Why Apple [Inc.] is a Virus.

[Arkaign]

So then you would sit ideally by as another company stole intellectual property from your employer even if that resulted in the loss of your job, got it.

That is the issue. This is business. One company has intellectual property and patents it. Another company is pissy because they didn't think of the idea first. They simple decide to use the idea because they think they can get away with it.

We get it, you irrationally hate Apple.

Try "inventing" a search engine that uses PageRank and see where that gets you.

The Patent process was created for the protection of the creator of something original so that they could use their invention however they wished, and for a direct copy not to be legal.

While the origins were somewhat benign, there was definitely a slide that began at a time that is rather difficult to determine with any certainty towards the abuse of the patent system in a decidedly anti-free-market way.

Also, the issue almost universally is no longer who invented what first in actuality, but who can think of ways to word patents for previously unpatented ideas and innovations. The entire precept of patents as they stand would have been a horrible thing to have seen in the past.

Imagine if cars were invented the way they were, only GE or some corporation quickly locked up the patents for the fundamental ideas (patents on throttle and steering mechanisms on moving wheeled vehicles). Then proceeded to sue the crap out of anyone else trying to make a car, regardless if they had actually not invented the car in the first place.

Or imagine if Jonas Salk was circumvented on his polio vaccine. When asked if he would patent it, he famously replied "would you patent the Sun!?" incredulously. He gave it away, and his work being open quickly allowed even greater vaccines that saved the lives and prevented disfiguration of countless people. He could have very easily become one of the richest people in the country by seeking massive profits from his discovery, but that path would have been worse for the country as a whole.

When the founding fathers drafted the original precepts for the US Patent process, I don't think they envisioned predators patenting the genetic code of human beings and naturally occurring fruits, vegetables, and animals. This kind of nonsense could only be believed by the wildest science fiction.

 

[DesiPower]

and back in the days we will though Microsoft was the devil, eating up Netscape, Real Coral and all that... but when Apple does, its all good... damn the Apple zombies.

 

[vbuggy]

TL;DR

Android fanboy is Android fanboy.

 

[SP33Demon]

Apple better stop Android asap b/c Kindle Fire is about to light iPad the f up this xmas. Wait until you see the numbers, don't be surprised if it outpaces iPad soon...

 

[Arkaign]

and back in the days we will though Microsoft was the devil, eating up Netscape, Real Coral and all that... but when Apple does, its all good... damn the Apple zombies.

Patent trolls and abusers of all types should be flatly denounced as the anti-free-market asswipes they are. The clearest indication of patent abuse is firstly those who patent either naturally occurring phenomena, or common-sense solutions that already plainly exist in previous products, but remained unpatented. There should be a process of patent 'exclusion' for a product coming to market with no patent on a particular element that someone later tries to patent. Should be able to point back at product X, and say "hey, that existed already, and it isn't patented, why are you trying to take credit for it and profit from the previous invention that wasn't your work?".

 

[Train]

i've seen old Mac's and Windows was different enough. you can't patent something like a GUI, only the source code and the way you solve problems. anyone else can ship a similar products if you make it differently. Windows was actually a lot better than the Mac OS and it's nonsense of assigning RAM to applications.

i had an android phone for 6 months and first thing i notice is that it does pinch and zoom just like my old iphone did. like HTC couldn't make something original up

What makes you think Apple invented pinch and zoom (it's called Multi-touch BTW)

MS had the same interface on the MS Surface well before the iPhone appeared.

 

[BoberFett]

LOL, intellectual property. What an amusing notion.

 

[Arkaign]

What makes you think Apple invented pinch and zoom (it's called Multi-touch BTW)

MS had the same interface on the MS Surface well before the iPhone appeared.

Patenting common sense shouldn't be abused so widely. What's next, the patenting of receiving optical information by ocular organs? The patenting of processing oxygen from air inhaled by lungs?

 

[cheezy321]

What makes you think Apple invented pinch and zoom (it's called Multi-touch BTW)

MS had the same interface on the MS Surface well before the iPhone appeared.

Lol wut? Proof?

Edit: iPhone 2G announced = January, 2007
iPhone 2G release = June, 2007

MS Surface announce = May 29, 2007
MS Surface release = April, 2008

Try again buddy.

 

[Train]

Lol wut? Proof?

Edit: iPhone 2G announced = January, 2007
iPhone 2G release = June, 2007

MS Surface announce = May 29, 2007
MS Surface release = April, 2008

Try again buddy.

ok...

