I am not following this weirdly platitudinous comment.
What depends on what 'rules' and what 'prizes'?! What do you mean by this statement? In what way do patent rules and prizes differ across products or companies or countries, and who benefits how from particular rules or prizes? Can you provide some examples?
The "rules" presented were the law and what I assume is an implied obligation to follow it. That, however, isn't how the game is always played. My comment is to show that bending or breaking the law — if the bean counters determine that the risk is worth it — is viable and common business strategy that oft has no barring on morality or the law (outside of potential penalties if caught and convicted).
Good thing that Samsung already has a 'work around' ready to go, so this entire bit of litigious nonsense will likely have little-to-no impact.
If Samsung had a workaround, why did they have to infringe Apple's patent in the first place? They could have saved themselves millions in legal expenses if they had simply used the 'workaround' in the first place.
All this talk of the all mighty Siri makes me wonder why Google doesn't use this patent to try and counter all this Apple BS? I know that Apple patented it early this year but surely it has to infringe. And what about the nicely copied "notification bar" that Apple decided to stick on the 4S?
Copying a process and stealing code is 2 very differnet things. Its like saying SAP does a customer lookup before creating a Sales Order. They could patent that and refrain any POS system from doing customer look ups.
That will never fly and it shouldn't... however if someone copies their code to do customer lookups that is a different story altogether. Its just silly but I understand why Apple does this as it gives them time to catch up to Android while keeping Samsung's devices out of the hands of the consumers.
Its dirty but it works.... However Apple on the phone front just looks dated now... with Android and MS options being new and exciting.
So, all you Android Fans - yes, you have a nice OS and some of the phones are pretty nice - however, please acknowledge that stealing is stealing.
This is what you should be upset about - the waste created by Android.
You remember this when Apple's iDevices get banned for 'stealing' Android's Notification Center. And of course the many features Apple 'stole' for iOS6 from Android like email 'priority inbox' or as Apple calls it 'VIP mail', or the "call you later" text response to incoming calls or Face detection api or custom vibrations or multiple keyboard layouts or in-app bluetooth, etc...
So, you still want to acknowledge stealing is stealing, or not so much now. The iFaithful never cease to amaze me. You think Apple invented everything.
If Samsung had a workaround, why did they have to infringe Apple's patent in the first place? They could have saved themselves millions in legal expenses if they had simply used the 'workaround' in the first place.
Samsung doesn't have a work-around. This is Android, hence why Google is doing the coding and not Samsung. Google will push the code to Samsung.
This is another reason why Apple suing Samsung is absurd over this patent.
You mean like every search engine in the world does. Google may be many things but patent suing assholes they are not. (That is why I hate what they are doing with Moto). I know this patent war that has threaten to the whole mobile industry, but google needs to stand its ground as one of the few companies that have morals regarding patent suits. I hope they end this Moto Frand bull.
Software patent is hurting our choices.
Wait until android gets notification drop down patent then my fellow apple fans you will see how ridiculous software patents are, just as I do. I hate them, I hate them so much.
Wasn't Google whining to someone about Bing scraping their search results?
What about that and their constant whining complaints to various government departments when someone treads on their toes.
Samsung excel in making shit products with built in obsolescence and Google is the same, look at all the crap they've dropped over the years.
You mean like every search engine in the world does. Google may be many things but patent suing assholes they are not. (That is why I hate what they are doing with Moto). I know this patent war that has threaten to the whole mobile industry, but google needs to stand its ground as one of the few companies that have morals regarding patent suits. I hope they end this Moto Frand bull.
Software patent is hurting our choices.
Wait until android gets notification drop down patent then my fellow apple fans you will see how ridiculous software patents are, just as I do. I hate them, I hate them so much.
Search engines existed long before Google did.
If they get that patent, it might be interestin. However, Google knows they make a lot more money on iPhones and iPads than Android phones,,,
I don't think that Apple is necessarily wrong in being ticked with both Google or Samsung, but ultimately I don't think that their strategy is going prove to be successful or in their best interest.
