Why Apple [Inc.] is a Virus.

[3chordcharlie]

The premiss of your post is fundamentally flawed.

The current patent system promotes innovation, it doesn't stifle it.

I know plenty of people who have technology patents, have built companies, and either have those companies running (some publicly traded) or have sold them.

None of these (self made) people would have been able to do anything without their patents as another company would have just been around to implement their idea.

How do you think a company like Apple or Google get patents? They are ideas that originate from people like you and me. In some cases people are willing to take risk and reap the reward by going it alone. Some people like the comfort/stability a company like Google provides and in exchange for that stability they forfeit the intellectual property they generate.

Go ahead and start a mobile phone company

You can't. You can't because no idea works in a vaccuum, and you won't be able to make even the simplest, most basic product without violating existing patents. So if you want to 'invent' based on your idea, what you need, instead, is a really good lawyer.

What all these companies have in common is they started in 'new' industries. Apple in computers, Google in search engines, etc. Folk wisdom often says things like 'making your first million is hard, after that it's much easier'. As far as I can tell with the current IP landscape, this is more true than ever.

You have still utterly failed to provide evidence that the current patent system effectively fosters innovation. I say it could be vastly improved to provide protection of truly original invention, without the insanely complicated and litigious landscape faced by inventors today.

As I said, it's much easier to pretend that I (and people like me) advocate eliminating IP, which is not remotely true. We advocate reforming IP to work as intended, instead of as a club for big players to beat down their competition.

 

[Patranus]

You have still utterly failed to provide evidence that the current patent system effectively fosters innovation. I say it could be vastly improved to provide protection of truly original invention, without the insanely complicated and litigious landscape faced by inventors today.

Huh?
Have you looked at the innovation that has occurred primarily in the United States over the past 222 years?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Huh?
Have you looked at the innovation that has occurred primarily in the United States over the past 222 years?

Were there patent protections in Greece? Rome? The renaissance?

Just because there has been innovation, doesn't mean the patent system c. 2011 cause it...

There have been major changes to the system, both intentional and functional over the last 40 years. I would suggest that nearly all of these changes serve to stifle, not promote true innovation.

One of the only positive changes was reducing the effectiveness of submarine patent strategies, and this only came about due to international pressure; i.e. it is one area where 'the world at large' is doing a better job than the USA.

On the other hand, I do respect the system in the USA for trying to stick to a 'first-to-invent' system, instead of the much easier to administer, but fundamentally flawed 'first-to-file' system the rest of the world now uses.

 

[SSSnail]

Its since 1993. When did Apple enter the market?

Don't know, why don't you tell me.

 

[Patranus]

Were there patent protections in Greece? Rome? The renaissance?

The concept, yes.

 

[3chordcharlie]

The concept, yes.

Nothing like now, and yet there was massive innovation.

The 'old' effective strategy to game the system was to bury your patent in the application process until someone else came up with it, then finish the application and spring your patent on the market.

The new strategy is to apply for an insane number of patents, then hope someone will miss yours in their legal search, so you can sue them. I don't see how allowing either of these strategies to be effective is spurring innovation.

 

[Macamus Prime]

WTF are you idiots complaining about? You scream and yell about capitalism running free and wild - well,.... here it is.

If you deny Apple their right to make as much money as possible, in any way possible (be it slave labor, using legal warfare, holding your children hostage, etc.), then you are clearly a fucking pinko commie socialist terrorist out to destroy AH-MUR-ICA!!!

,... bunch of morans. Morans I say!

 

[dwell]

Walking through the mall yesterday. All stores pretty busy then get to the Apple Store. Wall to wall people. Insane.

Face it, Apple is uber popular these days. Some people just cant deal with the truth.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Walking through the mall yesterday. All stores pretty busy then get to the Apple Store. Wall to wall people. Insane.

Face it, Apple is uber popular these days. Some people just cant deal with the truth.

?

What does Apple being popular have to do with whether they are patent trolls? If Apple really, truly believed they could maintain and extend their position without trying to sue away the competition, they would STFU and make new, cool stuff instead.

 

[Pliablemoose]

I love the way Apple is constantly trashed, particularly by people who buy Samsung products.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/technology/26samsung.html

But I guess Steve Jobs ghost is such a douchebag, you guys are right, Apple is one evil corporation.

 

[Macamus Prime]

,... Apple is one evil corporation.

I am shocked that they don't praise their efforts.

$10 says if some other company pulled this kind of shit, these ladies would soak themselves with excitement.

 

[dwell]

?

What does Apple being popular have to do with whether they are patent trolls? If Apple really, truly believed they could maintain and extend their position without trying to sue away the competition, they would STFU and make new, cool stuff instead.

They are protecting their intellectual property. Android stole everything from the iPhone. You can argue that the LG Prada was a touch screen phone before the iPhone but that's like comparing an ATM's touch screen to the fluid multi-touch you get on iOS.

In the USA if you do not vigorously protect your IP you lose it.

 

[Ninjahedge]

Huh?

Hrm.

Huh?

I sense a trend....


The basic premise of this thread is not Apple bashing... at leas not in the traditional sense. It is more of a complaint about their practice of hairsplitting on questionable "intellectual property" patents to the point where concepts or small subroutines can be used to foil competitive technology.

Patent law has sunk to absolute trolling (in the fishing sense, not as in "under the bridge").

Set out what nets you can and see what you catch. It ain't fostering innovation.

That being the case, it needs to be modified. The term of use is much too long in todays rapidly changing landscape. Pharms need a few years to recoup their research cost, then perhaps a buffer period with a reduced premium paid for generics, then a general release.

Tech? You have a patent on an idea that goes more than 2 years and you are already talking 2-3 generations.... Something has to be rewritten on that, but the terms need to be very well planned or we will just get more abuse later.


