The fact is I've used Apple products probably a lot longer than most people on this forum; having cut my teeth as a coder back on the Apple II+ and IIe in early 80's. I'm also a fan of Steve Wozniak (who, due to his views on the whole merits of litigation, funnily enough makes him unpopular on these types of forums.. hmm maybe he's a Samsung shill too because of his not having 100% pro biased apple views?)
So, perhaps instead of taking offense to someone with an opposing view, you might consider trying to counter it and provide your "balanced" view. Reality is that is harder to do as you are then defending the actions of a patent troll - easier to just ad hominem the poster.
Lastly, to your point on the Motorola acquisition, given the "going thermonuclear" intents of Jobs, it would have been corporate negligence of Google to not start looking at ways to counter this new NON technological threat that's been created by Apple. It was bought for defensive purposes. Now we have billions being spent away from technology and into the pockets of lawyers thanks to Apple - that ticks me off frankly, oh and the blind sheep that believe that is the right philosophy (it isn't, it won't end up with a good result for Apple (ie Android will continue to be around and dominate), it will hold progress back about 5 or 10 years though).
Hi Bryan, firstly, if you are indeed not a Samsung Shill then I sincerely apologise for the assumption but as you dont seem to have a supportive word for Apple then it is hard to assume otherwise. I am not an Apple sheep and have criticised them when I felt they deserved it but as Android is (and please dont try to persuade me otherwise) at best a stolen operating system I do get sick of people coming onto this forum to defend it. Having spent most of my career in design I know what it takes to develop an original idea and I am one of those people that believes in patenting things - however trivial they might seem to those who didn't develop them. This is because I understand the process; the pain and trauma in arriving at something new. There is no incentive to develop stuff if you are knocked off the following day by a company that has not spent the money and time to develop it for themselves. Simple concept but profound. Now we dont have the perfect system in patents but it is the only system we have right now. I do believe it needs to be re-thought but till we have a new system those who create should have legal recourse. I dont want to spend the rest of the night in a debating with everyone on the forum so this is the last word from me on the subject. Happy Easter all...
...but morse code was prior art, it encoded data, transmitted it over a network and decoded it at the other end.
According to your earlier arguments, that invalidates every GSM, 3G and 4G standards essential patent ever granted because that is all these inventions do, using software to do it.
Thanks Gatorguy - Nice link - I've got plenty of prior art references to submit to the PTO to assist then in invalidating the obvious patents Apple is pushing.. Background data sync, just invented since iPhone was released?? pffft.
The fact is I've used Apple products probably a lot longer than most people on this forum; having cut my teeth as a coder back on the Apple II+ and IIe in early 80's<span style="line-height:1.4em;">. I'm </span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">also a fan of Steve Wozniak (</span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">who, due to his views on the whole merits of litigation, funnily enough makes him unpopular on these types of forums.. hmm maybe he's a Samsung shill too because of his not having 100% pro biased apple views?) </span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">So, perhaps instead of taking offense to someone with an opposing view, you might consider trying to counter it and provide your "balanced" view. Reality is that is harder to do as you are then defending the actions of a patent troll - easier to just ad hominem the poster.</span>
Lastly, to your point on the Motorola acquisition, given the "going thermonuclear" intents of Jobs, it would have been corporate negligence of Google to not start looking at ways to counter this new NON technological threat that's been created by Apple. It was bought for defensive purposes. Now we have billions being spent away from technology and into the pockets of lawyers thanks to Apple - that ticks me off frankly, oh and the blind sheep that believe that is the right philosophy (it isn't, it won't end up with a good result for Apple (ie Android will continue to be around and dominate), it will hold progress back about 5 or 10 years though).
And therein lies your wrongheadedness. "Android...will continue to dominate". Dominate what? The only thing it dominates is cheap crap phones. By all other metrics - usability, profitability, actual mobile web usage, ad revenue generation, third party app revenue generation, etc. it lags far behind.
That's exactly how Rockstar uses these patents - for litigation purposes only. It doesn't create or use these patents in any other way. It's a patent troll.
