I'm wondering how much of these lawsuits were Jobs at all. To me this would seem like an overly depressing and time consuming when you have more important stuff to deal with. Leave it to the lawyers to determine who to sue and why. Same goes with Samsung. While their latest moves are desperate they actions that I'd think any multi-national company respond even if knowing they won't win.
... but Steve did say:
“I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”
... and this was said when his cancer was quite advanced iirc... in other words, said at a time when Steve was sick but still willing to devote time and energy to go after Android and Samsung.
So I'd say that these lawsuits are mostly Steve... jmho.
[whoops - I see this has been covered (I don't read CJ's posts), plus I thought I was in another thread... this deals with the lawsuit against the Spanish manufacturer which might have just come from Apple legal... as do other trademark infringements (ie - logo related lawsuits) ]
I'd prefer whichever of these is the banned one being able to make new posts, hit the Submit button, have everything look fine, but absolutely nothing actually happens.
Let them waste their time writing posts that get deleted the second they're posted.
Essentially, but instead of showing his posts with the word banned under his name, he was put on the global ignore list built into vBulletin. basically it means only the mods can see him post and until we made mention of his posts vanishing he wouldn't have known we can't see his posts until he logged out of AI to see why people weren't responding to him.
I thought he was just kicked for ten days. Is he really wasting his time posting right now?
Wait. Can someone explain why Apple would go after this company? Their tablets look nothing like the iPad. I'm glad that little company won.
That's as worthless as Apple beginning to sue that restaurant because their logo was an apple.
I think Apple legal was given a broad spectrum mandate and they just stretched it a little too far.
Sort of like the woman at the Safeway who was sent to jail and had her child taken away because she forgot to pay for a $5.00 sandwich while grocery shopping. Sometimes people take their jobs way way too seriously and with little common sense.
?I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple?s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,? Jobs said. ?I?m going to destroy Android, because it?s a stolen product. I?m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.?
... and this was said when his cancer was quite advanced iirc... in other words, said at a time when Steve was sick but still willing to devote time and energy to go after Android and Samsung.
So I'd say that these lawsuits are mostly Steve... jmho.
[whoops - I see this has been covered (I don't read CJ's posts), plus I thought I was in another thread... this deals with the lawsuit against the Spanish manufacturer which might have just come from Apple legal... as do other trademark infringements (ie - logo related lawsuits) ]
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
I think Apple legal was given a broad spectrum mandate and they just stretched it a little too far.
Sort of like the woman at the Safeway who was sent to jail and had her child taken away because she forgot to pay for a $5.00 sandwich while grocery shopping. Sometimes people take their jobs way way too seriously and with little common sense.
That's what I mean by not being Jobs. He's not going to do the lawyers jobs for them. I figure they were essentially to build a case against Android, something Apple has yet to directly go against Google on.
That's what I mean by not being Jobs. He's not going to do the lawyers jobs for them. I figure they were essentially to build a case against Android, something Apple has yet to directly go against Google on.
Which is going to be harder to win as Android matures and evolves into what it should've been in the first place, a mobile OS inspired by iOS.
Just because you lose a lawsuit doesn't mean the lawsuit was bogus. If Apple's claims were reasonable, although ruled incorrect, this doesn't mean Apple filed a bogus lawsuit. Moreover, Apple probably still has appeal rights, and was fighting in a foreign forum again a local company. In my mind, the competing product looked a lot like an iPad. In the US that would subject a party to possible patent, copyright, and trademark causes of action.
As far as freeze g the product goes, that is the same thing companies in the US are trying to do to Apple and Apple is trying to do to other companies by filing ITC complaints. It is just in some other countries those issues are worked out differently.
maybe the lawsuit wasn't bogus, but the criminal charges are.
Who ever approved that at Apple, was not thinking clearly.... it seems like Steve dies and shit like this happens soon afterwards.
if Apple keeps going after small manufactures, than i will agree, they are becoming a Microsoft, just with a different market to aim at
Still unclear about the "moral damages" mentioned in the countersuit. I mean, you can define "moral" in whatever manner suits your ideology. If you live in a predominantly socialist society, moral might mean to take from the greedy capitalist company and give to the poor local startup. Of course they didn't say that, but then what do they mean by "moral damages"? It's a laughably self-serviing charge.
