German Court Issues Injunction Against iPhone & iPad

Great! by Daetrin · 2011-12-11 14:15 · Score: 5, Interesting

Maybe if _all_ the big players suffer enough then there will actually be some support for real patent reform.

(Not to mention of course that it's nice to see Apple get nailed after all the patent crap they've pulled on others.)

--
This Space Intentionally Left Blank

Re:Great! by Trepidity · 2011-12-11 14:17 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'd put my cynical money on them finding some way to reform the patent system that only really benefits large companies while still screwing over individuals, small businesses, and free software developers, but I do hope you're right.

--
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 14:20 · Score: 0

Yup, mabey if were lucky they will reform how patents work or play nice. Unlikely though, what probably happen is they increase the amount of patents they have and go to battle more frequently till they somehow find a way to screw over existing customers. By doing something like suing X company for infridgement A and thus being required to brick X companies cell phone customers phones through an "update". I give it a a few years, 10 tops till this happens.
Re:Great! by wvmarle · 2011-12-11 14:23 · Score: 5, Insightful

Well, let's see, the tally so far.
Apple is blocked from selling iPad and iPhone.
Samsung is blocked selling their tablets and phones elsewhere.
Now with a little luck within a year or two no-one is allowed to sell any smartphone or tablet anywhere in the world.
The winners will be: the Chinese manufacturers who don't care about patents and copyrights, who will just continue to produce, and sell their products all over the world on the grey markets at rock-bottom prices.
Works for me.
Re:Great! by TheGratefulNet · 2011-12-11 14:36 · Score: 5, Insightful

teach your children how the system really is, not how they want you to think it is. (note, this be challenging as everyone is going to fight you on this, schools and everyone else 'in charge').
then hope that by the time they have power and are in control of things, they remember the lessons you taught them and they can make changes.
its absolutely hopeless for our generation. but the next one, maybe. maybe. IF we teach them how bad the current one is and stop covering it up and sugarcoating (disney-ing, to so speak) it.
I was brougth up with the myth that mr policeman is there to help and mr government man is, also. both are blatant lies and it took me decades to learn the real truth. I'd like to hope that the next generation might actually learn from OUR mistakes and make things better.
but for us, right now, nothing will change. inertia is too great. big bodies in motion keep going in their same directions.

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Re:Great! by giorgist · 2011-12-11 14:42 · Score: 2

The Chinese build the i* devices anyway, and the Samsung devices are getting unblocked
Re:Great! by gman003 · 2011-12-11 14:49 · Score: 2

I think we should start calling this whole thing "the 2011 Patent War". That's basically what it is - a war, just fought in global courtrooms instead of global hills and fields, and fought with lawsuits and injunctions instead of artillery and carpet-bombing.
And, eventually, one of them is going to get majorly destroyed. Especially if international court cases can be taken as precedent - once one case is decided, they'd all fall in line. IANAL, so I don't know if that's the case.
Re:Great! by GumphMaster · 2011-12-11 15:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

No reform required. That's exactly how it works now. The small guy holding a patent cannot afford to enforce it against the big guys. Even a small guy that would eventually win, with damages and costs awarded, has to stump up the costs in advance from a cash flow that typically cannot sustain it.

--
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
Re:Great! by obarthelemy · 2011-12-11 15:08 · Score: 2

That, and the system actually needs to benefit lawyers too, since lawyers are a disproportionate part of politicians and political contributors and lobbyists. They have right now a system that serves them well, they'll fight change or find a way to make it better for them (ie, even more litigious).

--
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Re:Great! by wvmarle · 2011-12-11 15:10 · Score: 3, Interesting

Patents are supposed to work the same all over the world. They may differ in details such as amount of penalties, back-penalties, etc - the basics (what is covered, and what constitutes infringement) should be roughly the same. So indeed if one courts rules one way, likely courts in other countries will rule the same.
But to come back to your statement about war: mind that there are no winners in war. There are only losers. In WWII the allied forces were considered the winners, but the rest of Europe was as much in tatters as loser Germany was. Both sides lost huge in form of people killed or seriously wounded and disabled, buildings destroyed, infrastructure destroyed, economic losses due to the high cost of warfare and the lost production, etc. It took enormous financial support from mainly the US to help get Europe back on its feet.
In these patent wars there will be no "Marshall plan" when the dust settles. Both Samsung and Apple (I think they can be considered the main parties here) may end up seriously crippled. Samsung has much more than just phones and tablets (they produce many other consumer electronics, and also parts for them, including parts for Apple products), Apple otoh is more reliant on their phone/tablet business, and losing too many of this kind of suits may cause them to go bankrupt in the end. And for side players like Google the mobile phone business is merely a way to expand/protect their core business, so they don't have much to lose there.
Re:Great! by Man+On+Pink+Corner · 2011-12-11 15:17 · Score: 3, Insightful

This is just a recapitulation of what happened when wireless tech was ramping up in the first few decades of the 20th century. The patent wars were nasty, brutal, and long enough to put an entire generation of lawyers' kids through college.
Nothing changed. It won't change this time, either, because there are more lawyers at the controls of the US government today than there ever have been.
Re:Great! by Myopic · 2011-12-11 15:21 · Score: 3, Insightful

That's basically what it is - a war, just fought in global courtrooms instead of global hills and fields, and fought with lawsuits and injunctions instead of artillery and carpet-bombing.
I have to say, I strongly prefer this kind of war.
Re:Great! by ohnocitizen · 2011-12-11 15:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

If we wait for our children to take up the fight, we will wait forever. As children grow, our generation will replace our parents as "the ones in charge", and we will oppress them and keep them from the halls of power the same way the previous generations do now. It is a cycle without end, unless we say WE are the generation to make change, and act on it. If that isn't enough to get you active, consider this: while we wait for our children to somehow rise up, we let everyone harmed by the current state of the world suffer.
Re:Great! by jsse · 2011-12-11 15:39 · Score: 1

Well, let's see, the tally so far.
Apple is blocked from selling iPad and iPhone.
Samsung is blocked selling their tablets and phones elsewhere.
Now with a little luck within a year or two no-one is allowed to sell any smartphone or tablet anywhere in the world.
The winners will be: the Chinese manufacturers who don't care about patents and copyrights, who will just continue to produce, and sell their products all over the world on the grey markets at rock-bottom prices.
Works for me.
Nah, blackmarket prices of iPhone/iPad would be hyping up when they are getting more difficult to get, and the prices of China made tablets and phones would also raise with the absent of major competitors. The whole world would be hurting, and surely Apple would hurt much less because their products are still in very high demand thanks to their brilliant production strategy by scarcity.

It doesn't work for me.
Re:Great! by Fluffeh · 2011-12-11 15:40 · Score: 4, Funny

I think I would prefer to see these companies slug it out akin to the ancient gauls:

Another very important aspect of Celtic ritual warfare at this time was single combat. To settle a dispute and measure one's prowess, it was customary to challenge an individual warrior from the other army to ritual single combat to the death while cheered on by the opposing hosts. Such fights were common before pitched battle, and for ritual purposes tended to occur at river fords. For examples of this behavior, one can read the epic literature of Ireland, such as the Ulster Cycle and Fenian Cycle, as well as accounts of Gaelic wars such as the "Wars of the Gael with the Foreigners" and Geoffrey Keating's "History of Ireland.
Ritual Combat would later manifest itself in the duel, as seen in the Scottish Martial Arts of the 18th century. The victor was determined by who made the first-cut. However, this was not always observed, and at times the duel would continue to the death.
"You there! Lawyer with the brown briefcase, I pick YOU for combat. Prepare yourself!"

--
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Re:Great! by 0123456 · 2011-12-11 15:49 · Score: 3, Informative

Patents are supposed to work the same all over the world.
Why?

But to come back to your statement about war: mind that there are no winners in war. There are only losers. In WWII the allied forces were considered the winners, but the rest of Europe was as much in tatters as loser Germany was.
WWII destroyed the British Empire, handed about half the human race over to communists where they couldn't compete with Western manufacturers and destroyed most of Europe's industrial production capacity. America benefited massively from the war because it was left with no real competition and the only large-scale manufacturing capacity in the West.
Re:Great! by wvmarle · 2011-12-11 16:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

Patents are supposed to work the same all over the world.
Why?
Because 1) they are supposed to fully and clearly describe an invention, so testing whether another machine uses a certain invention doesn't leave much grey area, and 2) they're based on international agreements.
Note that I say "supposed", I know it's idealising and that practice leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Yet in practice if a patent is found to be infringed upon in one country, very likely other countries' courts will come to the same conclusion.

WWII destroyed the British Empire, handed about half the human race over to communists where they couldn't compete with Western manufacturers and destroyed most of Europe's industrial production capacity. America benefited massively from the war because it was left with no real competition and the only large-scale manufacturing capacity in the West.
America was a remote party of the war, like they are now in Iraq and Afghanistan. It costs heaps of money, leaves the target in tatters, but nothing much happens on home soil. Same for WWII: there were no bombardments of US cities, no US bridges blown up, few US merchant vessels sunk. Compare that to the European countries.
Like now if Samsung and Apple (aka Germany and the other European countries) kill off each other, Google (aka US) maybe chipping in as secondary party getting hurt on the sidelines but not in their cores, parties like Google and of course all other manufacturers see two major competitors gone, opening up a huge market potential for them.
Re:Great! by bhagwad · 2011-12-11 16:10 · Score: 1

iOS was attacked by Android first?
Re:Great! by gman003 · 2011-12-11 16:18 · Score: 2

Both sides are already taking damage by not being able to sell their goods in certain areas, and they're spending fortunes on lawyers. It's only going to get worse - I can envision these legal cases going on for years (it's taken *how* long to nearly kill SCO?)
So Apple's more threatened. That means they're more likely to do something stupid and desperate. You think they'd try to block them from being manufactured, by getting involved with the Chinese judicial system? That would be a near-instant kill - you can't sell what you can't make, and without China it's hard to manufacture mass products cheaply.
Best-case scenario, of course, is that the War causes so much damage that patent reform becomes a pressing issue even for those who thought they were benefiting from it.
Re:Great! by meerling · 2011-12-11 16:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

Most of the people in power are those that vigorously sought it out.
Those people are almost always those who want power to have power, not to wield it for the greater good, justice, or compassion.
These, of course, are the worst people to have that power.
So even if you raise a generation of 99.9% kind and caring people, 90% of the positions of power will belong to that power grubbing remainder.

The only way to change that is either eliminate all positions of power, find a means to ensure that would be power mongers can never attain it, or somehow alter humanity itself so there is no such thing as a desire for power. Honestly, I don't think any of those will ever happen, though I can imagine a dictatorial situation where all the power is held by one small group so no-one else can attain any power, but that just eliminates competition, not the problem.
(And yes, I dream of a utopia where the would be politicians and such can never obtain the power they crave because they are considered unfit for the job, but the problem with utopians is that even science fiction writers don't believe in the possibility of a utopia being real.)

Of course this whole thing with Apple is the result of a pissing contest it looks like they started. Guess they are going to have much bigger problems if the wind keeps shifting direction. (Patenting a flat rectangle that's black with beveled edges. What moron let that through?)
Re:Great! by TheGratefulNet · 2011-12-11 16:34 · Score: 2

we can start now, but I don't think its realistic to expect to SEE change in our lifetime.
those who are the 'haves' are not going to give things up without a fight and I don't see a french (or any other kind) of physical violent revolution coming to the US anytime soon.
change (nonviolent kind) has to be slow and that's in lifetimes, not decades.
wish I was wrong. prove me wrong, I won't mind ;)

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Re:Great! by Ramin_HAL9001 · 2011-12-11 16:35 · Score: 1

That, and the system actually needs to benefit lawyers too, since lawyers are a disproportionate part of politicians and political contributors and lobbyists. They have right now a system that serves them well, they'll fight change or find a way to make it better for them (ie, even more litigious).
EXACTLY.
The the US Supreme court isn't there to benefit anyone but the large law firms, to hell with ordinary citizens and technology companies, and anyone who does any actual work. It is all one big extortion racket, designed to make money for lawyers.