Actually, there is one differentiation from a pure patent troll; Rockstar is also set with the objective of disrupting the Android business through the court system, which is not what a pure patent troll would do.. in fact, this makes Rockstar worse than a patent troll.
I don't know. On the one hand I see what you mean, but on the other hand I'm deeply uneasy with being able to buy a 'license to sue', whether it's in the form of patents or copyrights.
If I was to buy a patent from Samsung and then immediately used it to sue Apple, how is that any different from a troll? If the entire reason behind my purchase is just so that I can sue someone with it, how does that make me different from a company who files for broad patents for the same reason?
The difference is that Apple and Microsoft and Sony and Erricson and Blackberry who are all part owners of rockstar actually use a lot of these patents. A lot of Nortels (rockstars) patents are part of the 4G standard. There used by android phones as well as windows phones and iPhones. There valid patents and a lot of them are part of a standard (4G) that gets used every day. And the owners are entitled to there royalties. Remember that Google was part of the original Rockstar consortium and then backed out to try and bid for these same patents for themselves. They lost. The didn't have to back out and if they had not they would be part owners of these now.
...and yet don't bring a single lawsuit using any of them against a tech neighbor. Odd for a company that supposedly bought them to go after their competitors don't you think?
Except through there motorola arm while they owned them. Google even wrote public documents supporting Motorola's lawsuits against apple when they aquired them. And that they would not change that litigation at all as a result of the merger.
Perhaps you aren't reading enough. MM requested that ITC case be dropped just 6 weeks after it was filed.
There's not a single new lawsuit using MM IP in the works despite Motorola Mobility and/or Google having plenty of time to root thru those patents and find a few appropriate ones.
Now if you look really hard you might stumble on the only patent infringement lawsuit Google has ever filed in the history of their company. Yup, there's only one and it's not against Apple, Microsoft, Nokia or any other competitor of theirs.
Except the push notification ban on all apples products in germany filed by motorola and supported by google that ban was in effect for over a year. And Google approved.
The difference is that Apple and Microsoft and Sony and Erricson and Blackberry who are all part owners of rockstar actually use a lot of these patents. A lot of Nortels (rockstars) patents are part of the 4G standard. There used by android phones as well as windows phones and iPhones. There valid patents and a lot of them are part of a standard (4G) that gets used every day. And the owners are entitled to there royalties. Remember that Google was part of the original Rockstar consortium and then backed out to try and bid for these same patents for themselves. They lost. The didn't have to back out and if they had not they would be part owners of these now.
A couple of errors in your post.
Apple, Microsoft and the rest of the group have no ownership in the patents being used by Rockstar. They are supposedly simple investors in that company just like other PAE's, aka patent trolls like Intellectual Ventures, have investors. That's according to Rockstar's CEO.
Second, Google was never a part of Rockstar Bidco nor has there ever been a claim from any of the group that Google was ever invited to join them. You've confused Nortel with Norvell.
Except the push notification ban on all apples products in germany filed by motorola and supported by google that ban was in effect for over a year. And Google approved.
ummm... okay. That wasn't a new lawsuit, decided before Google purchased MM. Even the injunction was already in place before the MM deal closed. It would have been a nice gesture for Google to request the injunction be dismissed after they bought Moto, but of course they didn't. Not sure any company would have but perhaps Lenovo will drop all the litigation now, depending of course on whether Apple will let their lawsuits die too.
Apple, Microsoft and the rest of the group have no ownership in the patents being used by Rockstar. They are supposedly simple investors in that company just like other PAE's, aka patent trolls like Intellectual Ventures, have investors. That's according to Rockstar's CEO.
Second, Google was never a part of Rockstar Bidco nor has there ever been a claim from any of the group that Google was ever invited to join them. You've confused Nortel with Norvell.
Tell that to Google and the judge who supported Google's arguments when moving the case from Rockstars home state to Apple's.
