Slashdot Mirror
Apple Wants To Block Some HTC Products From US Under Tariff Act of 1930
An anonymous reader writes "Days after filing another suit against Samsung, Apple took aim at smaller rival HTC, filling a claim with the International Trade Commission (ITC) to ban the sales of the competing smartphones and tablets. Apple said that HTC was infringing on 'groundbreaking' [technology] that Apple developed for its iPod, iPhone and iPad products."
Contrary to Jobs' statements, they don't want competition and they learned their lesson back in the early Mac Vs. PC days when they got their lunch eaten by a bunch of nobody OEMs churning out cheap PCs. Apple's model is not sustainable, and it's even less sustainable when people aren't flush with disposable income. Any moron could have predicted Apple would be in trouble years ago - they're one company trying to make one model of phone (which is just an iPod with a 3G chip) versus numerous Android vendors each innovating.
"We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented inventions, or we can do something about it," Steve Jobs said at the time.
In other news, Steve Jobs is seeking to have a new liver transplanted in along with whatever bodily organ it is that keeps a person from being a huge douchebag.
If only he could rise to the ethical standards of 1990s Microsoft. Yeah, it's gotten that bad.
If Apple were serious in their attempt to protect their business, then make their devices in the US and maybe their complaint could be taken seriously.
They may do the bulk of their R&D in the US but it is all built offshore. I don't see how they can claim protection under these circumstances.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Apple is the new Microsoft. Remember how Apple used to sue bloggers for just talking about an upcoming product? How about the kid who was selling white iphone skins, Apple shut him down in a hurry.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
*By ironic I mean M$ and Apple appear to be colluding to take down another competitor while leaving each other alone.
It's not just appearances. Apple, Microsoft and Oracle have actually formed up to go after Android: Apple, Microsoft, Oracle Lead Unholy Patent Alliance Against Android
These companies have payed millions of dollars to buy patents. HTC didn't buy the IP therefore it has to pay a licensing fee.
The goal isn't to actually stop the selling of products, the goal is to extract licensing fees to cover the costs of patent purchases in the past and internal R&D.
The sales block just expedites the process by hitting the company much harder than insubstantial penalties (see Microsoft's fines in the 90s). It's one thing to fine them a few million a year, it's another to cut their revenue stream so that they can't afford the fines.
Just nobody noticed because they were tiny. For a little while in the beginning they were a real techie company. I call that the "Woz Apple." However it wasn't long before they became more locked down and controlling than MS ever was. I've seen it time and time again throughout their history, but they were small, it only affected a small number of people, most of them fans who would forgive any transgression.
They also got a pass from a lot of geek types since they were "against Microsoft." They figured anyone who opposed MS in any way, no matter how minor, had to be a good guy. They never looked in to it past that. The love of the underdog and the dislike of MS meant Apple could do no wrong and they needn't look deeper.
Now Apple is massive, they are a consumer electronics giant. However this is not because of any change in their way of doing business, just that they found a market that they do well in. However because they are large, people are taking notice of what Apple does. They seem to think Apple has changed, and don't realize that only their visibility, and the effects of their actions have changed.
Your post was right with the exception of this one part.
What's more, the Android market moves much faster. Right now you can get Android phones with 4G, with dual core CPUs, with 3D screens. Now I'd say other than the first one that is not so useful, but it is new gadgets that people want.
I own the phone you are talking about, the Evo3d. I wasn't too sure about getting this phone, even though I could get it for free (sold my Evo4G for $250 and picked up the 3D for $200. The extra $50 paid for taxes, fees and a new Zagg screen protector).
I thought the 3D would take away from other things, like the fact that it only had a 5MP camera instead of the 8MP of the 4G. I also thought the 3D would be a gimmick. Well, it is a gimmick, but it's a really really cool one. Text messaging was a gimmick at one point. A camera was a gimmick at one point. I even remember when mp3 ring tones were a gimmick, much less an actual mp3 player. Of course, 3D cameras and screens won't become standard like text messaging, but it is still very cool. Go to a Sprint store, check it out and see how good it looks. I've taken 3D video and stills that will blow your mind, like a water skier with the rope close up and the skier far away or a simple coffee cup on a pier with the sunrise in the background. Awesome.