No matter how devastating this patent situation becomes to tech companies, change WILL NOT be affected.
Re:Great! by um...+Lucas · 2011-12-11 16:40 · Score: 1

i don't think it was communism that destroyed eastern europes industrial capability. More like american and british bombs. Rest of your point still stands though. Of course, all these years later, Germany is once again europes powerhouse.
Re:Great! by hedwards · 2011-12-11 16:51 · Score: 1

As opposed to Western Europe which was left completely intact?
Re:Great! by gman003 · 2011-12-11 16:51 · Score: 1

Or hell, just find some jurisdiction where the old laws are still on the books, and challenge the other to a duel. Throw down the gauntlet, demand your satisfaction, pistols at dawn, field of honor, and so on.
In addition, trial by combat has never been explicitly made illegal in the United States (according to Wikipedia, IANAL, citation needed, etc.)
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 16:54 · Score: 0

Greedo shot first!
Re:Great! by Nursie · 2011-12-11 16:59 · Score: 1

Good luck.
Those of our generation who will have power are already licking the boots of those in power, and their politics and policies will be the same.
The majority of people in our generation will continue to vote for the status quo also.
The older generation in power are the current manifestation of a problem which will not go away easily. It's a shame, but there is nothing magical about our generation (whichever that is, if we even share a generation you and I) that will change things when we get into power. The hippies in the 60s thought that too, when they failed to get much change with their actions, that when their generation took the reigns of power then at last everything would change. Just look how far things have come.
Re:Great! by wvmarle · 2011-12-11 18:15 · Score: 2

The Chinese are fully capable of ramping up production and swamping the market with competing devices - like they're doing already. The only restriction might be in getting the parts for those devices, as those again are often made by high-tech giants like Samsung.
Re:Great! by gl4ss · 2011-12-11 18:27 · Score: 1

when all the big companies are suffering, but they still manage to print out profit, it's impossible for them to measure just how much they're suffering from the patent nonsense. what they can see clearly though is that it keeps all the little players who can't afford to go to court in ten countries effectively out of "big boys" market(if the projected sales turn up as big enough, they'll get sued. nifty, eh..).

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Great! by gl4ss · 2011-12-11 18:41 · Score: 2

newsflash: western planes didn't have the range to bomb eastern europe in ww2. russians and nazis did what they could of course, going scorched earth two ways kinda does hamper industrial output, no matter how free you make the proletariat from the chains of capitalist oppression.
post-ww2 eastern europe industrial capability was largely hindered by not having a free market, by having production goals dictated by dickheads and not getting paid for the produce and their exporting possibilities severely hampered by politics. unilateral trade was great for some countries who did trade with them(the eastern block) though, while fair trade would have been better still.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Great! by gl4ss · 2011-12-11 18:44 · Score: 1

iOS was attacked by Android first?
What is Android but an attack on iOS?
attack on symbian? attack on wm6.5? or more justly put, it's the product of an idea that had been floating around since early '00s(a mobile java based, java extensible os).

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 19:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

The police, in 99% of cases, ARE there to help. Just like in any profession, there are bad apples, and they spoil the bunch.
They'd also be a lot less paranoid and twitchy if there weren't so many of you "fuck the police" assholes.
Re:Great! by elashish14 · 2011-12-11 19:42 · Score: 1

Yeah, that'd be so great... it'd be proof that nothing's important unless it harms a major corporation. Cause just doing the common sense thing and blocking these worthless cases from the start requires too much intelligence for our neanderthals in power to handle.

--
I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
Re:Great! by mysidia · 2011-12-11 19:43 · Score: 1

That, and the system actually needs to benefit lawyers too, since lawyers are a disproportionate part of politicians and political contributors and lobbyists.
The system doesn't need to actually benefit the lawyers... the lawyers in the influential positions just need to think it will benefit the lawyers, or them personally.
Re:Great! by mvdwege · 2011-12-11 20:34 · Score: 3, Insightful
There are so many "fuck the police" rationalists, because:
1. There are too many bad apples.
2. The bad apples are being protected by the 'good cops' ('Thin Blue Line' ring a bell?)
And finally, even if you were wholly right, and it's standoff between assholes and a police force with a few bad apples, it's the police who have power, so it is incumbent upon them to make the first step to change the situation.
--
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Re:Great! by Hognoxious · 2011-12-11 20:40 · Score: 1

The police, in 99% of cases, ARE there to help. Just like in any profession, there are bad apples, and they spoil the bunch.
That would explain why the honest majority are so willing to testify against the rotten ones who step out of line. You never ever hear them claim to have not seen anything, do you?

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 20:50 · Score: 0

Except for America, who used the war as a stepping stone go global superpower status and hegemony.
Oh, and Canada too. Cos we played some more hockey and learned to say 'eh?'. :-)
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 22:20 · Score: 0

That's easy: Make patents very expensive. That way the state can make more money, too!
Re:Great! by khipu · 2011-12-11 22:24 · Score: 0

Because 1) they are supposed to fully and clearly describe an invention, so testing whether another machine uses a certain invention doesn't leave much grey area, and 2) they're based on international agreements.
Different societies make different choices as to what is patentable, what is obvious, and how long patents should run. That should be encouraged rather than discouraged, so that we at least get some data on how different kind of patent systems works, and to protect the system from the inevitable corruption and rent seeking.

Like now if Samsung and Apple (aka Germany and the other European countries) kill off each other, Google (aka US) maybe chipping in as secondary party getting hurt on the sidelines but not in their cores, parties like Google and of course all other manufacturers see two major competitors gone, opening up a huge market potential for them
Last I checked, both Google and Apple were primarily US companies. Granted, Apple hasn't been doing much for the US economy or US employment, but they are in no danger of disappearing soon because of patent lawsuits (although they will gradually fade as the fad surrounding their products fades).
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 22:34 · Score: 0

Or even better: there will be no smartphone model still on sale !
Re:Great! by roman_mir · 2011-12-11 22:50 · Score: 1

Yes, patents are supposed to do the same exact thing all over the world - prevent people from competing and providing better products at cheaper prices.

--
You can't handle the truth.
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 22:54 · Score: 1

Apple is Germany, right?
Re:Great! by anonymov · 2011-12-11 23:02 · Score: 2

Well, original motivation for patents included those "providing better products at cheaper prices". As in, preventing situation when small inventor creates something new and big company screws him and starts stamping clones on the cheap using their established manufacture and supply chain.
But since those times the idea got screwed and crooked from "support small innovator with groundbreaking inventions" to "raise entry barrier by patenting every gearwheel"
Re:Great! by rtb61 · 2011-12-11 23:44 · Score: 1

It is all about MAD, mutually assured destruction, in this case mutually assurec patent destruction. Apple executives new they could not when but they were desperate for the short term advantage, they knew they were the iHula hoop of the tech world, the iYoyo of phones, a passing fad. They wanted to extend the fad for as long as possible regards of the consequences.
Hence they went for first strike http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_strike in the hopes of a limited initial advantage and then stretching out that legal advantage by playing every legal shit head manoeuvre possible to stretch it out for as long as possible.
Apple once given market lead, proved to be a bunch of disgusting, disingenuous, asshats driven by nothing but greed and bullshit who resorted to the worst examples of patent twisting exploitation and legal manipulations, it all comes off as psychopath inc prior to the second strike http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_strike.

--
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 00:11 · Score: 0

It is ludicrous to compare ordinary business lawsuits to the destruction caused by major wars. All that will happen eventually is some cross licensing agreements with perhaps large sums of money changing hands. I know its frustrating to see lawyers reap windfalls but that the system we have. Any system that settles disputes without violence is to be appreciated not condemned. Overheated rhetoric is not helpful.
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 00:49 · Score: 0

so your answer is to brainwash your children.
Mod parent up, +1 retard.
Re:Great! by AmiMoJo · 2011-12-12 01:02 · Score: 1

I'd go further an say that power corrupts. Oversight is vital, but the police resist it by claiming that there is too much bureaucracy and it keeps them behind a desk instead of out on the beat fighting crime. Yeah, they have to fill out a form explaining why they stopped and searched someone and that takes time, but it also makes it harder for them to harass black people or abuse the number plate recognition system.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 01:08 · Score: 0

then hope that by the time they have power and are in control of things, they remember the lessons you taught them and they can make changes.
Wow. Someone drank the capitalist democracy kool-aid. If you do not have power and control, your children will not.

I was brougth up with the myth that mr policeman is there to help and mr government man is, also. both are blatant lies and it took me decades to learn the real truth. I'd like to hope that the next generation might actually learn from OUR mistakes and make things better.
Then you know full well nothing short of violent revolution will overturn this regime.
Re:Great! by blind+biker · 2011-12-12 10:20 · Score: 1

I think the solution is simple and science-based, but not sure if it will be implemented - because those who have the power now, will never allow for such to be implemented or even mentioned in the media: just filter out psychopaths. There are tests that can catch them, for instance by checking for their lack of fear of impending incident (they don't blink), their complete lack of remorse and ability to lie. Psychopaths are power-hungry and are the people that should NEVER be let close to power. Filter them out, and your will have a working democracy.

--
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Re:Great! by Phoghat · 2011-12-12 20:43 · Score: 1

Mr. Jung sheds a tear of joy.

--
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
Re:Great! by jefe7777 · 2011-12-13 03:19 · Score: 1

I have been away. But today I logged in and found gifts awaiting me, and I shared these gifts with those whose nimble fingers pound out prodigious prose in defense of liberty.
My hat is off to you.
Re:Great! by roman_mir · 2011-12-13 04:19 · Score: 1

Excellent, so the fight can continue. BTW., I used to get mod points, but haven't gotten any for near 2 years now for sure. I find it strange though, I have 'excellent' to 'terrible' karma back and forth, but I can't moderate it seems even when at 'excellent'. Not excellent enough I bet.

--
You can't handle the truth.
Re:Great! by jefe7777 · 2011-12-13 04:59 · Score: 1

At first, I didn't agree with slashdot's evolution, with the majority modding down the minority, but then again, this is kind of similar to real world media, where Fox News, MSNBC, CNN (and others), try and drive the dialogue, with the help of their viewers, and the minority with diverging opinion from the mainstream have a very tiny voice. But persistence can make up for this, persistence and purity of argument.
It takes a persistent minority to continue to bring contrary, sometimes forgotten, sometimes unpopular views into the debate mix.
I for one, have tired of the left/right dialogue. Maybe libertarianism is just like any other ism, in that it doesn't have all the solutions, could never work in a pure form. But perhaps that's true of any "ism". But I think I'm being reasonable when I ask for just a few things:
1. Stop the bleeding. We have to stop the deficit spending. I don't care whose watch or whose administration did the most damage, it doesn't matter anymore. We'll never reverse the direction the debt is going until we put the brakes on deficit spending, and current projections show no end in sight. 1.3 trillion in revenue, with a 1.4 trillion shortfall on 2.7 trillion in planned spending is beyond ridiculous. Not to mention, there's more to the problem then public debt. Private debt is a problem that nobody's talking about. Fewer and fewer Americans convert their labor into capital. They are simply consumption machines. Consumption machines with record levels of debt.
2. Once the bleeding is stopped, we have to start chiseling away at the debt.
Anyway, I appreciate your posts. I bet you're a real interesting fellow in person.

Ever since Steve died by koan · 2011-12-11 14:17 · Score: 0

It seems like things have turned sour for Apple,(no pun intended) I know these patent wars have been going on for some time but in the last 2 months I have seen a lot more anti Apple articles than I recall ever reading before.
The timing of it is most likely coincidence, or maybe not.

--
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."

Re:Ever since Steve died by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 14:38 · Score: 0

The RDF is fading..
Re:Ever since Steve died by erroneus · 2011-12-11 15:07 · Score: 0

You can't be serious. The ball on this started rolling BECAUSE of Steve Jobs and when he did before he died. He just doesn't get to see what the score is since he started his game. Most of us agree, regardless of what, if any, side we are on that this will not go well for anyone and so far, it's seeming to work out that way. There is no government or law in any nation that says "cool companies are exempt."
Reporting a defeat for Apple isn't an "Anti-Apple" story anyway. A legal decision was rendered based on evidence which was presented. By your measure, if your favorite sports team was defeated in the last game, would the reporting of such in the news constitute an "anti-home-team" news story?
Historically, Apple has won most of its stupid legal attacks. Apple "lost me" with the Apple IIe and the Franklin. But they also lost me further with their betrayal of their agreement with Apple records that they never get into the music business... they did so with impunity. Apple plays pretty dirty and always have. What is new here is that it's not working any longer and it could be because they are picking on targets which are of equal or greater size than themselves.
Re:Ever since Steve died by Myopic · 2011-12-11 15:26 · Score: 2

Yeah, but Apple Computer did pay Apple Corps handsomely when they made their music store. Money solves problems like that.
Re:Ever since Steve died by Daniel+Phillips · 2011-12-11 15:41 · Score: 2

Perhaps there are more anti-Apple articles because Apple's practices have become more despicable? And that more because of Jobs than because of his absence.

--
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
Re:Ever since Steve died by Mark19960 · 2011-12-11 16:24 · Score: 0, Troll

It's an anti-apple story because they lost?
I guess we should have it one way only: Apple always wins and we all lose?
Meh..... go hang with Florian... your both good at insulting people.
Re:Ever since Steve died by jo42 · 2011-12-11 18:34 · Score: 3, Insightful

The ball on this started rolling BECAUSE of Steve Jobs
Exactly. Instead of pissing away millions of dollars on legal fees and douche bag lawyers, Apple should put the money towards improving their products and getting even farther ahead of the "we're all copying Apple anyway" competition.