Now if you look really hard you might stumble on the only patent infringement lawsuit Google has ever filed in the history of their company. Yup, there's only one and it's not against Apple, Microsoft, Nokia or any other competitor of theirs.
They dropped the case because they discovered the IP they had acquired was a bust.
Yup. Good to see you've decided to actually look for some background on the patent fight between Moto and Apple.
So you've found there's still some old "before Google" cases filed a few years back and still dragging along. Some still haven't even been heard yet. And still no new infringement claims since Google bought 'em.
Sure would be a nice gesture if both Moto (or Google) and Apple would just agree to drop it all, but probably won't happen. Perhaps Apple will be more agreeable to putting it all to bed when Lenovo actually takes over which should be pretty soon. I think I read they're going to leave MM as a separate subsidiary just as Google did tho so maybe they'll just let this old stuff play out instead. Hmmm . . .
Comments
The fact is I've used Apple products probably a lot longer than most people on this forum; having cut my teeth as a coder back on the Apple II+ and IIe in early 80's. I'm also a fan of Steve Wozniak (who, due to his views on the whole merits of litigation, funnily enough makes him unpopular on these types of forums.. hmm maybe he's a Samsung shill too because of his not having 100% pro biased apple views?)
So, perhaps instead of taking offense to someone with an opposing view, you might consider trying to counter it and provide your "balanced" view. Reality is that is harder to do as you are then defending the actions of a patent troll - easier to just ad hominem the poster.
Lastly, to your point on the Motorola acquisition, given the "going thermonuclear" intents of Jobs, it would have been corporate negligence of Google to not start looking at ways to counter this new NON technological threat that's been created by Apple. It was bought for defensive purposes. Now we have billions being spent away from technology and into the pockets of lawyers thanks to Apple - that ticks me off frankly, oh and the blind sheep that believe that is the right philosophy (it isn't, it won't end up with a good result for Apple (ie Android will continue to be around and dominate), it will hold progress back about 5 or 10 years though).
Hi Bryan, firstly, if you are indeed not a Samsung Shill then I sincerely apologise for the assumption but as you dont seem to have a supportive word for Apple then it is hard to assume otherwise. I am not an Apple sheep and have criticised them when I felt they deserved it but as Android is (and please dont try to persuade me otherwise) at best a stolen operating system I do get sick of people coming onto this forum to defend it. Having spent most of my career in design I know what it takes to develop an original idea and I am one of those people that believes in patenting things - however trivial they might seem to those who didn't develop them. This is because I understand the process; the pain and trauma in arriving at something new. There is no incentive to develop stuff if you are knocked off the following day by a company that has not spent the money and time to develop it for themselves. Simple concept but profound. Now we dont have the perfect system in patents but it is the only system we have right now. I do believe it needs to be re-thought but till we have a new system those who create should have legal recourse. I dont want to spend the rest of the night in a debating with everyone on the forum so this is the last word from me on the subject. Happy Easter all...
Thanks Gatorguy - Nice link - I've got plenty of prior art references to submit to the PTO to assist then in invalidating the obvious patents Apple is pushing.. Background data sync, just invented since iPhone was released?? pffft.
Excellent use of a False Dilemma sir...
pffft.
And therein lies your wrongheadedness. "Android...will continue to dominate". Dominate what? The only thing it dominates is cheap crap phones. By all other metrics - usability, profitability, actual mobile web usage, ad revenue generation, third party app revenue generation, etc. it lags far behind.
Rockstar is nothing more than a patent troll and I wish Apple and Microsoft would stop their association with them.
Lol do you even have a clue who rockstar is? obviously not.
That's exactly how Rockstar uses these patents - for litigation purposes only. It doesn't create or use these patents in any other way. It's a patent troll.
Actually, there is one differentiation from a pure patent troll; Rockstar is also set with the objective of disrupting the Android business through the court system, which is not what a pure patent troll would do.. in fact, this makes Rockstar worse than a patent troll.
LOL Good popcorn bs string there!
Suck it Apple! Hopefully this gets thrown out and you'll have to go back to competing on merits alone.
