has come out and said he felt Android was stolen product. Why not sue then?
The highlight above does not fit this issue/thread at all.....a nuclear war between the US and Russia would have destroyed the WORLD! A lawsuit between Apple and Google does not even come close to rising to that level!
I thought it was common practice or requirement for recording to be done anytime a board was in session.
NOT a common practice, in fact, most companies and boards do not want their deliberations recorded. Only the minutes are the record.
In addition, it is very easy to imagine Jobs and Schmidt touring the labs (they were great friends, right?) while Jobs showed off all the new tech under development. Schmidt was on the board and a friend and peer of Steve's. Of course this wold never be recorded.
It was going to be a great partnership, almost a marriage. Thus Jobs' bitter hatred after the break-up.
Your entire post misses the point. I wasn't referring to lack of documentation of Apple Board meetings, but of internal discussions at Google.
Google have publicly admitted that they got into the phone business because Apple did and they were afraid they would be shut out of search.
With that context I agree with you. But saying that Google stole so much from Apple without some kind of legal response does not fit what what Apple has historically done.
I disagree with you...... Apple has alway gone after ANYONE that they felt violated their IP or copyrights. They have sued large and small companies alike. Apple has one of the largest legal staffs in the world for just these types of issues. Steve has come out and said he felt Android was stolen product. Why not sue then?
The highlight above does not fit this issue/thread at all.....a nuclear war between the US and Russia would have destroyed the WORLD! A lawsuit between Apple and Google does not even come close to rising to that level!
So, hello, what is your explanation?
Apple is suing over Google's IP. It will be more effective to sue the manufacturers. Who give a f*** how Apple goes after Google? What does it matter?
Oh, sure, and Apple wasn't working with Google (probably with Schmidt directly as he was Jobs' friend) on Maps, etc. for months if not years prior?
I agree with you. Google did wholesale theft of Apple's technology. I just pointed that out because it seemed that some people think that Schmidt had been in the board for years before the iPhone announcement.
NOT a common practice, in fact, most companies and boards do not want their deliberations recorded. Only the minutes are the record.
In addition, it is very easy to imagine Jobs and Schmidt touring the labs (they were great friends, right?) while Jobs showed off all the new tech under development. Schmidt was on the board and a friend and peer of Steve's.
It was going to be a great partnership, almost a marriage. Thus Jobs' bitter hatred after the break-up.
It is a requirement anytime a board is in session for everything to be recored. This is done either by video/audio or by a admin assistant in person at the meetings. Afterward the meeting minutes are distributed and posted for the all the board to see for clarity and context. Then the next meeting they review the minutes of the last meeting for context and to keep the discussions on point.
Again....if Apple had any evidence they would sue. They have done this over and over again.
Steve said he would spend Apple's billions destroying Android. If they had one shred of proof or discussion they could bring to court then they would.
If Android had violated (or stolen since that's what many people here are implying) that many of Apple's patents, then why are we not seeing a single lawsuit by Apple against Google? It would make more sense would it not? Why the need to waste time and go for proxies? It's Google themselves whom developed Android after all. It would be an easy win too since Android is clearly without a doubt, a stolen product according to Lord Jobs. And why isn't Schmidt prosecuted for violating his NDA and what amounts to corporate espionage from his stint at the Apple Board?
I keep hearing the same lines over and over again revolving around how Android stole everything from Apple. But until one of you can satisfactory explain to me as to why Apple isn't going after Google directly after basically copying everything, it will always be a baseless and unsubstantiated claim.
Your original question was "What did they steal exactly?" So I pointed that out to you in my previous post. Now you are asking a very different question. You are asking about Apple's legal strategy of attacking manufacturers instead of Google. Legal strategy is something I know nothing about. Apple's lawyers probably determined that the best way to attack Android was by going after the people who actually sell it. I don't know for sure.
So, hello, what is your explanation?
Apple is suing over Google's IP. It will be more effective to sue the manufacturers. Who give a f*** how Apple goes after Google? What does it matter?
Well this has been a long thread and it is getting fragmented. It was originally stated that Schmidt stole Apple's IP and went then produces Android. That Apple was suing to stop Android. So why not go after the source? Why not Schmidt and Google? So why not kill Android at the source? They could in one fell swoop stop Android forever.
So if there was a MAC clone maker out there making clones of MacPros or installing OSX non Apple hardware.....would it make sense to go after the people that bought they clones? Or go after the company that was making the clones? For reference see the suit Apple made against Pystar. they shut the company down for making clones. they didn't sue the people who bought the clones. So why would they not go after Google for Android instead of going after Samsung, HTC, et al?
Why not go after the company (Google) that was making the infringing product?
Well this has been a long thread and it is getting fragmented. It was originally stated that Schmidt stole Apple's IP and went then produces Android. That Apple was suing to stop Android. So why not go after the source? Why not Schmidt and Google? So why not kill Android at the source? They could in one fell swoop stop Android forever.
So if there was a MAC clone maker out there making clones of MacPros or installing OSX non Apple hardware.....would it make sense to go after the people that bought they clones? Or go after the company that was making the clones? For reference see the suit Apple made against Pystar. they shut the company down for making clones. they didn't sue the people who bought the clones. So why would they not go after Google for Android instead of going after Samsung, HTC, et al?
Why not go after the company (Google) that was making the infringing product?
Because Apple decided there was a better way. More effective, more timely and less dangerous to Apple. Read FOSS on this topic.
Because Apple decided there was a better way. More effective, more timely and less dangerous to Apple. Read FOSS on this topic.
That does not make sense.......bringing multiple suits in multiple countries against multiple companies and exposes yourself to one bad ruling and jeopardize all of the other suits? They would lose millions upon millions with just one bad ruling from an un sympathetic judge. If they had evidence they would go after the source of the whole thing and stop Android at the source with Schmidt and Google.
Who really cares about a sucker on a take off, bust a move or we could have a shake and bake off...
And the relevance of NWA's old school rap lyric to this subject is . . . ?
Ok so according to one of your previous posts, Apple is going after Android OEMs instead of Google themselves because it would be "easier" and faster. But it still doesn't make sense though. Android is clearly a stolen product (Jobs and his legion said so) and had violated countless Apple's touch input and other mobile software patents. It would be an easy win for Apple if that's the case. Why waste time and go after proxies when you can kill off Android in one giant lawsuit?
Apple has a very talented legal team and they determined that this is the best way to start the war. It's like bombing the radar towers before you hit command & control. I am reasonable certain that the front lines will eventually arrive at Google's doorstep.
I will be interesting to see how smoothly the remotely sensed (aircraft) images transition to local (vehicle) images when zooming in on a subject, assuming Apple goes for a continuous zoom rather than a specific transition to a street view.
Apparently, C3 fleshes out its 3D arial views with 2D static images to make the total effect look realistic from any angle.
While watching some of the C3 overhead videos at macrumors I got the feeling:
Wouldn't it be cool to enhance the panning/zooming of still photos by adding animation: things like cars moving, people walking, waves on water... running a play in a soccer or football stadium... cheering crowds...
Think of the video game potential of this technology -- or for pilot training in flight simulators.
...maybe even add realism and animation to the Republican presidential debates...
...Nah... that's just not possible