Mayhem in Mannheim by siddesu · 2011-12-11 14:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

If it was not yet obvious to someone that patents and litigation do more damage to free commerce than blatant and slavish copying, the abyss of ridiculosity that ha ensued in the wake of the recent Apple vs. * and * vs. Apple cases should have proved it once and for all with vengeance. Alas, the business leaders of the world and their political clients will continue to be oblivious to the issues. In the meantime, Florian Mueller and the rest of them patent "experts" rub hands in satisfaction in the background.

Re:Mayhem in Mannheim by poena.dare · 2011-12-11 15:40 · Score: 2

"...not yet obvious to someone that patents and litigation do more damage..."
CEO: Are patents and litigation do more damage to free commerce than blatant and slavish copying?
Consulting Lawyer: Preposterous!
Lobbyist: Never!
CEO: OK then. Carry on.

Re:P0WN3D! by Dunbal · 2011-12-11 14:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

The poetic part is that they fired the first shot, with Samsung. Will be fun to watch where the dominos end up.

--
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.

Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by youn · 2011-12-11 14:27 · Score: 1

i guess they are about to get a sweet taste of their own medicine :)

--
Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that :p

Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by DJRumpy · 2011-12-11 16:05 · Score: 3, Informative

Be careful what you wish for. These are FRAND patents that are in question. Motorola successfully argued that they did not have to license a FRAND patent to Apple unless Apple paid damages above and beyond the cost of the standard FRAND license rate issued to everyone else for 'past' infringement, and the additional damages are left vague under German law, meaning any ridiculous amount could pop out of the courts.
Given that Google is the new 'OS' kid in town, you should probably read up on FRAND patents and why they are supposed to be offered at a standard rate to everyone.
Patent wars are business as usual but when they start mucking around with FRAND patents in this way, it should make anyone in the tech business pay attention.
Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by hedwards · 2011-12-11 16:57 · Score: 4, Insightful

That's mostly because Apple filed suit having never paid for a license in the first place. Seems reasonable to me, I'm not sure how precisely making somebody pay above and beyond the standard royalties in a case like this isn't fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory. Apple could have avoided it by paying the licensing fee at the time or by not suing.
I'm not personally sure I understand how charging somebody that just filed suit against oneself isn't fair or reasonable.
Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 17:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

And again Apple fanboys come up with stupid "they're FRAND, that means Apple can do whatever it wants with them".
Nope, Apple should have secured the license before starting to produce iPhone. Instead they said "Screw it" and later proposed to Motorola "We'll generously pay you standard rate and in exchange you don't sue us for past offense".
Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by LordLucless · 2011-12-11 19:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

Motorola successfully argued that they did not have to license a FRAND patent to Apple unless Apple paid damages above and beyond the cost of the standard FRAND license rate issued to everyone else for 'past' infringement
That seems eminently sensible to me. Otherwise, what would be the disincentive for ignoring FRAND licenses? If what you seem to endorse was the case, and I was a new startup, I'd just ignore FRAND patents for as long as I could. When I finally got called on it, it'd be no worse for me - and I'd have had all those years longer with my money, and kept costs down during the delicate phase of launching a new product.
If all the courts could do was require standard payment, why would anyone, ever pay for FRAND patents without being compelled to by the court?

--
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by khipu · 2011-12-11 22:29 · Score: 1

It is reasonable as part of FRAND portfolios to insist on patent cross-licensing. Apple, however, wanted to monopolize the market with their features but still get everybody else's patents licensed to them at a low cost. That is not reasonable. And it doesn't affect other companies, because they have cross-licensed their portfolios. If the same mechanism can be used to end Microsoft's patent trolling, all the better.
Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 00:54 · Score: 0

Because the whole point of 'non discriminatory' is that it's not discriminatory.
*sigh*
Fair and reasonable relate to the amount charged and non discriminatory to the fact that you can't pick and choose who you license them to. FRAND only works if you have all three, otherwise Motorola's patents should be invalidated.
Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by thoromyr · 2011-12-12 05:39 · Score: 1

Before you agree wholeheartedly you might want to consider the case where FRAND patents were denied at the standard rate. When the 'club' doesn't want new members what do you do? Not play in the game? As reasonable as that might be, some folks/companies don't give up so easily.
Apple has been, and knew they were, infringing since the inception of the iPhone. If you believe the anti-Apple line it was because Apple refused to participate in the agreement. If you believe the pro-Apple line it was because the exclusive member club wanted crosslicensing of Apple's patent portfolio in exchange for being allowed to pay the standard license rate.
Not being privy to the behind-closed-doors maneuvering would make it prudent to not /assume/ that penalties should be necessary: it is entirely possible for both parties to have aggravated the situation and a fair resolution /could/ be standard license rate.
Whether or not that is the case here is something that there is insufficient information to decide.
Re:Payback is a bit (1/8th of a byte) :p by hedwards · 2011-12-12 09:10 · Score: 1

It's not discriminatory. If I yell at some random black person for being a thief that would be racist and discriminatory. However if I called some black person that just got finished mugging me a thief, that would be neither racist nor discriminatory.
Same deal here, Apple filed suit having not paid royalties for some of the products it had shipped and now Motorola is requiring them to pay more than they otherwise would have. It's not discriminatory, they aren't singling Apple out for reasons other than Apple's bad behavior. Now, if some other company engages in similar behavior to Apple and doesn't have to pay extra for the license, then it would likely be discriminatory.

Checkers anyone? by metalmaster · 2011-12-11 14:28 · Score: 3, Interesting

If these patent wars continue the map of Europe will look like a checkerboard. White country gets the Google product while black gets the Apple product

Re:Checkers anyone? by SteveTheNewbie · 2011-12-11 14:44 · Score: 4, Funny

Won't work. Apple will sue as they own the colour white as well.
Re:Checkers anyone? by steelfood · 2011-12-12 07:38 · Score: 1

They own black too.

--
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."

Be done by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 14:29 · Score: 0, Funny

Just ban all mobile phones and tablets and be done with it.

Re:Be done by Cigarra · 2011-12-11 15:20 · Score: 3, Funny

Just ban all mobile phones and tablets and be done with it.
King Solomon, is that you?!?

--
I don't have a sig.
Re:Be done by Fluffeh · 2011-12-11 16:19 · Score: 2

King Solomon, is that you?!?
I think Soloman would have suggested they cut the patent in half and give one half to Apple and one half to Samsung.
Actually, in this case, that wouldn't be a bad idea. Cutting up all the patents...

--
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Re:Be done by hedwards · 2011-12-11 16:58 · Score: 2

Actually, you'd make more progress cutting attorneys.
Re:Be done by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-12-11 21:50 · Score: 1

First they came for the tablets,
and I didn't speak out because I didn't own a tablet.
Then they came for the smartphones,
and I didn't speak out because I didn't own a smartphone.
Then they came for the laptops,
and I didn't speak out because I didn't own a laptop.
Then they came for my abacus,
and there was no-one left to speak out for me.
Re:Be done by znerk · 2011-12-11 22:19 · Score: 2

I like it!
There are entirely too many people making entirely too much money by arguing with each about what other people can and can't do.
We should follow Twain's advice on this matter.

--
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Re:P0WN3D! by exomondo · 2011-12-11 14:30 · Score: 5, Funny

Will be fun to watch where the dominos end up.

fallen....like a house of cards....checkmate.

It won't change anything by dbIII · 2011-12-11 14:30 · Score: 3, Insightful

Marconi vs Telsa was also ridiculous, as was Edison against a lot of people. The US patent system has degenerated a lot since that time instead of improving.

Slammed ... by giorgist · 2011-12-11 14:36 · Score: 4, Informative

Slammed ...

Even better considering that apple was caught flogging off their patents to a patent troll, hoping to hurt as many "competitors" as possible.
Every article written will hopefully include all the stories together to paint the apple darling in a new light.

http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/09/apple-made-a-deal-with-the-devil-no-worse-a-patent-troll/

Re:Slammed ... by DJRumpy · 2011-12-11 16:08 · Score: 0, Troll

You mean much like Google was caught giving patents to handset vendors so they could in turn sue Apple with said patents?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14832762
Re:Slammed ... by Mark19960 · 2011-12-11 16:27 · Score: 3, Informative

No,... so they could defend themselves.
Re:Slammed ... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 18:45 · Score: 0

You mean much like Google was caught giving patents to handset vendors so they could in turn sue Apple with said patents?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14832762
Only a fanboi or a troll would suggest that those two things are alike.
Re:Slammed ... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 20:36 · Score: 0

Caught flogging off? Is that what happened? We don't know for sure because no one is saying anything. Try reading the article you've linked to again instead of just the headline...
Perhaps Apple moved the previously Mitsubishi shares to Digitude in a settlement in April.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2011/06/13/big-tech-companies-might-learn-to-fear-digitude/
Perhaps apple is creating it's own patent pool to help switch off this patent war BS (unlikely, I'll grant you)
Perhaps Apple know more about running a business than you do
Perhaps you like imagining things without any facts because that lets you hate blindly
Re:Slammed ... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 20:46 · Score: 0

âoeOur goal is to generate great returns for our investors,â says Kramer. âoeWe have reached out to many of our prospective customers to encourage them to become early strategic licensees. Our formal licensing program will launch in the fourth quarter.â
Kramer said Digitude has already done a licensing deal with one company and it will do one more before rolling out a program that will include a litigation component.
Translation: "We're gonna acquire funding and some patents and then go sue whoever you point us to".
Surely no one will dispute that Apple knows about running a business, since "know more about running a business" have long ago become "be a total fuckwad, as long as you are raking in profits and (don't get caught) doing anything illegal".

Phone Wars by DanielRavenNest · 2011-12-11 14:40 · Score: 1

Will this era in tech history be known as the "Phone Wars"?

Re:Phone Wars by similar_name · 2011-12-11 14:59 · Score: 4, Funny

Begun, the phone wars have.

He who lives by the sword... by stox · 2011-12-11 14:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

dies by the sword.

Apple will soon learn.

Ever wonder why you see so few patent lawsuits from IBM relative to their portfolio? IBM uses their portfolio like a scalpel. Apple has uses theirs like a shotgun.

--
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "

Re:He who lives by the sword... by rotide · 2011-12-11 15:00 · Score: 1

Actually, wasn't it Thermonuclear War? So they use them like nukes?
Re:He who lives by the sword... by Nerdfest · 2011-12-11 15:25 · Score: 1

I prefer to think of their weapon as a "douche nozzle".
Re:He who lives by the sword... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 15:39 · Score: 1

That's not really fair to douches, as they actually serve a purpose.
Re:He who lives by the sword... by ross.w · 2011-12-11 15:41 · Score: 3, Funny

I think in this case, it's more likely to be "Fruit Ninja"

--
If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
Re:He who lives by the sword... by OverflowingBitBucket · 2011-12-11 16:10 · Score: 1

> Ever wonder why you see so few patent lawsuits from IBM relative to their portfolio?
Personally, I just assumed it was the same reason that you see very few knife attacks on the hull of a battleship.
Re:He who lives by the sword... by ediron2 · 2011-12-11 16:11 · Score: 1

Huh, I thought it was because IBM has become pretty worthless on the hardware and invention front since they became primarily a consultancy.
(Power CPU's and stuff notwithstanding, I am kidding a little. But scalpel? REALLY? Anyone that can say that IBM wields proprietary aspects of their computer technology like a frickin' scalpel needs to reexamine the first 70 or 80 years of IBM's history).
Re:He who lives by the sword... by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · 2011-12-11 18:34 · Score: 1

http://www.forbes.com/asap/2002/0624/044.html
IBM using their patent portfolio.
Re:He who lives by the sword... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 19:20 · Score: 1

What, idiot?
The GP asked why you see so few patent lawsuits from IBM. Not people suing IBM. This has nothing to do with the hull of IBM's battleship, it's about how IBM uses that battleship to engage others.
Re:He who lives by the sword... by viperidaenz · 2011-12-11 19:24 · Score: 1

Cool, a 30 year old story
Re:He who lives by the sword... by Splab · 2011-12-11 21:33 · Score: 1

So if you do bad once in your life, you can never become good?
Re:He who lives by the sword... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 22:09 · Score: 0

A battleship that has shown its willingnes to keep firing all guns until all atoms previously making up any knife-wielding attacker is at least in earth orbit, preferably in sun orbit.
Re:He who lives by the sword... by Totenglocke · 2011-12-12 02:25 · Score: 1

I think I need to email Apple's customer service and say "Isn't karma a bitch?"

--
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
Re:He who lives by the sword... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 02:35 · Score: 0

Apple reminds me of a small child grabbing everything while screaming 'MINE!'.
Re:He who lives by the sword... by swillden · 2011-12-12 04:45 · Score: 1

Huh, I thought it was because IBM has become pretty worthless on the hardware and invention front since they became primarily a consultancy.
IBM still spends more on R&D than any other tech company, and still receives more patents than anyone else -- and IBM's patents by and large tend to be pretty meaningful ones. While it's true that about half of IBM is focused on consulting these days, that still leaves over 200,000 employees doing other stuff. I haven't checked the numbers recently, but as of a couple of years ago, IBM was still the second-largest software company on the planet, as well as being the largest maker of server hardware, and the world's largest technology consultant.
IBM is huge.