A whole twenty posts and all anti apple. Welcome Troll of the Day.
I don't know. On the one hand I see what you mean, but on the other hand I'm deeply uneasy with being able to buy a 'license to sue', whether it's in the form of patents or copyrights.
If I was to buy a patent from Samsung and then immediately used it to sue Apple, how is that any different from a troll? If the entire reason behind my purchase is just so that I can sue someone with it, how does that make me different from a company who files for broad patents for the same reason?
The difference is that Apple and Microsoft and Sony and Erricson and Blackberry who are all part owners of rockstar actually use a lot of these patents. A lot of Nortels (rockstars) patents are part of the 4G standard. There used by android phones as well as windows phones and iPhones. There valid patents and a lot of them are part of a standard (4G) that gets used every day. And the owners are entitled to there royalties. Remember that Google was part of the original Rockstar consortium and then backed out to try and bid for these same patents for themselves. They lost. The didn't have to back out and if they had not they would be part owners of these now.
...and yet don't bring a single lawsuit using any of them against a tech neighbor. Odd for a company that supposedly bought them to go after their competitors don't you think?
Except through there motorola arm while they owned them. Google even wrote public documents supporting Motorola's lawsuits against apple when they aquired them. And that they would not change that litigation at all as a result of the merger.
Perhaps you aren't reading enough. MM requested that ITC case be dropped just 6 weeks after it was filed.
There's not a single new lawsuit using MM IP in the works despite Motorola Mobility and/or Google having plenty of time to root thru those patents and find a few appropriate ones.
http://venturebeat.com/2012/10/02/googlemotorola-unilaterally-drop-itc-patent-infringement-case-against-apple/
Now if you look really hard you might stumble on the only patent infringement lawsuit Google has ever filed in the history of their company. Yup, there's only one and it's not against Apple, Microsoft, Nokia or any other competitor of theirs.
Except the push notification ban on all apples products in germany filed by motorola and supported by google that ban was in effect for over a year. And Google approved.
A couple of errors in your post.
Apple, Microsoft and the rest of the group have no ownership in the patents being used by Rockstar. They are supposedly simple investors in that company just like other PAE's, aka patent trolls like Intellectual Ventures, have investors. That's according to Rockstar's CEO.
Second, Google was never a part of Rockstar Bidco nor has there ever been a claim from any of the group that Google was ever invited to join them. You've confused Nortel with Norvell.
ummm... okay. That wasn't a new lawsuit, decided before Google purchased MM. Even the injunction was already in place before the MM deal closed. It would have been a nice gesture for Google to request the injunction be dismissed after they bought Moto, but of course they didn't. Not sure any company would have but perhaps Lenovo will drop all the litigation now, depending of course on whether Apple will let their lawsuits die too.
Tell that to Google and the judge who supported Google's arguments when moving the case from Rockstars home state to Apple's.
I'm with you. I don't believe Rockstars CEO either.
Maybe Rockstar could sue for $Pi100 damages.
A google pi.
They dropped the case because they discovered the IP they had acquired was a bust.
Sure they did. Patents have little value. Oh wait. . .
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/152042/motorolas-seven-patent-itc-complaint-against-apple-detailed
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/09/11/apple-motorola-argue-for-reopening-of-dismissed-patent-suit
Here's another! Wheeeee!
http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/07/apple-and-googles-motorola-drop-14.html?m=1
Yup. Good to see you've decided to actually look for some background on the patent fight between Moto and Apple.
So you've found there's still some old "before Google" cases filed a few years back and still dragging along. Some still haven't even been heard yet. And still no new infringement claims since Google bought 'em.
Sure would be a nice gesture if both Moto (or Google) and Apple would just agree to drop it all, but probably won't happen. Perhaps Apple will be more agreeable to putting it all to bed when Lenovo actually takes over which should be pretty soon. I think I read they're going to leave MM as a separate subsidiary just as Google did tho so maybe they'll just let this old stuff play out instead. Hmmm . . .