The dual core processor is really handy. My Evo4G would become nearly unusable when installing or updating applications. My Evo3D can installs apps in the background without me even noticing.
4G, of course, is pretty useful if, and only if, you are in an area with coverage and you are not going to venture out of it. For some reason, when the phone gains and loses 4G signal, the batter drains quickly.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
Too bad that Apple is admitting how they can't compete with their design and technology, so they will compete with lawyers instead.
Sad.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
simply because the idea was completely lifted from Apple.
Meh. And Apple "stole" the app market idea and implementation from Docomo, AU and Softbank in Japan, each of which had a working and thriving app market ages before Jobs even visited Japan to hunt for smartphone ideas. I'm forgetting who they stole it from, because it wasn't all that new in 2002 either.
Besides, there's nothing bad about stealing ideas.
The copyright and patents are _artificial_ monopolies that, ceteris paribus, impede development, technological, social and otherwise. The society puts up with them for two reasons: the alleged contribution to "innovation", which never materializes, and the large amount of money for lobbying that the monopoly rents make available. I'll let you figure out which reason is the most important.
Engadget has a fair description of each of Apple's claims as well as links to each of the patents in question.
Storp it with your heterosexist bungholibg on thiscpompiupter I DEMAND ityou to apoiligive! Ifnthe the one thins hiujwqikj Poop the to sensitivityuir itis th=e male assholes who are alwaqyasnmtallkinghere aout their stipqoiojnrke ppoojbvytwq. So fiuck that! No no no no npo no np andNO! ass
Whoa there dude! Check your keyboard, somebody might have slipped you a Dvorak.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
What I find most amusing about this move by the a-word company, is that they are trying to take down the company that started this whole handheld revolution!
Back in 2000(yes 11 years ago!), I had(and still have) a Compaq iPaq, with a PCMCIA sleeve, containing a GSM card and a IBM Microdrive, it made calls, could play mp3s and video, and surf the web and email, it was incredible! I wasn't the only person in the world at the time with a similar set-up, I'm sure, but seriously, how many years later did the a-word company release their devices?
Todays devices are more compact, the battery life has been sorted and the screens are better too, but in terms of what could be done with them, even back then, it was a more capable, and less limited device; and guess who actually made it, that right HTC...
So, apple copies HTC's ideas(and a few people who could 'see' the potential of such a device), claims that they came up with it, try's to prevent the guys who came up with the ideas originally from selling their products, all while trying to create monopolies around every service that some hard working kid proves works...
What ever happened to free competition and regulators preventing monopolies, rather than helping them...
Land of the free, my arse!
How about, land of the lobbyist and advertising budget!
Well, no. The The iPod was *the* fashionable thing to own... back in the first part of the last decade. But not anymore. The iPod market is starting to fade - both because people *do* buy MP3 players that aren't iPods, and because phones in general and Apple's own Touch are starting to replace the handheld MP3 player.
It isn't like it would put them out of business, but it could shrink the profitability a lot and no company is interested in that.
Take a look at the P/E ratio on AAPL of 16+, analysts' earnings and one (1) year target estimates; not exactly a bargain, considering the risks (Android is both a serious and viable competitor), if you ask me. Plus, if Apple fails to meet expectationsor worse starts missing on quarterly earnings because of Android then look out below because Apple has a long ways to fall, especially given the fact that its meteoric rise in recent years is due in no small part to the fantastically profitable iPhone. If you want to see an example of how quickly the markets and Wall Street can punish a tech company that fails to deliver on expectations, look no further than RIMM which some commentators now refer to as, "wasted research, downward motion". Research in motion is down 63% from its 52 week high; that's brutal if you were a buyer any time between then and now.