(Power CPU's and stuff notwithstanding, I am kidding a little. But scalpel? REALLY? Anyone that can say that IBM wields proprietary aspects of their computer technology like a frickin' scalpel needs to reexamine the first 70 or 80 years of IBM's history).
First, the subject was how IBM uses its patent portfolio, not the much broader topic of "proprietary aspects of their computer technology". Second, IBM's a radically different company today than it was for the first 70 or 80 years of its history. Heck, it's a very different company than it was 10 years ago (I know, I was working there and watched it changing), and it's hugely different than it was in the 60s and 70s, prior to the anti-trust suits and the massive bloodletting of the 80s, and the layoffs of the 90s.
I'm not saying IBM doesn't do some underhanded crap. They do. And they exploit the hell out of their employees; I'm very glad I left. But I am saying that what they did 30 years ago really has no bearing on today, and what they did 20 years ago has little bearing.
And I do think they use their patent portfolio very responsibly. So far.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:He who lives by the sword... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 10:47 · Score: 0

Perhaps you should read the post again, a bit more slowly this time, to see if there is another interpretation. You can use a dictionary to look up any words you find confusing.
Re:He who lives by the sword... by OverflowingBitBucket · 2011-12-12 12:24 · Score: 1

> A battleship that has shown its willingnes to keep firing all guns until all atoms previously making up any knife-wielding attacker is at least in earth orbit, preferably in sun orbit.
Well said.
If the size of the battleship doesn't give you pause, climbing over the charred remains of the last few knife-wielding attackers may.
Re:He who lives by the sword... by ediron2 · 2011-12-12 23:12 · Score: 1

Glib answer: Pretty much.
Left field answer: Um, check for a pulse before you use that 'life' word.
My final answer: You can become good, but it should be nigh on impossible to be forgiven outright. Basically, Nobelesse Oblige seems a small price to pay for being a successful rapacious rat bastard. So, no-- systematic antisocial behavior never gets a free pass. Ever. Any mention of once-they-were-rich good deeds needs that second phrase that mentions how they (or dad or gramps) got their money, and it seems ethical to never completely let them off the hook. Anything less implies that forgiveness is cheaper than the crime itself.
Now, if a Gordon Gecko or a Microsoft (to go corp) tries to do everything in their power to make amends: (gives everything away and starts wearing a hair shirt and volunteering at soup kitchens anonymously, or similar Ma Theresa acts, etc), then they might earn that special slot where they're spoken of as someone whose good deeds far outweighed their misdeeds. Otherwise, anyone with a checkered past get exactly as much forgiveness as they earn: Some. Not much.
Tossback: So, if I godwin the question, is there a level of misdeed so egregious in your mind that the perpetrator can't be forgiven?

Serves Apple right. by unity100 · 2011-12-11 14:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

They not only tried to prevent samsung on grounds of 'rectangular shapes', but they also transferred their patents recently to a proxy company to sue ALL mobile phone providers.

All is the result of the strategy jobs laid out. 'theft' my ass. theft of rectangular shapes that is.

anyways. what goes around, comes around.

--
Read radical news here

Re:Serves Apple right. by erroneus · 2011-12-11 15:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

No, this does not serve Apple right. This doesn't even come close to the damage and harm Apple has caused through their legal actions of these sorts. For them to be served right, the public would have to stop buying iThings for at least long enough for Apple to notice.
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 16:28 · Score: 2, Informative

Pretty great passion and moral outrage there. Don't let the facts -- like the way "rectangular shape" was one of 7 design attributes that Samsung cloned -- get in the way of a good rant.
Re:Serves Apple right. by tsa · 2011-12-11 16:53 · Score: 3, Insightful

My colleague always says: "Never let the facts get in the way of a good story."

--
-- Cheers!
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 17:12 · Score: 1

Rectangular shape, big screen with black borders, roughly equally-sized borders around the screen, grid of icons, row of quick-access icons, I don't know what else I'm forgetting but any of these "design attributes that Samsung cloned" should have Apple laughed out of any court in the world. Don't let reason and common sense get in the way of fanboyism.
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 17:19 · Score: 0

You mean like "rectangular, round corners, black, thin, touchscreen display dominating front surface..."? Yeah, that really changes it all. It is surely cloning, not obvious design choices.
Re:Serves Apple right. by AmiMoJo · 2011-12-11 20:32 · Score: 2

For them to be served right, the public would have to stop buying iThings for at least long enough for Apple to notice.
Hopefully this ruling can be implemented fast enough to halt xmas and January sales. Imagine an Apple store unable to sell iPhones...

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Serves Apple right. by sempir · 2011-12-11 21:46 · Score: 1

anyways. what goes around, comes around.
Do you realize what an earth shattering phrase you have just uttered???? One cannot have " what goes rectangular, comes rectangular ".....can one? Think......round is far better than rectangular...not so? A ROUND shaped tablet is the answer, it comes to hand the correct way up always, and .....so on and so on! The mind boggles. Thinks.....if I can patent this the world will beat a pathway to my door!!!!...or is that a path to my doorway? I'm going to lie down now.
Round is the new way. (I'm too old for this shit.)

--
A closed mouth gathers no foot.
Re:Serves Apple right. by khipu · 2011-12-11 22:34 · Score: 1

Don't let the facts -- like the way "rectangular shape" was one of 7 design attributes that Samsung cloned -- get in the way of a good rant.
Most of those attributes are utilitarian, the rest are either trivial or attributes Apple ripped off themselves.
And if Apple wants to go down this road, they are going to be in big trouble themselves, because there are hundreds of attributes that the iPad and iPhone "cloned" from prior devices. Maybe one can't sue Apple over those retroactively anymore, but other manufacturers are now going to file the same kind of stupid patents that Apple has been beating them up with, and they are going to sue Apple over it. Apple is going to be tied up in knots until they stop engaging in this nonsense.
Re:Serves Apple right. by L4t3r4lu5 · 2011-12-12 01:13 · Score: 1

Admitting that you both work for the Daily Mail won't make you any friends.

--
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 01:44 · Score: 0

That sounds like Christmas come early for the rest of us :)
Re:Serves Apple right. by Theaetetus · 2011-12-12 01:51 · Score: 1

They not only tried to prevent samsung on grounds of 'rectangular shapes'
FUD. Apple doesn't have a patent on "rectangular shapes" and never did. They have a very specific and narrow design patent, and no other manufacturer came close to infringing it... except for Samsung, who made a device so close that even their lawyers who had been writing briefs about how distinctive they were couldn't tell them apart.
Re:Serves Apple right. by delinear · 2011-12-12 01:53 · Score: 2

The real crime is that such blatant and obvious patents make it through the process at all. I suspect most companies, if handed such a ridiculously broad patent that could effectively be put to use against 90% of what's out there right now, would struggle not to use it. That doesn't excuse Apple's behaviour, or the behaviour of any big company that exploits these things, but let's not forget the gloriously broken patent system that made it all possible
Re:Serves Apple right. by gnasher719 · 2011-12-12 02:10 · Score: 1

Hopefully this ruling can be implemented fast enough to halt xmas and January sales. Imagine an Apple store unable to sell iPhones...
Imagine Motorola having to pay for damages when it is decided that this injunction wasn't issued properly.
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 02:26 · Score: 0

FUD. There are a lot of obvious differences between iPad/Galaxy Tab and iPhone/Galaxy phones, and the only thing Samsung came closer to than others is market share, which is why it got sued.
And also, can you stop it with "couldn't tell them apart" myth?

Koh frequently remarked on the similarity between each company's tablets. At one point during the hearing, she held one black glass tablet in each hand above her head, and asked Sullivan if she could identify which company produced which.
"Not at this distance your honor," said Sullivan, who stood at a podium roughly ten feet away.
"Can any of Samsung's lawyers tell me which one is Samsung and which one is Apple?" Koh asked. A moment later, one of the lawyers supplied the right answer.
So, a) they did give the answer, b) from 10 feet you'll have hard time telling apart not just two tablets, but two LCD displays or two notebooks, or even a tablet and Etch-a-Sketch.
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 04:19 · Score: 0

Cool, I'd love to work with Mark Twain too.
Re:Serves Apple right. by tsa · 2011-12-12 07:31 · Score: 1

Did he say that? I never knew.

--
-- Cheers!
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 07:38 · Score: 0

Thankfully there's a chance that can still happen. One of the remedies for patent infringement is that a manufacturer can be forced to recall ALL offending products.
I dream of the day that Apple is forced to send a forced update that deactivates all their iShit and Apptards are forced out of their little walled garden to discover just how shit Apple really is.
And it could really happen! Imagine every iPhone in the world being forcibly bricked, and every Apptard having to run down to their local phone store to buy an Android at full, non-upgrade price. It would be BEAUTIFUL. And it would be what Apple deserves.
It almost certainly won't happen, but I can always dream.
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 08:38 · Score: 0

We're talking 10 *feet*, not yards, not meters, not miles. Feet. If you can't tell two objects of the same class apart at 10 feet, you'll have serious trouble arguing to a court that the objects are not similar enough to be confused in the marketplace. Worse still, these are the *lawyers* for the side which is arguing that the likelyhood is low that customers will be confused into thinking their product is actually their competitor's product. They are (or at least should be) intimately familiar with the two devices. If they can't tell them apart (despite numerous Android fans claiming that they're *obviously* different) then how can they argue that a normally informed consumer will be able to tell them apart?
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 09:55 · Score: 0

Oh please! The Samsung devices in question were near identical clones of the iPhone and iPad. I thought Apple was being heavy-handed until I saw pictures of the two devices side-by-side. You don't need a judge to hold up both devices to see how Samsung purposely designed the devices to mimic the iPhone or iPad. Samsung even used the same exact icons in the exact layout that Apple does, but I guess the 'I'm going to follow the other knee-jerking haters of Apple to show how much of a free-thinker I am' haters are too blind to admit to things like that.
Instead of creating innovative and unique products, every other smartphone manufacturer and tablet manufacturer are being parasites by copying Apple's ideas in one way or another. As numerous times in the past decade, Apple puts out a product and in no time Samsung and HTC and all the rest mimic Apple. Before all of you haters-that-love-to-hate start complaining that Apple copies ideas from others you should first open your eyes and see what every Android device manufacturer does, but that would turn your 'Linux-Rulez!' world upside down. Wouldn't it?
I don't like M$, but at least their Win7 mobile OS isn't just another clone of iOS.
Re:Serves Apple right. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 11:38 · Score: 0

Customers will be looking at them from 1 foot. At that distance you can clearly see that SAMSUNG logo on front and back, as well as camera and lack of home button.
And you still missed the part where they did tell them apart. It might have been a lawyer who didn't hold neither iPad nor Tab in his hands who couldn't.
And again, look at two same sized LCDs from 10 feet and try to tell them apart.

What goes around comes around by Billlagr · 2011-12-11 14:55 · Score: 2, Interesting

Did Apple seriously think that they could get away with their asshole-ish behaviour forever without any repercussions? It was seriously short sighted of them to think that there wouldn't be an eventual backlash, or that they underestimated how much of a backlash once it got up some momentum. Just my own observations too, the backlash seems to be trickling down to the consumer level, I've heard quite a bit of talk around the office of jumping ship to Android when phone contracts expire from people who previously wouldn't part with their iPhone. YMMV.

Re:What goes around comes around by RandomFactor · 2011-12-11 15:24 · Score: 1

I take anecdotal sales impacts with a lot of salt.
There is one ray of sunshine as cases and counter cases fly.
When Apple wins, they don't benefit much, and the competing ecosystem doesn't suffer significantly. The damage they are doing to a whackamole competitor isn't going to gain them much in sales since people who aren't buying an iThing are generally going to switch to one of the alternative non-iDevices.
When they lose however, all their competitors benefit. There is no alternative to current model iPad or iPhone, those dollars go to a competitor.
Of course Apple has money to burn, and this asymmetry has no doubt been considered and the decision made that it was worth spending 10:1 in legal costs against lower margin competitors.
So here we are.

--
--- Mercutio was right.
Re:What goes around comes around by giorgist · 2011-12-11 16:56 · Score: 1

Amm ... actually they did ... we joke about the SJ distortion field, but it is a real event. I know of somebody that works in an apple store, and he so believes in apple he speaks as if he works in a church.

In the same context Steve Jobs effectively hasten his own death by believing he can think him self out of cancer.