My personal feeling is both Google and Samsung were kind of just asking for a fight. Samsung's hardware, charging cables, packaging very closely mimic Apple. So much so that it creates consumer confusion to much of the less tech savvy consumers. If you do something like that, you have to expect to ruffle some feathers. Samsung "could have" differentiated their hardware, cables and packaging, but it's easier to mimic the market leader.
Google is now differentiating themselves more with Android's design and feature set, but they gained traction in this market with versions that were clearly borrowing from Apple. You have to expect that as well is going to ruffle some feathers, especially when Google was partnering with Apple. I can see why Apple is pissed.
At the end of the day, I want nothing Google wherever possible. I don't like their business model. I take offense to any company whose primary product involves harvesting and selling info on their users. Apple design and sell real products, from hardware to software and THAT is their product and that is their business model. Google's sole reason for being is to have their greasy fingers in absolutely every area of my online life, so they can harvest my data. Pricks.
Google Now is a prime example of this. Google had all the parts that make up Siri (and then some) but it wasn't until Apple did it that Google saw how they could assemble the parts into a working product.
I most sincerely doubt that Google's work on GoogleNow began when Apple purchased Siri. Google's engineers may be good, but they're not magicians.
Samsung doesn't have a work-around. This is Android, hence why Google is doing the coding and not Samsung. Google will push the code to Samsung.
This is another reason why Apple suing Samsung is absurd over this patent.
But Samsung is the one selling an infringing device and Samsung is the one who claims to have a workaround. The fact that Google wrote the code doesn't absolve Samsung of liability. Why in the world do you think Samsung should be able to sell infringing devices with impunity just because they got the code from someone else?
Apple suing Samsung is not absurd in any way. Samsung is selling millions of devices which Apple claims are infringing on its patent and the judge agreed that stopping Samsung from selling the allegedly infringing devices would be the best move in the interest of justice. That is based on an assessment of Apple's chances to prevail. So what's absurd about it?
Samsung is selling millions of devices which Apple claims are infringing on its patent and the judge agreed that stopping Samsung from selling the allegedly infringing devices would be the best move in the interest of justice. That is based on an assessment of Apple's chances to prevail. So what's absurd about it?
...that you'd suddenly be so certain that her decisions are right?
I see that you're still unable to come up with any rational arguments and simply resort to ad hominem attacks - as usual.
Why would you consider that an ad-hom Jr? Weren't you accusing her of actions bordering on incompetence (you may have actually used that word to describe her but not certain) when she initially denied the Apple requested Galaxy injunctions? That you're now so comfortable with her decisions that you no longer see any need to question them doesn't seem rational on the surface.
The notifications and the the priority inbox are not patented products. These are cosmetic variations, not quite like fully threaded OS functions. Whoever created, whether it was Google or a independent Android programmer, the idea and it's implementation was not patented. While convenient, it isn't quite the same as unified search. When unified search arrived on the scene- the very same patent that Apple filed back in OS9 on the Mac and the very same Patent - it was huge, as it searched not only the web, but also all the resources within the device and network, along with searching multiple search engines, and web resources, all at once. Siri rides on this. It truly is a unified search. Siri, while in Beta now, is eventually going to replace regular searches, which works against Google's ad revenue.
I don't doubt that each company robs many cosmetic and convenience steps from each other. But, when core facets of an OS are robbed, especially ones that are patented, then you need to do your own work around instead of just taking them. Work arounds are expensive and maybe not as slick but that is what is required by law. I think that the things that Apple patents are always the slickest way of doing something and thus, to compete, companies find that the solution Apple came up with is virtually impossible to try to out do, without making it a bit awkward. A perfect example of this is the "data tapping" patent, where the OS recognizes phone numbers, web addresses, etc., and allows you to simply tap on them to instigate a phone call, a web lookup, etc. The work around simply doesn't exist yet, so Android simply takes it. This is what is also being litigated.
.....common business strategy that oft has no barring on morality or the law (outside of potential penalties if caught and convicted).
You also have to factor in loss of reputation and possible decline in stock price, the extent and consequences of which are quite difficult to estimate. I.e., bean counters don't just do a cost-benefit analysis of penalties like you think they do.