I consider myself to be a fairly savvy investor, but the smart phone market changes quarterly and the pace of new handset releases, especially Android phones, is only increasing. There are many unknown variables, including killer apps or features, that are both disruptive and come out of nowhere on a regular basis. This may be good for consumers, but that level of risk and volatility, especially in a narrowly focused company like Apple with a healthy stock premium, is high risk and high stakes for all but the hardiest and best informed investors. I'm not a buyer of Apple, especially at these prices, because (a) the stock is expensive and (b) the risks in a disruptive and unpredictable business, like the smart phone business, with plenty of well informed insiders, are too high. In my opinion, most small investors would be well advised to steer clear of these rocky shoals. Alternatively, the telecoms have come down in price somewhat and all of those smart phone users are still paying $30+ per month, in spite of the jobless recovery, for their data plans.
Honestly? I think we are beginning to see what will be the future of Apple without Steve. it is kinda sad really as it really was "The house that Steve built" but it is his own fault for not building a clean line of succession and obviously grooming his replacement after the first health scare. i know that a company is more than one man but reading many stories of those that have worked there it is pretty clear that from the time he came back it has been Steve's vision the whole time.
Sadly I have a feeling it is gonna be like the Pepsi guy all over again when he is gone, or like the bumbling mess that has been Ballmer's takeover of Gate's company. Whether you liked them or not Gates and Jobs had clear visions of where they wanted their respective companies to go and plans to get them there. I have a feeling as Steve takes more and more time to tend to his failing health the stupid moves and general douchebaggery will only get worse, but that is what happens when you get suits in charge that are MBAs and salesmen and not visionaries.
It happened to Apple under the Pepsi guy, it is happening now to MSFT under the sweaty monkey, and it looks like it will happen to Apple again without Steve at the helm. Let us just hope for all those Apple fans out there Steve gets well soon, because whether you support their products or not you have to admit the man knew how to run his company.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
It's all a matter of context I guess. Companies like MS, Apple, Oracle & co sit on treasure chests in the form of patent portfolios. The LAW makes it so. It would be foolish of them not to try and make money out of them.
So they go against people that are obviously infringing their overly broad patents. But they have so many of them that it's becoming impossible to fight, unless you have yourself a huge patent portfolio.
In that view, I don't understand why google didn't put everything they had behind the Nortel portfolio. They NEED it in order to make Android a sustainable product - from a commercial perspective.
What is dead wrong in this system is that none of these lawsuits will ever result in a judgment. So all in all, the justice system is just a means to grab money and nothing else. And none of the players here want any of these lawsuit to go before a judge. Because none of them can afford to lose one of these lawsuits. They just move their pawns in court and then settle.
In my view, a judge SHOULD be able to declare a lawsuit "non settleable." This way, those companies would think twice before starting such lawsuits because there would be a chance that one of them would actually go to the end of the procedure. Then it would be obvious to everyone (or at least to the DOJ) that the patent system is just here to benefit trolls and major patent holders, but hardly anyone else. And it should be obvious that ANY NEW PRODUCT will infringe millions of patents because everything has been patented many times already.
Write boring code, not shiny code!
So does Apple.
I don't know, around these parts, I see a lot more non-Apple MP3 players than I do iPods anymore. Most people in my circle have since stopped carrying a standalone MP3 player completely and use their phones as one instead. The few people that don't (due to the fact that they have "dumbphones") rarely have an iPod, and instead have a Samsung or SanDisk cheapo.
Most of them probably couldn't even tell you the name brand of their MP3 player, but they're not concerned with brand names; they want a cheap MP3 player that holds a few hours of music for in the car or wen they're working out. I know a few people that deliberately went that route for a workout MP3 player because they broke their expensive Apple toys at the gym a few times and would rather be out $50 when they inevitably drop in on the treadmill and stomp on it then the $399 or whatever they paid for their iPod or iPhone.
Now, 5 years ago I would have agreed, pretty much everyone carried an iPod. But today, I know very few people that, if they do have one, actually carry it around and use it. You can add me to that list, as my iPod is currently rotting in a drawer because the battery won't hold a charge, Apple wants to charge me $100 to replace it, and I can listen to all the same songs on my Droid. I bet a lot of them are sitting in drawers and glove boxes all over the country.
To each their own...