It clearly IS copying the iPad’s look—without seeing the iPad, they’d never have made it look the way it does.
There are plenty of examples where the idea of what a tablet like an iPad might look, from a hardware perspective, that predate the iPad. Just to name one, "Star Trek: The Next Generation", a TV show from the early 1990's had flat, squarish, touchscreen computers. It was even called a PADD. Apple clearly stole the idea from there!
Or we could even look at Apple's own Newton MessagePad or all of the PalmPilots and other such devices from the 90's and consider the iPad the logical evolution from that form factor.
We can credit Apple with pushing a finger-based, touchscreen, hand held computer into mainstream reality; but I don't think you can credit them with the idea itself.
Apple has an absolute right to attempt a defense of any IP rights they believe they have in a civil court. It's the filing of a criminal complaint that's particularly worrisome to me. That smacks of over-the-top bullying. According to FOSSPatents they threatened other small producers of tablets with criminal filings, and rather than fight the others rolled over. NT-K wouldn't go away quietly. Kudos to them.
Civil charges are completely understandable. Threatening to see that company owners are put in jail over criminal charges if they don't cow-tow to Apple is way beyond reasonable IMHO.
Even the normally Apple-friendly Florian has harsh words for Apple:
"Considering that this was not a case of product piracy but just a dispute over whether or not Apple has exclusive design rights covering n-tk's Andoid-based products, I think it's absolutely outrageous that Apple tried to attack its rival under criminal law. . .
I think Apple should use better judgment in the future. This story from Spain makes Apple look very bad."
Theft is theft, why shouldn't white collar criminals go to jail too? After all, what they are stealing is worth a lot more than, say, a car.
For example, maybe if Schmidt, Page & Brin were facing jail time for their many crimes, they wouldn't be so eager to continually steal other people's IP.
Would be a good arguement if images of the LG Prada were not available before the iPhone was announced.
And the LG Prada UI was nothing like the iPhone UI. They may have changed a few things around after seeing the iPhone's UI but it's not likely, IMO.
They did used icons, which is what you'd expect on device that uses fingertips for input. Note the LG Prada was not the first device to use icons on a touch display and, most glaring of all, it only allowed a single touch at a time. Not exactly violating Apple's multi-touch capacitance patents there.
From their website, it looks like Psystar all over again. No sign of any real product, any actual "sales" or any way to buy it if there were, just a few computer-generated mock-ups of computer concepts.
The "NT-K Pad", the one the Spanish customs impounded, was real enough. It looks exactly like any number of iPad lookalike Android-based knockoffs you can buy in the back-street markets of Shenzhen.
And like all of these iPad knock-offs, it looks exactly like an iPad, if you ignore the stretched widescreen aspect ratio and the bulge where all those USB ports plug in. Plus it has a fold-out "stand" that looks like it is made from a bent coat hanger.
Problem is, everyone knows, if you go to Shenzhen you might lay out $100 for one just to try. Until these Catalans came along, no-one actually tried to import and SELL them. These guys are not "heros", they are just high-tech black-market cigarette smugglers.
And like all of these iPad knock-offs, it looks exactly like an iPad, if you ignore the stretched widescreen aspect ratio and the bulge where all those USB ports plug in. Plus it has a fold-out "stand" that looks like it is made from a bent coat hanger.
I find your definition of "exactly like" to be interesting...as in "not at all like". Taking all of your "if you ignore" items into account, you're basically left with: flat, black, and rectangular.
Are you saying that Apple has rights to the flat, black, rectangular form factor for all portable electronic devices? Just like Ford has rights to all personal transportation machines that have seats, a steering wheel, and four tires?
Comments
I'm wondering how much of these lawsuits were Jobs at all. To me this would seem like an overly depressing and time consuming when you have more important stuff to deal with. Leave it to the lawyers to determine who to sue and why. Same goes with Samsung. While their latest moves are desperate they actions that I'd think any multi-national company respond even if knowing they won't win.
... but Steve did say:
“I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”
... and this was said when his cancer was quite advanced iirc... in other words, said at a time when Steve was sick but still willing to devote time and energy to go after Android and Samsung.
So I'd say that these lawsuits are mostly Steve... jmho.