You remember this when Apple's iDevices get banned for 'stealing' Android's Notification Center. And of course the many features Apple 'stole' for iOS6 from Android like email 'priority inbox' or as Apple calls it 'VIP mail', or the "call you later" text response to incoming calls or Face detection api or custom vibrations or multiple keyboard layouts or in-app bluetooth, etc...
So, you still want to acknowledge stealing is stealing, or not so much now. The iFaithful never cease to amaze me. You think Apple invented everything.
Do you believe all of the features you mentioned were invented by Google for Android?
You remember this when Apple's iDevices get banned for 'stealing' Android's Notification Center. And of course the many features Apple 'stole' for iOS6 from Android like email 'priority inbox' or as Apple calls it 'VIP mail', or the "call you later" text response to incoming calls or Face detection api or custom vibrations or multiple keyboard layouts or in-app bluetooth, etc...
So, you still want to acknowledge stealing is stealing, or not so much now. The iFaithful never cease to amaze me. You think Apple invented everything.
Google stole the "call you later" from the various apps in the Market that have been around for years.
Comments
The "rules" presented were the law and what I assume is an implied obligation to follow it. That, however, isn't how the game is always played. My comment is to show that bending or breaking the law — if the bean counters determine that the risk is worth it — is viable and common business strategy that oft has no barring on morality or the law (outside of potential penalties if caught and convicted).
I provided examples in my post.
If Samsung had a workaround, why did they have to infringe Apple's patent in the first place? They could have saved themselves millions in legal expenses if they had simply used the 'workaround' in the first place.
All this talk of the all mighty Siri makes me wonder why Google doesn't use this patent to try and counter all this Apple BS? I know that Apple patented it early this year but surely it has to infringe. And what about the nicely copied "notification bar" that Apple decided to stick on the 4S?
Copying a process and stealing code is 2 very differnet things. Its like saying SAP does a customer lookup before creating a Sales Order. They could patent that and refrain any POS system from doing customer look ups.
That will never fly and it shouldn't... however if someone copies their code to do customer lookups that is a different story altogether. Its just silly but I understand why Apple does this as it gives them time to catch up to Android while keeping Samsung's devices out of the hands of the consumers.
Its dirty but it works.... However Apple on the phone front just looks dated now... with Android and MS options being new and exciting.
You remember this when Apple's iDevices get banned for 'stealing' Android's Notification Center. And of course the many features Apple 'stole' for iOS6 from Android like email 'priority inbox' or as Apple calls it 'VIP mail', or the "call you later" text response to incoming calls or Face detection api or custom vibrations or multiple keyboard layouts or in-app bluetooth, etc...
So, you still want to acknowledge stealing is stealing, or not so much now. The iFaithful never cease to amaze me. You think Apple invented everything.
This is another reason why Apple suing Samsung is absurd over this patent.
Wasn't Google whining to someone about Bing scraping their search results?
What about that and their constant whining complaints to various government departments when someone treads on their toes.
Samsung excel in making shit products with built in obsolescence and Google is the same, look at all the crap they've dropped over the years.
Search engines existed long before Google did.
If they get that patent, it might be interestin. However, Google knows they make a lot more money on iPhones and iPads than Android phones,,,
I don't think that Apple is necessarily wrong in being ticked with both Google or Samsung, but ultimately I don't think that their strategy is going prove to be successful or in their best interest.
My personal feeling is both Google and Samsung were kind of just asking for a fight. Samsung's hardware, charging cables, packaging very closely mimic Apple. So much so that it creates consumer confusion to much of the less tech savvy consumers. If you do something like that, you have to expect to ruffle some feathers. Samsung "could have" differentiated their hardware, cables and packaging, but it's easier to mimic the market leader.
Google is now differentiating themselves more with Android's design and feature set, but they gained traction in this market with versions that were clearly borrowing from Apple. You have to expect that as well is going to ruffle some feathers, especially when Google was partnering with Apple. I can see why Apple is pissed.
At the end of the day, I want nothing Google wherever possible. I don't like their business model. I take offense to any company whose primary product involves harvesting and selling info on their users. Apple design and sell real products, from hardware to software and THAT is their product and that is their business model. Google's sole reason for being is to have their greasy fingers in absolutely every area of my online life, so they can harvest my data. Pricks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Google Now is a prime example of this. Google had all the parts that make up Siri (and then some) but it wasn't until Apple did it that Google saw how they could assemble the parts into a working product.