The product idea for Surface was initially conceptualized in 2001 by Steven Bathiche of Microsoft Hardware and Andy Wilson of Microsoft Research.[6]

In October 2001, DJ Kurlander, Michael Kim, Joel Dehlin, Bathiche and Wilson formed a virtual team to bring the idea to the next stage of development.

In 2003, the team presented the idea to the Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates, in a group review. Later, the virtual team was expanded and a prototype nicknamed T1 was produced within a month. The prototype was based on an IKEA table with a hole cut in the top and a sheet of architect vellum used as a diffuser. The team also developed some applications, including pinball, a photo browser and a video puzzle. Over the next year, Microsoft built more than 85 early prototypes for Surface. The final hardware design was completed in 2005.

A similar concept was used in the 2002 science fiction movie Minority Report. As noted in the DVD commentary, the director Steven Spielberg stated the concept of the device came from consultation with Microsoft during the making of the movie. One of the film's technology consultant's associates from MIT later joined Microsoft to work on the Surface project.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Surface

 

[cheezy321]

ok...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Surface

So now a product 'idea' includes pinch to zoom? This is BS and you know it.

Everyone mentions minority report as well having pinch to zoom in it. Watch the film again. Nowhere in the movie do they ever do the pinch to zoom movement.

 

[SunnyD]

Lol wut? Proof?

Edit: iPhone 2G announced = January, 2007
iPhone 2G release = June, 2007

MS Surface announce = May 29, 2007
MS Surface release = April, 2008

Try again buddy.

You could have argued your case a little better in that Apple's patent application for Pinch & Zoom was submitted in December of 2005.

That said, "gestures" to perform an action is a fucking ridiculous use of the patent system. It's the same thing as patenting a number. Or using a common fruit or the letter 'i' as a copyright and a trademark symbol.

 

[Ninjahedge]

i'm sure that patent is really 50 some pages with all kinds of source code and HTC copied it close enough to lose a lawsuit

That is kind of what I am thinking.

This smells of a script kiddie graduate ctrl-v-ing a snip of source code into their algorithm instead of writing something himself.

But that is a boring story, so it gets dummied down for general distribution and predicts doom for all things not Apple.

I do agree with the OP articles premise that this needs to be looked into, for ALL parties (not just Apple), but I do not think that this particular case is the beginning of the end of the Mayan calendar.

 

[Train]

So now a product 'idea' includes pinch to zoom? This is BS and you know it.

Everyone mentions minority report as well having pinch to zoom in it. Watch the film again. Nowhere in the movie do they ever do the pinch to zoom movement.

Do you really want to take this argument further?

Have you seen any of the prototype videos? Do You see where it says 85 prototype apps in 2004? Go ahead, go watch how many of them have all the pinch and zoom and two points of contact rotation that Apple used.

 

[Ninjahedge]

When the founding fathers drafted the original precepts for the US Patent process, I don't think they envisioned predators patenting the genetic code of human beings and naturally occurring fruits, vegetables, and animals. This kind of nonsense could only be believed by the wildest science fiction.

You mean like Soy Beans?

 

[ShawnD1]

Patenting common sense shouldn't be abused so widely. What's next, the patenting of receiving optical information by ocular organs? The patenting of processing oxygen from air inhaled by lungs?

I should patent the idea of sitting in a chair while doing engineering work. I'd have the market cornered in 3 days flat.

 

[Patranus]

Or imagine if Jonas Salk was circumvented on his polio vaccine. When asked if he would patent it, he famously replied "would you patent the Sun!?" incredulously. He gave it away, and his work being open quickly allowed even greater vaccines that saved the lives and prevented disfiguration of countless people. He could have very easily become one of the richest people in the country by seeking massive profits from his discovery, but that path would have been worse for the country as a whole.

If Jonas Salk decided to sell his vaccine, nothing should stop him. The general population isn't entitled to his hard work just as Google isn't entitled to Oracle (sun) or Apple hard work.

If he wanted to sell it for $1,000 a pop, more power to him.

This is America and you are entitled to make however much money you want from your hard work without the leeches of society telling you otherwise.

 

[bfdd]

I'm sure Apple is in full-alarm mode really. Competing tablets are becoming better and cheaper quickly, ditto Android-based phones, and when the mass market consumer has a choice between a $500 Apple product and a $150 competitor that does 99% of what it can do with no Apple logo, most non-hipsters will choose the alternative. Indeed, the majority of smart phones sold today are running Android, and that margin is growing slimmer for Apple every month.