Group think is a wonderful thing, from pearl harbor to a couple of chicks telling each other they have beautiful eyes nobody is too big not to suffer from it.
Re:What goes around comes around by Splab · 2011-12-11 21:11 · Score: 1

Ever considered Apple knew they where in hot water and started firing suits to make sure they had something to settle with?
Missing RAND license means no ability to do anything on a mobile network; having patents for the defacto way of making mobile device design (whether we like it or not, they have the patents), gives them a bargaining chip.
Granted, it might very well be Jobs was being an arsehole.
Re:What goes around comes around by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 22:16 · Score: 0

Steve Jobs effectively hasten his own death by believing he can think him self out of cancer.
In this specific case, it probably didn't do any difference, but he didn't do himself any favours by delaying.

I want more lawsuits. by FauxReal · 2011-12-11 15:02 · Score: 1

I hope at some point the entire mobile market is frozen solid with injunctions dependent on a infinite loop of IP/Patent cases. I will probably die from laughing too hard. Not sure if my guts will explode or if I'll have a aneurysm. On second thought, I'd rather not die. I'll have to carry some emergency Valium just in case.

--
Deltron 3030 - Virus (music video)

will it ever end? by Jarik+C-Bol · 2011-12-11 15:02 · Score: 1

At what point will we finally reach the realization that certain design features are NOT original to anyone, and simply required to obtain basic useable function from a smartphone? At some point, this stupidity has to stop, right?

--
I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.

Re:will it ever end? by inglorion_on_the_net · 2011-12-11 16:49 · Score: 1

At some point, this stupidity has to stop, right?
I'm with you in hoping it will, but in terms of what would have been sensible, it should have stopped a looooong time ago.

--
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.

Tech Culture by Wolfling1 · 2011-12-11 15:03 · Score: 1

At first, I was like 'damn patent laws', but then I was like 'what if Apple did steal the technology?'.

This ruling implies that Apple stole the technology from Motorola, and the lawsuit is Motorola's attempt to force Apple to relent.

Congratulations. I've passed patent trolling 101.

What concerns me most is that there are enough of these rulings being made at the moment to suggest that all the large technology houses are simply stealing each other's technology on the basis of saying 'prove that I stole it'. Its kind of like the schoolyard bully saying 'make me'. It occurs to me that these injunctions are too much about cash changing hands and not enough about providing a disincentive to the company that stole the technology.

Perhaps some more novel punishments need to be dished out by the judges. For example: indict all current and past company directors on criminal charges, and proceed with extradition orders. That might put the frighteners into some of them.

Re:Tech Culture by Fluffeh · 2011-12-11 16:32 · Score: 1

What concerns me most is that there are enough of these rulings being made at the moment to suggest that all the large technology houses are simply stealing each other's technology on the basis of saying 'prove that I stole it'.
The other logical reason for this that you may not have considered is simply that the patents that are being awarded/approved are merely logical next steps in evolution of the technology. I think that is the main reason of why so many of us /.'ers get cranky with the patent system. So many patents are awarded (and then used to sue others) that are merely logical extensions of a current idea/technology that they should NEVER be patentable.
A good example is this patent awarded to Apple. When you have a touchscreen that you can input data with a finger, surely the idea to have the screen scroll by moving your finger along the screen and zoom in and out by moving two fingers closer or further apart is obvious. It is an INPUT device. To have those sort of simple gestures is the logical, blatantly obvious, anyone can think of it idea possible.
I wouldn't agree that novel punishments are needed by judges - I would say that less* patents like this should be granted.
* By less, I mean none.

--
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Re:Tech Culture by inglorion_on_the_net · 2011-12-11 16:56 · Score: 1

What concerns me most is that there are enough of these rulings being made at the moment to suggest that all the large technology houses are simply stealing each other's technology on the basis of saying 'prove that I stole it'.
I feel that the way a lot of businesses operate is that they just go ahead and do things, and not worry too much about whether something is legal or just. Also, the validation of those steps is not whether or not they eventually lose lawsuits, money in settlements, or goodwill, but rather if the business succeeds in generating a lot of profit.
There are good and bad things to this. On the one hand, it is good that some people have the guts to just go ahead and do stuff. It brings progress, innovation, new insights, etc. On the other hand, some businesses arguably take things too far - e.g. making millions of people sick so you can grow your business is not something I like to see, and this does happen.

--
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Re:Tech Culture by viperidaenz · 2011-12-11 19:33 · Score: 1

It should be fairly easy for Motorola to prove the theft. Apple are using GPRS technology. "[the] Motorola patent that is essential to GPRS, a radio communication standard" Apple refused for 4 years to pay royalties like every other manufacturer does
Re:Tech Culture by LBU.Zorro · 2011-12-11 20:48 · Score: 3, Informative

I never understood why this patent was granted - back in 2006 the same gestures were demonstrated (and publicly) by Jeff Han with his FTIR multi-touch display.
http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_han_demos_his_breakthrough_touchscreen.html - take a look from about 2:29 onwards, pinch zoom, scoll etc.
It really doesn't appear that Apple should have been able to patent it, especially if their file date was in 2007 and it looks like the grant date was 2011 (seriously? wtf?).
Still, who knows why it was granted, and if I can find that prior art surely the other big companies who were sued because of it could too so I assume I'm missing something.

*cries* by v1 · 2011-12-11 15:05 · Score: 1

why can't we just all GET ALONG?

--
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.

Re:*cries* by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-12-11 15:16 · Score: 2, Funny

You can't - I've patented that business method.
Re:*cries* by tsa · 2011-12-11 16:57 · Score: 1

Because we haven't really gotten to know each other.

--
-- Cheers!
Re:*cries* by znerk · 2011-12-11 22:30 · Score: 1

Because we haven't really gotten to know each other.
Are you sure? We all seem to be lying in the same bed...

--
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Cross Licensing by msevior · 2011-12-11 15:05 · Score: 1

I think this is part of a cross licensing strategy that could finally make Apple stop being so stupid. The rest of the phone world has patents on tech that Apple employs. The rest of the phone world has FRAND'ed those patents. My guess is that this stuff is trying to force Apple to give up it's own small improvements related to iPhones and iPads as being world-changing tech available only to them.

We'll see.

Re:Cross Licensing by Deorus · 2011-12-11 15:37 · Score: 1, Insightful

I think it's way too soon to see Apple as defeated when just yesterday there was an article about some third company suing everyone except Apple for patent infringement. This is far from over, and the way I see it, Apple will use their deep pockets to drown smaller vendors until there's no option left but to compensate Apple with their assets and declare bankruptcy. Don't forget that currently Apple has enough live money to buy 2 Nokias or 7 Samsungs.
Re:Cross Licensing by oxdas · 2011-12-11 17:24 · Score: 1

You do realize that Samsung makes twice Apple's annual revenue and has 6 times the number of employees. These are all big companies competing in this market, but Samsung is without a doubt the biggest. Samsung's current market cap is around $140 billion for just the electronics division (the company itself is privately controlled due to a circular ownership system that would be illegal in the U.S.). Apple has a lot of money, but not enough to buy this marketplace. You are right though that this is far from over.
Re:Cross Licensing by mysidia · 2011-12-11 20:01 · Score: 1

I think this is part of a cross licensing strategy that could finally make Apple stop being so stupid. The rest of the phone world has patents on tech that Apple employs. The rest of the phone world has FRAND'ed those patents.
Personally... I would like to see this get escalated more, and raise more and more embarrassment for those involved, and more and more public awareness of the corrupt patent system.
The whole Blackberry VS RTP situation was great for raising public awareness. The patent system will never get reformed without the public demanding it.
Re:Cross Licensing by Zironic · 2011-12-11 22:42 · Score: 1

Hahahahahahahaha, no. Apple is the small player in this market, Samsung is the company that has enough money to buy Apple twice over.
Re:Cross Licensing by Deorus · 2011-12-12 09:47 · Score: 1

I stand half-corrected regarding Samsung's market cap ($123B). Half because they are nowhere near Apple's value ($364B), but it is true that Apple's live $40B wouldn't be enough to buy Samsung.
Re:Cross Licensing by Zironic · 2011-12-12 10:56 · Score: 1

That's Samsung electronics. One of Samsungs many subsidiaries which by itself pulls in more revenue then Apple.
Samsungs total assets are at 340 billion to Apples 116 and their equity is 140 to apples 76.

What exactly costitutes an expert? by bogaboga · 2011-12-11 15:11 · Score: 5, Insightful

The linked article refers to Florian Mueller as a patent expert. What exactly constitutes one?

When it comes to this particular case, this "expert" predicted Motorola's doom by fronting the ideas that it (Motorola), was suing over what he termed as "standards essential" and therefore "weak" attack or defense patents.

No wonder he sounds humbled by this development on his blog.

Re:What exactly costitutes an expert? by exomondo · 2011-12-11 15:30 · Score: 4, Interesting

The linked article refers to Florian Mueller as a patent expert. What exactly constitutes one?
Whoever wrote it likely made the mistake of searching for antonyms rather than synonyms when searching for an alternative word to 'incompetent' to follow 'patent'. Florian Mueller is the bumbling idiot that has made countless idiotic assertions (most disproved with just a cursory look at the evidence) to drive hits on his blog, he's the JarJar Binks of the patent world.
Re:What exactly costitutes an expert? by stevesliva · 2011-12-11 16:03 · Score: 1

The linked article refers to Florian Mueller as a patent expert. What exactly constitutes one?
When it comes to this particular case, this "expert" predicted Motorola's doom by fronting the ideas that it (Motorola), was suing over what he termed as "standards essential" and therefore "weak" attack or defense patents.
No wonder he sounds humbled by this development on his blog.
See signature below.

--
Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
Re:What exactly costitutes an expert? by Mark19960 · 2011-12-11 16:34 · Score: 3, Informative

Florian Mueller is not an expert.
He is a troll, plain and simple.
Burn that name into memory and as soon as you hit that name in any article stop reading it.
That is all I can suggest to avoid permanent brain damage from reading his blathering.

Karma... by luis_a_espinal · 2011-12-11 15:21 · Score: 3, Funny

... is a poetic, totally awesome bitch.

Samsung tablet designs pre-iPad? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 15:23 · Score: 1

Have you seen the Samsung tablet designs before the first iPad come out and the designs after the iPad came out (including the packaging)? Pretty obvious they copied Apple and it wasn't obvious to them (or anyone else) how to design an "obvious" tablet or packaging for it.

Re:Samsung tablet designs pre-iPad? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 15:41 · Score: 2, Informative

Have you seen the Samsung tablet designs before the first iPad come out and the designs after the iPad came out
Do you find it odd that Samsung's photo frame design circa 2006, is almost identical to their Tablet design that followed it? Right down to the Samsung logo on the front and the lack of any visible buttons on the front? That's just Samsung's product design.
Re:Samsung tablet designs pre-iPad? by PaladinAlpha · 2011-12-11 18:57 · Score: 1

It doesn't matter when the patent was granted. The patent is absurd. Most of its stipulations are extremely obvious design directions for a tablet computer -- directions all manufacturers were moving in anyway. The reason "before iPad" looks different from "after iPad" is because of technological advance -- it has nothing to do with Apple's misguided claims that it invented thin.
Re:Samsung tablet designs pre-iPad? by PaladinAlpha · 2011-12-11 20:03 · Score: 1

No one had come up with a perfectly flat, thin tablet because the technology was still developing. It has not been shown that a supposedly infringing tablet would not have existed sans Apple, with merely access to the technology. All tablet manufacturers pre-iPad were expressing, publicly, the desire to make a thin, light tablet. All the features of that patent follow that pattern -- touch gestures benefit from a flat bezel, structural strength and ergonomics are vastly improved by rounded corners, the touchscreen removes the need for buttons, etc. They didn't exist pre-iPad because the technology to make them exist wasn't there yet.
Apple did do something savvy, in spotting when the technology had matured enough to make a mass-market appeal item -- that's historically what they're good at (iPhone, iPod, etc.) They did not, however, demonstrate innovative or non-obvious design; they merely built the device everyone had already envisioned first, and attempted to lock it up in patents which are now coming into question.
Re:Samsung tablet designs pre-iPad? by anonymov · 2011-12-11 20:18 · Score: 1

Eh? "Thin" was always a technological limit for portable computer, and "completely flat front surface" was here long before iPad, look at touch-controlled devices before tablets, like mediaplayers, for example.
"Nobody come up with them before" != "I didn't hear about them before".
Anyways, you're still mistaken about design patents. What Apple and Samsung are disputing in design patent case is not "Did Apple come up with this before Samsung?", but "Does Samsung device looks too much like Apple's?" and "Does that patent cover only elements following the function and is invalid or is it ornamental design and should be protected?"
Re:Samsung tablet designs pre-iPad? by Splab · 2011-12-11 21:07 · Score: 1

Rounded corners, flat front, black bezel (or whatever it's called) and aluminium edge - yes it's thick, but rest of the design is on par with iPad.
Re:Samsung tablet designs pre-iPad? by gnasher719 · 2011-12-12 02:17 · Score: 1

Do you find it odd that Samsung's photo frame design [androidauthority.com] circa 2006, is almost identical to their Tablet design [droidmatters.com] that followed it? Right down to the Samsung logo on the front and the lack of any visible buttons on the front? That's just Samsung's product design.
Look at it sideways and tell us that they look the same. Then show us where the stand for the iPad can be found. A design patent covers the design as a whole. Similarities of parts of the design don't matter. And a logo does not count at all in a design patent. Samsung could have easily got a design patent in 2006 for a device that looks like their photo frame, but is just flat and without a stand. And then Apple could have done nothing about it. But they waited until Apple came out with a successful design, and then Samsung copied it.
Re:Samsung tablet designs pre-iPad? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 10:31 · Score: 0

The picture that you link to is misleading at best: http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/CeBIT-2007-Samsung-Blasts-Into-Digital-Photo-Frames
This shows that the Samsung is ~1.25" thick and the frame is noticably curved. The white frame is even less convincing, and is styled with a white ribbed plastic design similar to that used on some Apple monitors from that period.
Oh right, and of course Apple's exhibits haven't been misleading at all have they? Photoshopped to remove logos and change the dimensions. I only showed the front of the device because that's all Apple ever compares with the ipad and galaxy tab, if you compare from other angles there's clearly no case anyway.