I most sincerely doubt that Google's work on GoogleNow began when Apple purchased Siri. Google's engineers may be good, but they're not magicians.
But Samsung is the one selling an infringing device and Samsung is the one who claims to have a workaround. The fact that Google wrote the code doesn't absolve Samsung of liability. Why in the world do you think Samsung should be able to sell infringing devices with impunity just because they got the code from someone else?
Apple suing Samsung is not absurd in any way. Samsung is selling millions of devices which Apple claims are infringing on its patent and the judge agreed that stopping Samsung from selling the allegedly infringing devices would be the best move in the interest of justice. That is based on an assessment of Apple's chances to prevail. So what's absurd about it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Samsung is selling millions of devices which Apple claims are infringing on its patent and the judge agreed that stopping Samsung from selling the allegedly infringing devices would be the best move in the interest of justice. That is based on an assessment of Apple's chances to prevail. So what's absurd about it?
...that you'd suddenly be so certain that her decisions are right?
I see that you're still unable to come up with any rational arguments and simply resort to ad hominem attacks - as usual.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
I see that you're still unable to come up with any rational arguments and simply resort to ad hominem attacks - as usual.
Why would you consider that an ad-hom Jr? Weren't you accusing her of actions bordering on incompetence (you may have actually used that word to describe her but not certain) when she initially denied the Apple requested Galaxy injunctions? That you're now so comfortable with her decisions that you no longer see any need to question them doesn't seem rational on the surface.
The notifications and the the priority inbox are not patented products. These are cosmetic variations, not quite like fully threaded OS functions. Whoever created, whether it was Google or a independent Android programmer, the idea and it's implementation was not patented. While convenient, it isn't quite the same as unified search. When unified search arrived on the scene- the very same patent that Apple filed back in OS9 on the Mac and the very same Patent - it was huge, as it searched not only the web, but also all the resources within the device and network, along with searching multiple search engines, and web resources, all at once. Siri rides on this. It truly is a unified search. Siri, while in Beta now, is eventually going to replace regular searches, which works against Google's ad revenue.
I don't doubt that each company robs many cosmetic and convenience steps from each other. But, when core facets of an OS are robbed, especially ones that are patented, then you need to do your own work around instead of just taking them. Work arounds are expensive and maybe not as slick but that is what is required by law. I think that the things that Apple patents are always the slickest way of doing something and thus, to compete, companies find that the solution Apple came up with is virtually impossible to try to out do, without making it a bit awkward. A perfect example of this is the "data tapping" patent, where the OS recognizes phone numbers, web addresses, etc., and allows you to simply tap on them to instigate a phone call, a web lookup, etc. The work around simply doesn't exist yet, so Android simply takes it. This is what is also being litigated.
Gatorguy is absolutely right! It is absurd that Apple would sue Samsung because jragosta "agrees" with the judge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
...that you'd suddenly be so certain that her decisions are right?
Seriously. It seems that opinions are based upon confirmation bias rather than an objective asessment of the facts at hand.
Had this gone the other way, I would expect bleating about this being "only one lower court" with a "biased judge" who will be "overturned on appeal".
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
.....common business strategy that oft has no barring on morality or the law (outside of potential penalties if caught and convicted).
You also have to factor in loss of reputation and possible decline in stock price, the extent and consequences of which are quite difficult to estimate. I.e., bean counters don't just do a cost-benefit analysis of penalties like you think they do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World
You remember this when Apple's iDevices get banned for 'stealing' Android's Notification Center. And of course the many features Apple 'stole' for iOS6 from Android like email 'priority inbox' or as Apple calls it 'VIP mail', or the "call you later" text response to incoming calls or Face detection api or custom vibrations or multiple keyboard layouts or in-app bluetooth, etc...
So, you still want to acknowledge stealing is stealing, or not so much now. The iFaithful never cease to amaze me. You think Apple invented everything.
Do you believe all of the features you mentioned were invented by Google for Android?
Google stole the "call you later" from the various apps in the Market that have been around for years.