robertwalter

All Apple need do is add a toggle for this feature to allow the user to decide if they want to benefit from it. 

Grants?

I’m pretty sure this is an investment, not a grant. 

zroger73 said:

When I write about the Honda Civic Si, it annoys me when my Macs autocorrect "Si" to "is". I've even added "Si" to the dictionary, yet the autocorrection persists. Very annoying!

Imagine you are Mel Blanc on The Jack Benny Show doing your Si, Sy, Sue routine live on air and the cue card guy is suddenly possessed by Siri.

In the back glass you can see the reflection of the guy who posted the video. 

I wonder if he is going to catch heat. 

In another forum, somebody tracked him down and claimed to have been met with dickishness. 

I don’t understand the negative bias in the authors writing.

I also don’t understand all the comments that don’t dispute how the author frames his opinion piece.

This issue at hand is the normal course of patent business.

Apple had as much chance to buy the related patent as any other party. The party that bought it bought it because they thought they could make a case it was/is being infringed. The party that sold it may never have pursued an infringement case because they were unawares or had not the resources to do so. If it was the latter, chances are that the sell received a nice sum for the assignment. 

So the new owner thinks they can assert infringement and recover damages. Good let them. If there is infringement, Apple will probably pay more than it would have cost to buy or license the patent in the first place; that is also normal and appropriate. 

If if the owner had tried to sell or license the patent to Apple, was refused, and Apple infringed, then if the up owner wins, there will be extra penalties for willful infringement; this is also good and normal. 

This is the nature of any property, including IP, ownership confers special privileges including renting, selling, suing for damages. Folks that dispute this are apparently ignorant.