As for Apple? Just look at their original plan back in the 80's. IIe's were in MANY schools at reduced cost. They tried to get people interested in the machines early, and it worked (to a certain extent). They STILL push them in the schools, offering great discounts.

Now Android is starting to do something similar with phones and making them at a loss (or Android utilizing companies, to be more accurate). You get a kid to start using a smart phone with particular proggies and other things, they will be more likely to stay with it later, especially if there are "cool" ones like the Razr available when they start getting enough $$ to afford them.

Apple has made a lot of money off of its hardware, but it risks losing software sales in the future if it does not ride the wave a little more cautiously. So long as they keep making kool, friendly phones and systems, there will be users. But if they do not watch their price point, they may become boutique rather than the mainstream they are now.

(BTW, can the $1000 price point "achievement". I built a kick-ass machine for just over that this year. Does that mean others will? No. It just means that you can still make, or buy, a compact, multimedia/gaming rig for less than $1000. The only thing that $1000 and above price point says is that Apple is beating Alienware/Dell in the overpriced market.)

 

[alent1234]

Go ahead and start a mobile phone company

You can't. You can't because no idea works in a vaccuum, and you won't be able to make even the simplest, most basic product without violating existing patents. So if you want to 'invent' based on your idea, what you need, instead, is a really good lawyer.

What all these companies have in common is they started in 'new' industries. Apple in computers, Google in search engines, etc. Folk wisdom often says things like 'making your first million is hard, after that it's much easier'. As far as I can tell with the current IP landscape, this is more true than ever.

You have still utterly failed to provide evidence that the current patent system effectively fosters innovation. I say it could be vastly improved to provide protection of truly original invention, without the insanely complicated and litigious landscape faced by inventors today.

As I said, it's much easier to pretend that I (and people like me) advocate eliminating IP, which is not remotely true. We advocate reforming IP to work as intended, instead of as a club for big players to beat down their competition.

if you were to enter the mobile phone business you would have to license 3G and wifi patents based on FRAND, just like everyone else does. it's like DVD and Blu-ray where people get together to make a patent pool and everyone pays into the pool from their sales.

you can make your phone based on android or Wp7 and sell it and pay the fees to everyone

 

[JackBurton]

?

What does Apple being popular have to do with whether they are patent trolls? If Apple really, truly believed they could maintain and extend their position without trying to sue away the competition, they would STFU and make new, cool stuff instead.

Oh yeah, that's a great idea. Let Apple come up with the idea and do the R&D for it, and then let someone else come in and rip them off. Yeah, that's sound like a great plan.

 

[JackBurton]

They are protecting their intellectual property. Android stole everything from the iPhone. You can argue that the LG Prada was a touch screen phone before the iPhone but that's like comparing an ATM's touch screen to the fluid multi-touch you get on iOS.

In the USA if you do not vigorously protect your IP you lose it.

Exactly.

 

[BoberFett]

Yes, like the rounded rectangle. I cannot begin to fathom the amount of R&D that must been involved to come up with that doozy of an invention.

 

[cheezy321]

Yes, like the rounded rectangle. I cannot begin to fathom the amount of R&D that must been involved to come up with that doozy of an invention.

Yep, and a screen too! Derp derp! When is this tired response ever going to stop. Quit bringing it down to one thing. it was never about 1 thing.

 

[Patranus]

Now Android is starting to do something similar with phones and making them at a loss (or Android utilizing companies, to be more accurate). You get a kid to start using a smart phone with particular proggies and other things, they will be more likely to stay with it later, especially if there are "cool" ones like the Razr available when they start getting enough $$ to afford them.

You miss the fact that Android isn't competing on a level playing field.
They are taking the intellectual property of others and repurposing it as their own.
Companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars on employees who come up with these ideas then Google thinks that it can come along and integrate these features.

Apple is suing over specific features which they have patents on. There is nothing wrong with that.

Since Google seems to think that it is above the law, Apple muse use the courts to level the play field so that Google plays fair in the market place.

What people seem to miss is the fact that Apple *is* the one who is competing fairly in the marketplace while Google is the one who isn't.

Think of it this way. the 16-0 New England Patriots beat their opponents on the field but they cheated. They videotaped defensive calls which gave them the upper hand. They *stole* information and integrated it into their product. They used something they had no right to use to improve their product.

Google is taking ideas that they have no right to use and the only way to level the playing field is the courts.

 

[Patranus]

Yes, like the rounded rectangle. I cannot begin to fathom the amount of R&D that must been involved to come up with that doozy of an invention.

Its pretty funny when people take that lawsuit out of content.

The funniest thing from that trial was when the Samsung lawyers couldn't identify their product when they judge held up their tablet next to an iPad.

 

[alent1234]

Yes, like the rounded rectangle. I cannot begin to fathom the amount of R&D that must been involved to come up with that doozy of an invention.

it's amazing how now one shipped an ARM cpu/capacitive touch screen tablet with a "lite" OS until a year after apple did

 

[BoberFett]

Yes, and touching icons and typing on on-screen keyboards. Truly novel UI I tell you, nobody had ever though of those before, including stores like Target and their gift registry kiosks. Nobody I tell you.

 

[BoberFett]

it's amazing how now one shipped an ARM cpu/capacitive touch screen tablet with a "lite" OS until a year after apple did

So gathering a bunch of existing technology into a single device counts as an invention?

 

[Patranus]

---

 

[cheezy321]

Yes, and touching icons and typing on on-screen keyboards. Truly novel UI I tell you, nobody had ever though of those before, including stores like Target and their gift registry kiosks. Nobody I tell you.

Do you realize how retarded you sound? Comparing gift registry kiosks to a tablet computer? Lets compare wakeboards to snowboards! Because they are both boards! DERP DERP!