Re:P0WN3D! by spyder-implee · 2011-12-11 15:35 · Score: 5, Funny

I thought the poetic part was that the German economy was the only one in the Euro where people might actually be able to afford an iPhone/Pad.

--
Take what ye can. Give nothing back!

Re:P0WN3D! by poetmatt · 2011-12-11 15:50 · Score: 5, Informative

the article is idiocy and so is your comment.

We have the fact that apple already tried to sue Motorola over the xoom. This is just the response, which was done well before google acquired motorola.

The "Google" Action will be if/what we see from google as a result of this reflecting on them going forward, which could be entirely nothing.

The ultimate outcome by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 15:53 · Score: 0

Lawyers+patents=Cluster fuck. The only winner is chaos.

FRAND Patent War by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 16:01 · Score: 0

Can't wait until Microsoft starts leveraging FRAND patents against Google.

Re:FRAND Patent War by znerk · 2011-12-11 22:11 · Score: 1

Can't wait until Microsoft starts leveraging FRAND patents against Google.
"Oh, sure, we offered to license it to them for a 'Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory' price - all we wanted in return was some accurate standards for all versions of MS Office documents..."
Sorry for butting in with this, but it still sickens me that older MS Office documents are not able to be opened by default with newer MS Office products.

--
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Re:FRAND Patent War by Daniel+Phillips · 2011-12-14 08:09 · Score: 1

Sorry for butting in with this, but it still sickens me that older MS Office documents are not able to be opened by default with newer MS Office products.
An excellent reason to use Open/Libre Office

--
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?

The interesting part by Luckyo · 2011-12-11 16:04 · Score: 2

This is patent MAD at work. Funnily, or sadly even insanity like this will not diminish support from big companies to tightening patent rules and laws even further.

Why? Because as long as patents can be enforced like this even against big names, no one small or new will ever be able to even try to enter the same business to compete.

Re:The interesting part by inglorion_on_the_net · 2011-12-11 16:59 · Score: 1

Why? Because as long as patents can be enforced like this even against big names, no one small or new will ever be able to even try to enter the same business to compete.
While this makes a lot of sense in theory, what about Apple and Google entering the phone market pretty successfully, without having been active there before?

--
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Re:The interesting part by Luckyo · 2011-12-11 17:41 · Score: 1

Former entered "mobile device" market around 1980s or so. Latter ended up having to buy motorola's mobile phone division after outsourcing all actual manufacturing still got it assraped in courts.

The Inevitable by rickzor · 2011-12-11 16:13 · Score: 1

apple vs. everyone flamewar in 3... 2..

Realy who gives a shit by slackware+3.6 · 2011-12-11 16:13 · Score: 1

My Android is awesome . Buddy's iPhone is awesome. Guy at work says his Storm2 is way better than my old Storm. They are all so close with minor differences that people chose to harp on. Get real, you love them cause they cost more than a decent laptop and you need to justify it to your self.

Re:Oblig XKCD by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 16:16 · Score: 0

Uh ... this is an article about Intellectual Property, not Internet Protocols ... I can see where you went wrong, though!

EASTERN DISTRICT ?? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 16:24 · Score: 0

Then that explains it !!

Put that in your Bundesloch and it essen my moeglicher frau !!

Google acted in self defense by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 16:30 · Score: 1

Google was trying to defend it's business partners against Apple's hyper-aggressive bogo-patent lawsuits.

It was plainly obvious that Apple was trying - in a nasty under-handed way - to compete unfairly against Android. Apple found it easier to sue companies that use Android, instead of suing Google directly. Microsoft does the same scam, all the time.

Don't kid yourself, Apple is 100% to blame for all of this.

Re:Google acted in self defense by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 16:39 · Score: 0

Or perhaps you should consider that Google infringed on patents they should have purchased instead, and left their handset vendors woefully unprepared and in the cold.
Did you ever stop to think that Google might have infringed since it had essentially no legs in the OS business prior to Chrome and Android? They are relative newcomers in both the phone and the OS market. The fact that they had to start hastily start buying up patent pools in the hopes they would get something of value out of them speaks volumes. The fact that they had to start selling those patents to the handset vendors to 'defend' themselves also speaks volumes.
Re:Google acted in self defense by hedwards · 2011-12-11 16:59 · Score: 2

The deal with these patents is that everybody infringes, it's just a question of whether you've got a big enough patent warchest to force cross licensing.
Re:Google acted in self defense by hairyfeet · 2011-12-11 19:07 · Score: 1

Actually that isn't a fair or correct description at all....Apple sues, MSFT uses the classic "Pay your $699 license fee you cocksmoking teabaggers!" meme which it bought from SCO.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

The best part of the article is not even mentioned by JonySuede · 2011-12-11 16:43 · Score: 2

according to Florian Mueller, who has been closely following patent lawsuits in the mobile industry. Mueller is a patent expert who sometimes does consulting work for companies including Microsoft.

--
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected

Re:P0WN3D! by Colonel+Korn · 2011-12-11 16:47 · Score: 3, Funny

Just take a deep breath and try for one moment to appreciate just how many Motorola's Apple's $81 billion bux would buy, outright. How many legal hours do you think that represents? How many companies can afford to do battle at these scales? Do you really think Germany is that important when China sits there with a 1% Apple penetration?

Legal issues aside, sonny, you may want to reconsider calling this dominoes. It's clear you're not familiar with the game or business, in general.

And it's clear you're not familiar with a mixed metaphor.

--
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)

In other words by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2011-12-11 16:50 · Score: 1

European patent law is just as screwed up as American patent law.

And Australian patent law is just as screwed up as European patent law.

--
#DeleteChrome

Re:In other words by Z00L00K · 2011-12-11 17:38 · Score: 1

And the only winners are the lawyers.
Maybe this will spell the end of the patent laws as we see them today. At least we can hope that they flush stupidities down the drain.

--
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.

oh yeah. by unity100 · 2011-12-11 16:59 · Score: 1

simple rectangles, shiny surfaces and similar other bullshit -> these are not 'facts', these are total morondom.

once you start letting people claim ownership of BASIC shapes and colors, you enter the nutjob realm. but appallingly, that realm is already being traversed by millions in usa as something 'normal' and 'legal'.

whats next ? claiming ownership of basic syllables ? oh wait - apple is already doing that.

--
Read radical news here

Re:P0WN3D! by exomondo · 2011-12-11 17:07 · Score: 1

It's clear you're not familiar with the game or business, in general.

LOL! ok then, i'd explain the concept of the 'mixed metaphor' but given that you took the original post seriously i doubt you have the capacity to understand it anyway.

Re:P0WN3D! by bonch · 2011-12-11 17:15 · Score: 0

The "Google" Action will be if/what we see from google as a result of this reflecting on them going forward, which could be entirely nothing.

So far, it is nothing. And that's very telling. Motorola is acting as Google's personal patent troll, which is what people recently criticized Apple for.

I've got a simple rule by anonymov · 2011-12-11 17:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

When you see "expert" where you expect "lawyer", "engineer", "doctor" and so on, it's a sure sign of incoming bullshit.

Re:I've got a simple rule by JonySuede · 2011-12-12 05:01 · Score: 1

the news was the Microsoft consulting thing, I already knew about the bullshit rule ;)

--
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 17:25 · Score: 5, Informative

It's obvious to anyone with common sense viewing Samsung's designs that Samsung is deliberately aping Apple's designs.

oh yes because this design of Samsung's from 2006, before the ipad, looks nothing like this, you'd have to be an idiot to think those look the same wouldn't you :P

Re:P0WN3D! by bryan1945 · 2011-12-11 17:26 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Damn, wish I had some mod points right now. +1 Brilliant.

--
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.

Re:P0WN3D! by PopeRatzo · 2011-12-11 17:29 · Score: 5, Interesting

The poetic part is that they fired the first shot, with Samsung. Will be fun to watch where the dominos end up.

At this rate, nobody will be able to buy a handheld tablet until sometime the 22nd century, and then it will have to be trapezoidal in shape, no multi-touch and nothing resembling a screen on one side and a back on the other.

But at least by then it will almost certainly be all open source, hardware and software, because if the human race is going to survive to the 22nd century, it will only be because we've finally jettisoned the obsolete notion of patents and copyrights.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.

Oh crap! by SwedishChef · 2011-12-11 17:31 · Score: 1

I should have become a patent lawyer instead of an engineer. (FACEPALM)

--
No one ever had to evacuate a city because the solar panels broke!

Re:P0WN3D! by mug+funky · 2011-12-11 17:32 · Score: 2

you fail to realise the profound effect this will have on the big patent "reform" lobby.

this can only make things better, if the companies that have been clusterfucking innovation finally realise that they're not able to innovate because of all these damn patents.

Re:P0WN3D! by anonymov · 2011-12-11 17:34 · Score: 5, Insightful

> The dimensions are the same

Yeah, after Apple lawyers photoshopped them to match, not in real life.

> the look is the same

Except for all the parts that aren't.

> the chargers and cables are the same

Now after previous two these is just straw-grabbing.

> the packaging is the same

Or as it says in that original pic "You open the box, and you see... [the product front]". Shocking. No one thought about it before.

> They even stole Apple artwork and used it on the walls of their retail stores

You mean "Some electronics retail shop in Italy, which has Samsung section, decorated walls with all kind of icons, including Google's and Apple's"

I didn't think there were still Apple apologists who still hang on to that "OMG DEFINITE PROOF" pic.

> that Google's patent acquisitions were purely for defensive purposes. Well, Motorola is now seeking injunctions

How's countersuing is not defensive? What constitutes "defensive purposes" then?

Re:P0WN3D! by Samantha+Wright · 2011-12-11 17:35 · Score: 3, Informative

For the answer to this week's word puzzle, see pg. 46.

--
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!

Re:P0WN3D! by Daniel+Phillips · 2011-12-11 17:37 · Score: 5, Insightful

Slashdot historically has had a bias against things that are popular...

Not really. It is more a bias against evil.

--
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?

Re:P0WN3D! by anonymov · 2011-12-11 17:41 · Score: 5, Informative

"Patent troll" usually means "non-practicing entity", not "anyone who sues on patent grounds".

Like, you know, that Digitude Innovation who recently got some patents from Apple to sue everyone with.

Unlike Motorola, who got sued for Xoom, and now sues Apple in retaliation.

Re:What the hell? by anonymov · 2011-12-11 17:43 · Score: 3, Interesting

Defensive - "Lay down and take it like a man! Why do you even need that Xoom and whatnot anyways?", offensive - "OMG, why are you hitting back, you bully!"

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-12-11 17:45 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Lawyers by mutherhacker · 2011-12-11 17:46 · Score: 1

I bet lawyers worldwide are rubbing their hands together in greed.

Re:P0WN3D! by Galestar · 2011-12-11 17:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

Because Apple is a huge, influential player now after the success of the iPhone, Slashdot has decided that they don't like Apple anymore

No, I think most people here have always hated Apple - they are the Fisher-Price of consumer electronics. We do not hate them because they are popular, we hate them because their products are garbage yet they market them as if they are gold, and some people buy into it.

--
AccountKiller

Re:P0WN3D! by oxdas · 2011-12-11 17:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

In his defense, the LCD's, nand, and processors are the same. Of course that's because they are all made by Samsung.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 17:54 · Score: 5, Insightful

Slashdot has decided that they don't like Apple

Yes everyone but you.

Slashdot discussion has become so boring in the last few years. Even the trolls used to be more interesting. Unfortunately, because Slashdot's news posting is so behind everyone else's

But here you'll stay, continually posting because the reality is that you don't really believe what you wrote there, if you did then that would mean you believe the whole community is trolling you but you just don't have the mental ability to resist responding and continually posting. So we will keep seeing posts from bonch because he just can't leave, even though he believes he's being trolled he just can't help but respond.

