Is it so hard to believe that Apple is suing because they feel work and research that they performed and paid for and protected is begin used by others to profit?
LOL
you better watch out for those flying pigs if you actually believe that
LOL
you better watch out for those flying pigs if you actually believe that
Nice rebuttal. As always with our resident trolls, both very informed and informative.
Unlocked Pentaband iPhone 5 (AWS), unlocked iPhone 4
Unlimited airtime, Unlimited CAN/US long distance, Unlimited SMS to CAN/US wireless numbers
2500 Call Forwarding minutes to CAN/US numbers
CiD, 6GB
Google Voice for visual voice mail with message transcription, conditional greetings, unlimited messages (vs 35 message cap), remote retrieval from any PC or phone, no auto-purge after 10 days and most importantly no $7-$8 charge.
$53
that's how desperate patent trolls like apple work. they 'patent' vague ideas that are worded in such a way as to apply to anything.
there are amoebas in my house that are more innovative than apple
Unfortunately, those comments have almost nothing to do with how the patent system actually works.
Hmm, I go to your wikipedia (hint: nice to see people still using wikipedia...) and what is the very first line?
"Patent troll is a term used for a person or company who enforces patents against one or more alleged infringers in a manner considered aggressive or opportunistic with no intention to manufacture or market the patented invention"
As I said, you have no idea what this means, or you are really stretching to apply it to Apple. Just in case you missed it, Apple actually sells products which use their patents. Bizarre, I know, but they even sell phones.
didn't apple patent ones and zeros last year? they've tried to patent everything else that's bleedin' obvious.
So obvious that no one was doing it (in most cases). In those cases where others were doing it first (prior art) then their lawyers should have no problem demonstrating that.
In case you were wondering, the injunction is in place because MS sued for an injunction in a patent infringement case. I am in no means using this to justify Apple's actions as right or wrong, that would be irrational. I am posting it to shows those that have swallowed the "I hate Apple kool-aid" crew, that when they claim stupid things like "Well, MS doesn't sue" or "MS doesn't seek injunctions/bans", they are completely talking out of the back side. If that is one of the reason you hate Apple, then you must also hate MS, Samsung, Nokia, Motorola, HTC, Google, Sony,....you get the idea (I hope). On the otherhand, if it is ok for these other companies, then why keep bringing it up as a reason to hate Apple? Find other reasons to justify your hate, but put at least some thought into it.
Oh and for every one living under the delusion that only Apple sues for injunctions (bans) and others, like MS, don't, this just popped up today.
Anybody who says that only Apple sues for injunctions has no idea how the legal system works. Every single patent case I have worked on we ask for an injunction. Even if that is not you end goal, an injunction makes you negotiation position for a royalty that much stronger.
Hmm, I go to your wikipedia (hint: nice to see people still using wikipedia...) and what is the very first line?
"Patent troll is a term used for a person or company who enforces patents against one or more alleged infringers in a manner considered aggressive or opportunistic with no intention to manufacture or market the patented invention"
As I said, you have no idea what this means, or you are really stretching to apply it to Apple. Just in case you missed it, Apple actually sells products which use their patents. Bizarre, I know, but they even sell phones.
when i suggested for that to read "Etymology and definition", i meant read past the first sentence.
Originally Posted by ceredon
Oh and for every one living under the delusion that only Apple sues for injunctions (bans) and others, like MS, don't, this just popped up today.
In case you were wondering, the injunction is in place because MS sued for an injunction in a patent infringement case. I am in no means using this to justify Apple's actions as right or wrong, that would be irrational. I am posting it to shows those that have swallowed the "I hate Apple kool-aid" crew, that when they claim stupid things like "Well, MS doesn't sue" or "MS doesn't seek injunctions/bans", they are completely talking out of the back side. If that is one of the reason you hate Apple, then you must also hate MS, Samsung, Nokia, Motorola, HTC, Google, Sony,....you get the idea (I hope). On the otherhand, if it is ok for these other companies, then why keep bringing it up as a reason to hate Apple? Find other reasons to justify your hate, but put at least some thought into it.
Here is a handy chart. It isn't just MSFT and AAPL filing suits. Every player in the industry is suing or being sued. It is just the natural cycle of business. Any new industry sees the exact same thing. In the early 90s, the same thing happened with the personal computer.
Here is a handy chart. It isn't just MSFT and AAPL filing suits. Every player in the industry is suing or being sued. It is just the natural cycle of business. Any new industry sees the exact same thing. In the early 90s, the same thing happened with the personal computer.
there's a few points to note about that:
1) apple is getting sued more than any other
2) within the mobile space, it is almost always apple doing the initial suing, with samsung, htc, et al countersuing
3) that chart need to be updated. such as this: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/...-121110-lg.png
Nope. I see MS trying to force injunctions in order to protect the positions. There is an argument made, but hardly fleshed out, that MS sees this as necessary because they are significantly behind in market position and competing without the lawsuits would be difficult. That may well be true, but even if MS was in a dominate position, through innovation or otherwise, they would sue, just as they always have.
Apple is not in that same position. They have led much of the innovation in the smartphone market for the last half decade, they are not in a precarious market position. They are not trying to come from behind as MS is.
What was your point? I hope you aren't claiming a company only starts suing when they are desperate and can't compete with innovation. If that is really, truly your actual belief, please tell me what products you own. I would hate for you to hypocritically and unknowingly be buying from a company doing exactly that. Moto/Google, MS, Nokia, Samsung, HTC, Sony, etc, etc, etc.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by GeminiIII
Bookmarks