[whoops - I see this has been covered (I don't read CJ's posts), plus I thought I was in another thread... this deals with the lawsuit against the Spanish manufacturer which might have just come from Apple legal... as do other trademark infringements (ie - logo related lawsuits) ]
I'd prefer whichever of these is the banned one being able to make new posts, hit the Submit button, have everything look fine, but absolutely nothing actually happens.
Let them waste their time writing posts that get deleted the second they're posted.
5600+ posts in a little more than a year.
Get a life, you fucking nerd.
That's as worthless as Apple beginning to sue that restaurant because their logo was an apple.
Essentially, but instead of showing his posts with the word banned under his name, he was put on the global ignore list built into vBulletin. basically it means only the mods can see him post and until we made mention of his posts vanishing he wouldn't have known we can't see his posts until he logged out of AI to see why people weren't responding to him.
I thought he was just kicked for ten days. Is he really wasting his time posting right now?
Wait. Can someone explain why Apple would go after this company? Their tablets look nothing like the iPad. I'm glad that little company won.
That's as worthless as Apple beginning to sue that restaurant because their logo was an apple.
I think Apple legal was given a broad spectrum mandate and they just stretched it a little too far.
Sort of like the woman at the Safeway who was sent to jail and had her child taken away because she forgot to pay for a $5.00 sandwich while grocery shopping. Sometimes people take their jobs way way too seriously and with little common sense.
5600+ posts in a little more than a year.
Get a life, you fucking nerd.
You've taken a shot at the biggest fanatical fanboi in the known Apple universe.
You are now classified as 'troll' along with anyone who has hinted that Apple isn't perfect.
Congratulations.
... but Steve did say:
?I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple?s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,? Jobs said. ?I?m going to destroy Android, because it?s a stolen product. I?m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.?
... and this was said when his cancer was quite advanced iirc... in other words, said at a time when Steve was sick but still willing to devote time and energy to go after Android and Samsung.
So I'd say that these lawsuits are mostly Steve... jmho.
[whoops - I see this has been covered (I don't read CJ's posts), plus I thought I was in another thread... this deals with the lawsuit against the Spanish manufacturer which might have just come from Apple legal... as do other trademark infringements (ie - logo related lawsuits) ]
I think Apple legal was given a broad spectrum mandate and they just stretched it a little too far.
Sort of like the woman at the Safeway who was sent to jail and had her child taken away because she forgot to pay for a $5.00 sandwich while grocery shopping. Sometimes people take their jobs way way too seriously and with little common sense.
That's what I mean by not being Jobs. He's not going to do the lawyers jobs for them. I figure they were essentially to build a case against Android, something Apple has yet to directly go against Google on.
That's what I mean by not being Jobs. He's not going to do the lawyers jobs for them. I figure they were essentially to build a case against Android, something Apple has yet to directly go against Google on.
Which is going to be harder to win as Android matures and evolves into what it should've been in the first place, a mobile OS inspired by iOS.
You've taken a shot at the biggest fanatical fanboi in the known Apple universe.
Aside: I've retired my Steve Jobs reaction images. Thought it proper. Please enjoy my new Tim Cook line of reaction images.
He specifically referred to Android and Google. Not EVERY competitor.
Correct.
Wait. Can someone explain why Apple would go after this company? Their tablets look nothing like the iPad. I'm glad that little company won.
That's as worthless as Apple beginning to sue that restaurant because their logo was an apple.
Apple obviously doesn't care about companies like this. The strategy is to pick on a little guy, hoping that you can also scare some bigger guys.
A similar proxy war is ongoing against HTC.
Just because you lose a lawsuit doesn't mean the lawsuit was bogus. If Apple's claims were reasonable, although ruled incorrect, this doesn't mean Apple filed a bogus lawsuit. Moreover, Apple probably still has appeal rights, and was fighting in a foreign forum again a local company. In my mind, the competing product looked a lot like an iPad. In the US that would subject a party to possible patent, copyright, and trademark causes of action.
As far as freeze g the product goes, that is the same thing companies in the US are trying to do to Apple and Apple is trying to do to other companies by filing ITC complaints. It is just in some other countries those issues are worked out differently.
maybe the lawsuit wasn't bogus, but the criminal charges
Who ever approved that at Apple, was not thinking clearly.... it seems like Steve dies and shit like this happens soon afterwards.
if Apple keeps going after small manufactures, than i will agree, they are becoming a Microsoft, just with a different market to aim at
It clearly IS copying the iPad’s look—without seeing the iPad, they’d never have made it look the way it does.