No Weihnacht for Apple!!! by G3ckoG33k · 2011-12-11 18:06 · Score: 1

No Weihnacht for Apple!!!

na-na-na-na-na-na-na

bleeeehhh.

Re:P0WN3D! by Teun · 2011-12-11 18:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

You seem to have strange ideas about very large parts of the European economy.

--
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."

Re:P0WN3D! by hairyfeet · 2011-12-11 18:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

Won't happen and here is why: cross licensing. Look at AMD and Nvidia, or Intel and AMD for examples. even when they are at each others throats they never revoked their cross licenses and you know why? Because it makes a hellish barrier of entry for everybody else. imagine if anybody could make an X86 CPU, or a GPU for that matter, you'd probably go back to the days of WinChip and Cyrix and having tons of free choice. but of course that would mean the two or three competitors we have now wouldn't be splitting the pie between themselves and a two way pie is a hell of a lot bigger than a five way pie, so they'll just sit their lawyers down at a table and cross license.

Mark my words Apple will play their "look and feel" game for awhile longer and then they'll finally, after a couple of legal spankings, sit down and cross license. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if you see Apple and MSFT get together with a cross license to 'fucking kill Google" as that is one thing they both seem to agree on if Jobs rants were true. But you get the big players to cross license you have put up a toll booth so expensive nobody with less than Warren Buffet money has a prayer in hell, and even if they take a shot they'll be tied up in court for a decade or maybe two because it doesn't really cost MSFT nor Apple squat. Any fines they get could be payed with the change in the couch compared to how much they make owning the market..

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

Re:What the hell? by LynnwoodRooster · 2011-12-11 18:26 · Score: 3

Sorry, this is retribution - Apple sued Motorola (pre-Google buyout) over Xoom. This is Motorola/Google responding. Your little fantasyland of Appledom notwithstanding...

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!

Doling out power by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · 2011-12-11 18:29 · Score: 3, Interesting

Make it like jury duty. Select leaders at random. Maybe have a test for specialized positions, or a general civics exam.

I'm not sure I believe in this myself, but it would have advantages over the current system.

Re:Doling out power by isorox · 2011-12-11 20:13 · Score: 3, Interesting

Make it like jury duty. Select leaders at random. Maybe have a test for specialized positions, or a general civics exam.
I'm not sure I believe in this myself, but it would have advantages over the current system.
In the UK there are very powerful, unelected, civil servants that run the country (see Yes Minister for an exagerated example). I assume the same happens in the U.S.
I genuinely believe most new politicians (at least the UK) have principles. I might not agree with them of course. After a few years on the job they're brow-beaten, same as in any large organisation. They're allowed to make the occasional grand gesture for PR purposes, but generally the ship keeps steering the course with noone at the helm.
Re:Doling out power by blue_goddess · 2011-12-11 22:39 · Score: 2

Random government won't have democratic legitimation, even if it will be chosen with uniform distribution among entire population (possibly with some age restrictions like 18-75 or so). That situation will backfire when it does something unpopular (and that seems to be the frequent case), so you will get some bonus social unrest (that is, more than normal). That unrest will probably be well enough to overthrow such power, so that is not really an option.
My sig seems to be correct also this time.

--
As a computer, I find your faith in technology amusing.
Re:Doling out power by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 00:46 · Score: 0

This is why the whole business with unelected technocrats in Europe is causing a stirr. It's not that they're unelected - these people were already running things - it's that the illusion of democracy has been peeled back. They can no longer pretend the country is run at the will of the people.
Re:Doling out power by AmiMoJo · 2011-12-12 00:47 · Score: 1

In the UK there are very powerful, unelected, civil servants that run the country
Are you kidding? If that were so why are they having wages and pensions cut? Why do ministers like to blame them for every government cock-up?
You need to back up your claims with some examples. I'll go first. The head of the immigration service was recently forced to resign by a minister, and the head of the Met was forced out by pressure from ministers and the Mayor of London. John Reid called the entire Home Office "not fit for purpose" and forced major changes on it.
Besides which ministers like to surround themselves with aids these days, unelected spin doctors who wield a fair mount of power.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:Doling out power by tcr · 2011-12-12 05:30 · Score: 1

Uh, I think you mean 'aides'.

--

Information wants to be beer.
Re:Doling out power by Dripdry · 2011-12-12 10:25 · Score: 1

Why not add a third house of Congress? Randomly select citizens, like jury duty, who serve a certain number of years, with pay and job security of some sort. ?

--
-
Re:Doling out power by blue_goddess · 2011-12-12 19:34 · Score: 1

The short answer is: I don't know, I live in Europe.
The long one is: don't ever think that changing the system is cure for all the evil on earth. Some people in Europe made that mistake several times. The one and only thing to improve is people. The best system will always fail when filled with bad people.
That said, maybe two-house parliament is complicated enough to understand for some of the MPs, spare ordinary citizens. The legislative process will have too many loopholes vulnerable to all kinds of shadowy lobbing etc. Think "bloat". There is some reason (other than historical connected with Westminster) that most democratic systems consist of two houses, more or less democratically elected, and some kind of one-person fuse (like president or king) with comparatively few powers but enough to block or severely delay some bad legislature. (In US it's different because the president is also head of the cabinet). Elections to parliament are by design desynchronized with presidential elections (4 and 5 years, respectively) just to avoid situations like "one party takes all" by the fluctuation of social feelings (and thus eliminate the blocking capability, because president will certainly agree with ideas of his own party). Maybe you could do something like that. Get some democratically elected body (few members at most) that will be devoted to protecting citizens rights, with legislative-blocking capabilities. There are some ancient patterns.

--
As a computer, I find your faith in technology amusing.
Re:Doling out power by gicxjo · 2011-12-13 08:07 · Score: 1

Indeed there is a quite nice paper (from an statistical physics group in italy whose names I don't remember anymore) that stated precisely what you're suggesting. They found that under their model of how companies work (how people is promoted and get better salaries), people ends in positions of more power in which they are not efficient. The idea is that you are promoted for doing it good in your job until you land in a job which you are not good at. Then you are not promoted anymore because you are bad at your position but you wont go back to the previous position, where you were god because you would earn less. So at the end, the people on the top are usually the ones that cannot successfully do their job. They compared with a system where people get their initial positions randomly and found that this is actually much more efficient, giving a better output.
In a talk by the author he suggested that if his model was right for the government, maybe the best thing to do is get a randomly chosen government. He also pointed out that indeed some peoples have used this system throughout history.

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-12-11 18:32 · Score: 0

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 18:34 · Score: 2, Funny

Okay, the hyperbole just crossed some event horizon of hilarity.

Mankind's great challenge over the next 88 years: patents and copyrights. They will DESTROY HUMANKIND.

Re:P0WN3D! by bloodhawk · 2011-12-11 18:36 · Score: 2

Motorola is an entity that is producing a product and responding defensively with the only way the system allows companies to respond, nothing about what they are doing can be considered trolling. Apple on the other hand have setup a shell company that produces nothing but has a portfolio of patents for the very purpose of suing competitors, that pretty well fits perfectly with the definition of trolling.

Wait by rabtech · 2011-12-11 18:38 · Score: 1

So Motorola, which came up with part of the GRPS standard, gets to use its patents to shut down a competitor? How is that not a massive anti-trust violation?

I was under the impression that they were required to license all the standards-related patents under RAND terms.

--
Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)

Re:Wait by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 18:50 · Score: 0

Apple didn't even try to license that patent, and then tried to slip "you don't sue us for past infringement" in licensing deal. Motorola didn't like that.
Re:Wait by moronoxyd · 2011-12-11 20:32 · Score: 2

I was under the impression that they were required to license all the standards-related patents under RAND terms.
Motorola is willing to do that.
But they are not willing to let Apple get away with using the technology without licensing it for several years.

Re:P0WN3D! by hairyfeet · 2011-12-11 18:45 · Score: 5, Interesting

Not to mention we already went through this in the states with them over 20+ years ago. Anybody remember "look and feel"? because that is pretty much EXACTLY what we are talking about here. Just as with look and feel Apple is claiming that generic thing A plus generic thing B equals patentable and makes about as much sense as saying "Well you can build a car with square wheels, or motorcycle handlebars, but you build a car with round wheels and a steering wheel that's mine". There isn't a damned thing on the iPad that wasn't done somewhere else first. grid of iCons? Palm. Squarish tablet? Samsung and Sony and Toshiba ALL had WinTablets with the same dimensions they just weighed more. Touch screens? older than dirt. the only thing I'd give Apple is the gestures although even with those i'd want to compare them to the gestures Opera had back in the day before i'd issue a patent.

Personally I predicted this would happen when Jobs died. like it or not apple has always been "The house that Jobs built" and just like before without a dictator running the shop and putting their foot down things break down over there. I predict they'll file more lawsuits trying to hang onto what they have, but there won't be anymore of those "holy shit, where'd THAT come from?" brand new hot products just popping out of Apple. Again like him or not you had to give the man credit, as Jobs had a vision of what he wanted and stuck with it, but I just haven't seen anything from Cook to make me think he has that same overarching vision. Instead just like under the pepsi guy they'll just be updating existing lines while suing like crazy trying to hold onto share.

They probably have one or two at the max products left in the wings from Jobs tenure, after that I bet the well runs dry.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

GRPS and LTE by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 19:01 · Score: 0

Watch for when Apple turns around and sues Motorola over LTE patents it bought from Nortel.

I'm not sure who got a bug up their ass first, but it seems FRAND patents regarding GPRS violates something more major than a simple licencing agreement. the AND part means that Apple, if they were to licence it, should pay exactly the same amount as HTC, Nokia, etc.

And this responsibility seems like it should belong to Qualcomm since their chips implement GPRS/EDGE/HSPA+/etc and they own a buttload of CDMA patents which are used in UMTS (HSPA) and LTE as well.

As far as Germany is concerned, German patents are ignored ... frequently when it comes to software. Just look at Fraunhofer and MPEG. If anyone remember's the advent of mp3 and music piracy, and Franhofer going after every software implementation of mpeg1-layer3. At some point you have to realize that if it can be implemented in software, it shouldn't be patentable, and everyone will work around it until the patent expires if you're too much of an asshole about it. (Which is the current problem with the MP4 standard being adopted for the web, too many of the IP holders are dicks. End result? Nobody adopts MP4 except those who already have MP4 available in hardware.)

I don't expect too much from this, what will happen is that the injunction will last a short amount of time, anyone who wants an iPhone/iPad with 3G will just go next-door to France and fuel the grey market. The stupid thing is, this patent concerns GPRS, which is the now obsolete method once LTE becomes available. Apple could just go "f you, LTE now thx", and it doesn't have an effect on the CDMA models used in the US.

It's not like Apple has no options. Everyone who urgently wanted an iPhone bought one on black friday in the US or Canada, this news just means that everyone else will buy their phone now, it's not going to mean they're suddenly going to buy a motorola phone.

Re:GRPS and LTE by anonymov · 2011-12-11 19:24 · Score: 4, Informative

> the AND part means that Apple, if they were to licence it, should pay exactly the same amount as HTC, Nokia, etc.
Basically, what happened is this: Motorola found out Apple has not licensed this patent. As this is a FRAND patent, Apple could avoid the suit if they tried to negotiate a fair deal to license the patent.
Apple said "OK, but you can't sue us for damages from past infringement, we're gonna pay same rate for past".
Motorola said "Na-ah" and went to court.
Judge said "You've got caught infringing, so it's fair to demand extra for the time when you was breaking the law" and decided that was not a fair deal, so FRAND defense didn't work.
Re:GRPS and LTE by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 04:42 · Score: 0

In order to get damages ( money beyond what Apple owes Motorola ) they will likely have to prove willfull infringement. That sounds pretty unlikely. Who knows.

Re:P0WN3D! by R3d+M3rcury · 2011-12-11 19:12 · Score: 3, Interesting

Not to mention we already went through this in the states with them over 20+ years ago. Anybody remember "look and feel"? because that is pretty much EXACTLY what we are talking about here.

While I agree, keep in mind that Apple lost those cases not so much because Apple was in the wrong but because Apple had actually granted rights to Microsoft to use the "look-and-feel" in Windows (Apple claimed that Windows 2.0 used things that Apple had not granted a license to, but the judge found otherwise).

There is no licensing here.

Apple Plays Chess by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 19:14 · Score: 0

Has anyone considered the fact that Steve Jobs is a quite capable, intelligent visionary who seems to know what he wants and what he needs to do to get there? Perhaps he felt the patent wars were an experience required in order for our society to technologically mature. Perhaps there is good intention here. He's always been quite the radical.

I can only imagine all the copyright mumbo-jumbo the Apple development teams have faced while trying to build the iPhone. I can just see Steve planting a bomb of hope right before making his final bow

rea1l1.

