As a developer, I do hate that Apple frequently "Sherlocks" indie developers. I do think that, out of goodwill, they should provide fair compensation in such situations, but there are legal issues with that - opening the possibility of future legal action, particularly if the offer of compensation is not accepted (e.g. if Blix says that feature is worth US$1 Trillion).
I do think Apple could offer a technology licensing arrangement without admitting guilt somehow.
Still, even if Apple were to license the technology from Blix, since they don't have a patent or any kind of trade dress, another company could sue them for the same thing the next day; then, the fact that they paid something to Blix could be used against them with that next company.
Entitled developers. What an annoying group. You don't deserve anything out of goodwill just because someone else makes an app that's better than yours, an app that offers more ease-of-use than yours, or an app that isn't littered with crap. Either make a good app and keep people from moving off of your app, or stop whining.
Sherlocking is a problem. Sign in with Apple is not an example of sherlocking. It is a response to popular sign-in services simply lacking any decent level of privacy protection, and seeing both a market need and an issue for their user base that they felt they could address. One could argue that the terms of service for Sign in with Apple are an anti-trust violation, since they could be seen as abusing their power in controlling their platform to strong-arm themselves into a market. But, Sign in with Apple is a good thing, so I am personally okay with it.
But, this is a suit from a patent troll who is pretending to stand up for other developers to gain positive publicity for their trollish ways.
Comments
But, this is a suit from a patent troll who is pretending to stand up for other developers to gain positive publicity for their trollish ways.