There are plenty of examples where the idea of what a tablet like an iPad might look, from a hardware perspective, that predate the iPad. Just to name one, "Star Trek: The Next Generation", a TV show from the early 1990's had flat, squarish, touchscreen computers. It was even called a PADD. Apple clearly stole the idea from there!
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/PADD
Or we could even look at Apple's own Newton MessagePad or all of the PalmPilots and other such devices from the 90's and consider the iPad the logical evolution from that form factor.
We can credit Apple with pushing a finger-based, touchscreen, hand held computer into mainstream reality; but I don't think you can credit them with the idea itself.
Apple has an absolute right to attempt a defense of any IP rights they believe they have in a civil court. It's the filing of a criminal complaint that's particularly worrisome to me. That smacks of over-the-top bullying. According to FOSSPatents they threatened other small producers of tablets with criminal filings, and rather than fight the others rolled over. NT-K wouldn't go away quietly. Kudos to them.
Civil charges are completely understandable. Threatening to see that company owners are put in jail over criminal charges if they don't cow-tow to Apple is way beyond reasonable IMHO.
Even the normally Apple-friendly Florian has harsh words for Apple:
"Considering that this was not a case of product piracy but just a dispute over whether or not Apple has exclusive design rights covering n-tk's Andoid-based products, I think it's absolutely outrageous that Apple tried to attack its rival under criminal law. . .
I think Apple should use better judgment in the future. This story from Spain makes Apple look very bad."
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...t-against.html
Theft is theft, why shouldn't white collar criminals go to jail too? After all, what they are stealing is worth a lot more than, say, a car.
For example, maybe if Schmidt, Page & Brin were facing jail time for their many crimes, they wouldn't be so eager to continually steal other people's IP.
It pre-dates the iPad but that doesn't mean it is original. That is an iPhone KIRF that clearly violates Apple's design patents.
Would be a good arguement if images of the LG Prada were not available before the iPhone was announced.
Would be a good arguement if images of the LG Prada were not available before the iPhone was announced.
Would be a good argument if interface images of the LG Prada were available before the iPhone was announced.
Unfortunately, this argument has been done to death and the LG supporters are wrong.
Would be a good arguement if images of the LG Prada were not available before the iPhone was announced.
And the LG Prada UI was nothing like the iPhone UI. They may have changed a few things around after seeing the iPhone's UI but it's not likely, IMO.
They did used icons, which is what you'd expect on device that uses fingertips for input. Note the LG Prada was not the first device to use icons on a touch display and, most glaring of all, it only allowed a single touch at a time. Not exactly violating Apple's multi-touch capacitance patents there.
From their website, it looks like Psystar all over again. No sign of any real product, any actual "sales" or any way to buy it if there were, just a few computer-generated mock-ups of computer concepts.
The "NT-K Pad", the one the Spanish customs impounded, was real enough. It looks exactly like any number of iPad lookalike Android-based knockoffs you can buy in the back-street markets of Shenzhen.
And like all of these iPad knock-offs, it looks exactly like an iPad, if you ignore the stretched widescreen aspect ratio and the bulge where all those USB ports plug in. Plus it has a fold-out "stand" that looks like it is made from a bent coat hanger.
Problem is, everyone knows, if you go to Shenzhen you might lay out $100 for one just to try. Until these Catalans came along, no-one actually tried to import and SELL them. These guys are not "heros", they are just high-tech black-market cigarette smugglers.
And like all of these iPad knock-offs, it looks exactly like an iPad, if you ignore the stretched widescreen aspect ratio and the bulge where all those USB ports plug in. Plus it has a fold-out "stand" that looks like it is made from a bent coat hanger.
I find your definition of "exactly like" to be interesting...as in "not at all like". Taking all of your "if you ignore" items into account, you're basically left with: flat, black, and rectangular.
Are you saying that Apple has rights to the flat, black, rectangular form factor for all portable electronic devices? Just like Ford has rights to all personal transportation machines that have seats, a steering wheel, and four tires?