They will take the lawsuits as far as they possibly can, but it can only take them so far. The only possible win is to force android from the marketplace, and that's somewhat unlikely given both the facts and the forces arrayed against them.

especially since they are all made by fucking Foxconn. it's not like apple employs americans to make their shit, they use the same factories and same components as those cheaper components. you pay a premium for a more refined OS and brand recognition. lols brand recognition, tools.

If Jonas Salk decided to sell his vaccine, nothing should stop him. The general population isn't entitled to his hard work just as Google isn't entitled to Oracle (sun) or Apple hard work.

If he wanted to sell it for $1,000 a pop, more power to him.

This is America and you are entitled to make however much money you want from your hard work without the leeches of society telling you otherwise.

And I should be able to reverse engineer it, manufacture my own and sell it for whatever price I fucking choose. Fucking owning ideas is retarded, it's like trying to unmake the gun.

 

[Arkaign]

If Jonas Salk decided to sell his vaccine, nothing should stop him. The general population isn't entitled to his hard work just as Google isn't entitled to Oracle (sun) or Apple hard work.

If he wanted to sell it for $1,000 a pop, more power to him.

This is America and you are entitled to make however much money you want from your hard work without the leeches of society telling you otherwise.

This is essentially why too much profit seeking is destructive. If Dr. Salk had patented and charged a costly fee for the use of his product, countless additional deaths and disfigurements would have been suffered by those who could not afford the price which the market could bear.

I don't agree with the concept of forcing creators to give their product away either, but it does show the consequences of such a system. For-profit corporatized healthcare and government integration is why our health care ends up costing such a dramatic portion of our GDP in contrast to healthier nations such as Sweden or Norway.

In other words, the larger enemy is really the entrenched collusion between corporate lawyers and lobbyists, and the government who is fully bought and paid for by those same interests.

Or are you one of those who actually agree that it is a just thing for a corporation to patent natural human, plant, or animal genes? It's one thing to patent a newly created variant of an apple that lasts twice as long on the way to market, it's quite another to take a naturally occurring variant and saying "that's ours now".

 

[bfdd]

This is essentially why too much profit seeking is destructive. If Dr. Salk had patented and charged a costly fee for the use of his product, countless additional deaths and disfigurements would have been suffered by those who could not afford the price which the market could bear.

I don't agree with the concept of forcing creators to give their product away either, but it does show the consequences of such a system. For-profit corporatized healthcare and government integration is why our health care ends up costing such a dramatic portion of our GDP in contrast to healthier nations such as Sweden or Norway.

In other words, the larger enemy is really the entrenched collusion between corporate lawyers and lobbyists, and the government who is fully bought and paid for by those same interests.

Or are you one of those who actually agree that it is a just thing for a corporation to patent natural human, plant, or animal genes? It's one thing to patent a newly created variant of an apple that lasts twice as long on the way to market, it's quite another to take a naturally occurring variant and saying "that's ours now".

What's funny is no one ever really talks about how IP protection is concentrating wealth.

 

[BoberFett]

What's funny is no one ever really talks about how IP protection is concentrating wealth.

And in fact some people who bitch the loudest about wealth disparity *cough*Craig*cough* are staunch IP advocates. It's truly fascinating to watch the mind of a hyprocrite dance around.

 

[bfdd]

And in fact some people who bitch the loudest about wealth disparity *cough*Craig*cough* are staunch IP advocates. It's truly fascinating to watch the mind of a hyprocrite dance around.

He's a Captain-Save-A-Ho it's to be expected.

 

[0roo0roo]

blaming apple for the patent system is pretty damned retarded.

 

[bfdd]

blaming apple for the patent system is pretty damned retarded.

I don't, I blame them and every other company for exploiting it though.

 

[Arkaign]

And in fact some people who bitch the loudest about wealth disparity *cough*Craig*cough* are staunch IP advocates. It's truly fascinating to watch the mind of a hyprocrite dance around.

Such a cogent point.

So many on the partisan sides of both major parties fail to see the similarity in their viewpoints, typically they support statism under the guise of their respective philosophies, but it comes down to the same old story at the end of the day, which is to create an ever more powerful central government aligned with the most powerful corporate interests in the world. As even the dyed-in-the-wool hack Michael Moore was forced to concede "we don't have a free market, we don't have free capitalism", when it was pointed out to him that the capitalism he was railing about the evils of was actually corporatism.