I highly doubt Apple or Microsoft actually have valid patents for Android, given how generic they actually are.
Google better take a serious and thorough review of future Android versions to make sure they aren't going to be flooded with these 'Me too!' lawsuits.
Too bad the court and the ITC seem to think so. Keep in mind these are the same folks who let Amazon's one-click patent stand. The extensibility of the UI actually works against Android in this case. The base version of Android may not contain UI elements that are infringing but with all of the custom OEM UI's, one of them is bound to infringe a patent from somewhere.
Err, so you never had a reason to use folders . . .or multi-task . . . or use an app you wanted but Apple deemed unnecessary, or use a different browser than Safari, or copy/past. Android has caused Apple to implement all these features into iOS.
Ok. You wanted a feature Apple does not provide. Power Windows on cars used to be a priced feature. It doesn't change how the car handles or the fuel economy of the car. The lack of this feature doesn't make the car more prone to damage or wear and tear. The lack of Power Windows may make said car not the ideal product for you but it's not like the car was not sufficient for the vast majority of users. And in the case of the iPhone, it features pretty much everything a common user (not tech oriented or highly advanced) would want from a smartphone.
You're mistaking "getting screwed" with "features I want but not provided by Apple" there. Getting screwed is getting a phone that looks nice but is shit, perhaps bug ridden or with poor battery life. It's not like Apple is missing a feature that one deems fundamental to a smartphone. In fact, Apple iPhones are fine for the overwhelming majority of consumers.
I love how Apple can copy unabashedly and spend an untold millions on their legal team. Protecting your patents in one thing. Suing your competitors out of the market is another.
Let me rephrase that. Suing your competitors out of the market, while copying ideas like it's a free market, is downright unethical.
You're forgetting that the current way to interface with smartphones was practically invented by Apple. Gee, it's ok for others to copy Apple I guess. No outcry there. I've also pointed out in the past how some of the common features of today's desktop windowed GUI's were developed by Apple. For everyone else don't start on the lie of how Apple copied Xerox. It's been often repeated that Xerox gave permission for Apple to visit their research labs and received stocks in payment for the use of their GUI. Apple paid for permission to use Xerox's GUI.
Everyone copies everyone else. It's a fact. Just because Company A feels its patents are being infringed on and is suing Company B doesn't suddenly make it wrong for them to copy features/functionality when everyone else does the same. You can't just tell someone who is engaged in standard industry practices that what they are doing is wrong because they're suing someone else.
That's not to say I think those Apple patents that HTC are sued for are valid. That's a whole other story. Some of them have very obvious prior art.
Meanwhile, Apple is doing little to protect the little guy developers from Lodsys patent trolls.
Wrong. You might have missed it but this news was plastered over many tech web sites like Engadget, CNET, Ars Technica, BGR, Information Week, and others. Here's one
article on Apple intervening on behalf of their developers. And here's an
article on developer response to Apple's stance on the Lodsys patents.
I doubt you'll see HTC barred from exporting any phones.
If that happens, it will be unprecedented embarrassment to the entire international legal scene.
It will change things forever. No longer will innovation lead, it will be how strong is your patent suite?
Does your legal team cost more than your entire R&D and Marketing teams combined? No? You will lose.
Business today is all about your patent portfolio (defensively and offensively). This ruling, whether in favor of Apple or HTC won't change a thing. Hell, NTP vs RIM should have taught you that.
Here's something to think about. Apple is suing handset makers, Moto, HTC, Samsung, etc, the people who make Android devices, and not Google, the people who make Android. If Android is violating these patents, then why isn't Apple going after the source of the problem?
The reason? Money. The profit margins made by HTC, Moto, Samsung et al are razor thin, and none of them have the resources for a drawn out legal battle. Apple has tens of billions in the bank and a legal team larger than their entire engineering and development groups. Google also has billions in the bank, and could drag a legal battle out for years.
So, not only is Apple unabashedly copying others, and then suing them for patent violations, they are targeting those who can't defend themselves for long.
Microsoft is just as bad.
Google has plenty of cash on hand to defend itself. Google has some $30 billion in liquid assets I believe (too lazy to look it up). If Apple sued them first, it will be a long and protracted battle and Google's defense team may just win. What is Apple to do? Sue the little guys first. These are the guys who have less resources to defend themselves. You're more likely to obtain a favorable ruling to your claims. Now go after the big guys with court precedence on your side. Standard practice in patent disputes. Not saying the practice is right or wrong, just stating that's standard practice.
Facebook
Twitter