Re:Apple Plays Chess by znerk · 2011-12-11 22:39 · Score: 1

Has anyone considered the fact that Steve Jobs was a quite capable, intelligent visionary who seemed to know what he wanted and what he needed to do to get there?
Fixed that for you. Since you seem to have missed the news, Mr. Jobs is dead. It was all over the TV, printed newsmedia, and the internet. I'm assuming you live under a rock, and only come out to charge your iPod.

--
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Re:Apple Plays Chess by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 22:47 · Score: 0

Nah, he just thinks Apple is like Asimov's Foundation and Jobs is like Seldon, planning the future so far that he'll advise Apple from beyond the grave with prerecorded messages.
Maybe Apple's engineers are already secretly building an iGenerationShip to sow the appleseed in another star system.

Why tax when you can sue? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 19:19 · Score: 0

...so much for free trade.

Re:P0WN3D! by jeti · 2011-12-11 19:20 · Score: 2

But they're now in bed with trolls. So I wouldn't insist on this distinction.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 19:31 · Score: 0

Wow! A metaphor smoothie!

Re:P0WN3D! by mysidia · 2011-12-11 19:40 · Score: 1

"Patent troll" usually means "non-practicing entity", not "anyone who sues on patent grounds"

Usually, yes... but lately, some large corporations have been blurring the lines, by suing over bad patents obtained for obvious technical choices falsely labelled as "invention"s.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 19:43 · Score: 0

Like this one or this one, you mean?

Wow by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 19:43 · Score: 0

Don't read this... it is a curse...

In 2007, a little boy named Timothy was standing in the hallway inside of his house. He then turned towards the place where the hallway connects with his mom's bedroom and spotted a box of graham crackers. This made him realize that there was a new rule in his house: anyone who walks past the box of graham crackers must allow the large black man standing near it to fuck their ass! Then, for some reason, he tried to run past the box of graham crackers and was grabbed by the large black man. The large black man looked at his bootyass naked ass and screamed, "There is no hole!" Timothy then escaped and ran into his mom's closet, and the black man followed. The black man then bumped into a cabbage patch kid in the closet and angered it. Timothy managed to escape outside while the black man's ass was turned into a rumblehouse. Then, Timothy noticed that a close friend of his had his car parked in front of his house and was signaling him to get inside. Timothy did so, and the car took off down the road at great speed while Timothy explained his situation to his friend.

While Timothy was celebrating the fact that he escaped, the car began slowing down; his friend then said, "Now, now, now's the time right now!"

Timothy asked him what he was doing. His friend grinned evilly and replied, "What slowness can I offer you? I'm copyright owner Madow!" and turned into an old man wearing a butler's outfit.

The car continued to slow down, and the cabbage patch kid was catching up to them. Timothy then got out of the car (since he could run faster than it was moving) and began running. However, what seemed to be an invisible entity lifted him into the air and thrusted him ass-first around the world at a speed greater than the speed of light! Eventually, Timothy's bootyass naked ass crashed directly into the very cabbage patch kid he was trying to escape from! The cabbage patch kid was then sucked into Timothy's ass as if his ass was a spaghetti noodle (just like grandma)! At that point, his ass became a bouncehouse for the cabbage patch kid, and major tickle was inflicted upon it!

Now that you have read this, the very same cabbage patch kid will get sucked right up your ass as if your ass is a spaghetti noodle, and major tickle will be inflicted upon it!

You can prevent this by doing the following: post this comment in three different threads.

What's the matter Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 19:45 · Score: 0

Don't like a taste of your own medicine?

Re:P0WN3D! by Arancaytar · 2011-12-11 19:47 · Score: 1

To the lawyers, it's more like a full row of hotels on every case- ah, street.

Re:What the hell? by moronoxyd · 2011-12-11 19:50 · Score: 2

Except this case started in 2007 or thereabouts, way before the split up of Motorola and Googles decision to buy one part of it.

But don't let the facts stop you from building you fantasy world.

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-12-11 19:52 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:P0WN3D! by AgNO3 · 2011-12-11 19:58 · Score: 1

huh, Tim Cook has been in Charge how long? They will still be releasing Jobs stuff for AT LEAST a couple years if not 5+. Cook was hand picked for a reason and until he proves other wise you are talking out of your ass. He might be another Scully or he might not but to even imply after only a few months that he will derail the train is crazy. Maybe Cook will rerail the train that got a bit more weird towards then end. Like Killing the MOST POPULAR VIDEO EDIT OR THE PLANET WTF? So while the patent thing is crazy Cook's not exactly ready to be burned at the stake.

--
OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink :-(

No Injuction by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 20:03 · Score: 0

There was NO INJUNCTION. German court has decided on behalf of the plaintiff, that's all. No injunction had been submitted at that time.

Re:P0WN3D! by Hognoxious · 2011-12-11 20:21 · Score: 3, Funny

trapezoidal in shape, no multi-touch and nothing resembling a screen on one side and a back on the other.

Actually, the screen will be on the back because that's the only configuration Assple haven't patented. To use it you'll have to hold it wrong.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

Re:P0WN3D! by Plammox · 2011-12-11 20:21 · Score: 2

Are you saying the Dutch/Belgians/French/Austrians/Luxembourgish couldn't possibly afford iPhones? Guess, I'd better get rid of mine, then.

Re:P0WN3D! by thsths · 2011-12-11 20:32 · Score: 0

> However, Slashdot historically has had a bias against things that are popular--a common quality of al tech crowds, really.

I completely agree, but as you say the trend is not just visible on Slashdot - it also happens on other tech communities.

And it is really quite obvious: Samsung copies design that is successful, and they do that deliberately. In the Eastern societies that is a form of appreciation, in the West it is illegal. Tough luck, you should have asked your lawyers first (and you should try not just to copy the look, but also the seamless feel of the software, which unfortunately is still preventing me from every buying anything Samsung again).

There is a solution by aepervius · 2011-12-11 21:05 · Score: 4, Interesting

I think it was even done by ancient greek : democraty by lottery. Any adult at 20 is forced to pass a small test (nothing great, and certainly the test must not be allowed to filter out the population majority, only that you can count, basic litteracy stuff, and mental healthy, aka no life breaking psychose). Once the test is good, you are OK for the next 40 years to be in the lottery (forced in the lottery). Then each 4 or 5 years at election, a college of people is elected at random under hefty surveillance that no cheating happen with sheets of paper thrown at random and taken out for each seats of representative. Then those people are given a 2 or 3 hours refresher on constitutionality of law, the constitution , bill of rights etc... After that they are thrown in to vote for laws. For the next 30 years after their investiture they are looked at by tax, law representative, anti corruption team, whatnot to make sure there is no "gift" coming after their investiture.

There would still be cheating and corruption, but it would be a tad bit more difficult than with the elected pigs aristocraty we have right now.

Another solution would be that laws are not anymore voted by representative, but open for the whole folk to vote for/against electronically.

--
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org

Re:There is a solution by AmiMoJo · 2011-12-12 00:56 · Score: 1

The problem I would have with being picked is that the press will tear anyone in office apart if they can. Every aspect of their private lives will be examined. For that reason I would never go into politics, not because I have done anything wrong but because newspapers will twist and distort everything to make it look like I have. That is the primary function: to sell papers by causing their readers to feel outraged at headlines.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:There is a solution by tbannist · 2011-12-12 02:07 · Score: 1

Otherwise known as the "Murdoch Recipe".

--
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Re:There is a solution by monkeyhybrid · 2011-12-12 04:07 · Score: 1

Some decisions need to be made (or at least influenced) by experts in whatever field is relevant to the law in question.

For example, If a random sample of the general public was asked to vote on what to do about aspects of the economic crisis at a time when a not insignificant percentage of the sample may happen to be suffering unemployment, the outcome could be heavily biased to 'fix' the problem with a short term goal to create jobs fast as possible, possibly at the detriment to a longer term solution that would really be better for all in the long run.

I'm not saying we shouldn't look at involving the general public more (I'm actually all for it), but just that on it's own it risks missing the bigger picture that only experts may be fully aware of. It works both ways though, experts can be too involved with details and miss the point that government is meant to serve the people.

I'd love to see the general population much more involved in policy and decision making overall, with experts (not necessarily government figures) putting the various cases to us for us to decide on. It would probably need to be weighted to strike a balance between public opinion and expert opinion but I can't help but think it would be better overall.

I live in a supposedly democratic country (UK) but what can I actually vote on? Red, blue or yellow every few years and not much else. There have only ever been two referendums here in the UK, the first in 1975 regarding EU membership, the second in 2011 regarding the electoral system. Yes, I know I can talk to my local government 'representative' but in my experience that is next to useless in practice, especially if it concerns something my representative has no personal interest in following.

The sad fact is that the only people with much say these days is big business. And big business gets big from hunting down avenues of profit, not for the good of mankind.
Re:There is a solution by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 04:25 · Score: 0

I like this, but would go further with your other solution. Provide all the required context in a concise manner so that the voter can make an informed decision. Prior to making the decision, a short test of say 10 questions (randomly selected from a pool and with some percent required for passage) to keep the uninformed from voting on the issue.
Don't know whether it would be better/worse/the same when it comes to selfish voting (as opposed to voting for things that benefit society) when compared to now.
Re:There is a solution by cavebison · 2011-12-12 16:35 · Score: 1

Another solution would be that laws are not anymore voted by representative, but open for the whole folk to vote for/against electronically.
True democracy - ie. everyone voting for everything - would lead to complete chaos. The same lack of direction and long-term thinking we have now, it would just be for different reasons.
The trouble with Democracy is that:
a) people are naturally selfish and short-sighted in most situations,
b) people are generally ill-informed, biased, and don't care to be otherwise,
c) constitutional protections would eventually give way to rule by majority.
That may sound little different to the current situation, but at least what we have now is a body of "rulers" who are the constant focus of ire and disrespect. It is a point of focus for the population, a place we direct our dissatisfaction - instead of a cloudy, nebulous type of rule which can't be coordinated to held to account.
At least up to now, that's been the case in a fairly healthy way, but these days corruption - in terms of commercial influence - has gone way too far.
The main problem now is dismay and disenfranchisement in a system which is increasingly seen to be corrupt, corrosive and unhelpful, perhaps even ultimately counter-productive.
That makes me worry. A civilisation getting to that point has only a couple of ways to go. Reformation or collapse. The political culture isn't looking very healthy, unfortunately.

Regarding Samsung's "defeat" by Kartu · 2011-12-11 21:27 · Score: 1

Out of bunch of Apple's claims Dutch judge agreed only on minor detail about gallery app, and to fix that (doable by simply firmware update), Samsung had about 2 month.
Doesn't quite qualify as "Samsung's defeat" in my humble opinion.

Where Samsung was defeated, was Dusseldorf, where brilliant German judge Johanna Brueckner-Hofmann agreed that "minimalistic design" is, in fact, patentable, hence Samsung, as all other rmanufacturers, must add some whistles to it, for look to be a bit cluttered, not to look as Apple's registered community design of rectangular shape with rounded corners.

AHA HAHAHAHAHAHA by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 21:30 · Score: 0

AHA HAHAHAHAHAHA - Fiiinally.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 21:37 · Score: 0

Not always. They used to make quality hardware. SCSI rather than IDE, Motorola 68k CPU rather than Intel 286. They were expensive back then, but the price reflected the quality.

Nowadays they are about design, and the design isn't even great. It's just become fashionable.

Re:P0WN3D! by DrXym · 2011-12-11 22:01 · Score: 1

There are more than enough similarities in the form factor, detailing, packaging, headphones, power adapter, and even in sanctioned peripherals between the Galaxy Tab and the iPad to be more than a coincidence. Samsung was aping the iPad and it was obvious Apple was going to sue them. There are more than enough non-Apple tablets out now to see this was a concious decision by Samsung and they got burned for it. While I don't like Apple one bit I am not in the least surprised that they chose to sue.

The patent disputes is a whole different issue. I have no sympathy for Apple getting back a little of what it has dealt out.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 22:06 · Score: 0

Look at the raging Apple zealot and her selective history. It's clear that Apple stole their designs from numerous prior tablets and phones.

Re:P0WN3D! by Runaway1956 · 2011-12-11 22:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

astroturfer, and troll tied into one? Come on, Phanboi - how long has Motorola been around? How long has Motorola been making radio devices? Go on, look at their history - then come back and tell us that Apple hasn't intentionally aped a single Motorola feature.

Oh, as for those "industry trends" that you cite? The trends these day favor Asian manufacturers. Blame Apple, among hundreds of other major US corporations, for having outsourced everything they could outsource. Face it, if you're training Asians to do all your work, and you're NOT training any Americans or Europeans, then you're actively promoting Asian growth while inhibiting American and European growth.

I don't feel sorry for Apple, or any other company that has been exploiting Asian labor markets. Fuck 'em all.

--
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br

Re:P0WN3D! by pmontra · 2011-12-11 22:14 · Score: 1

iPhones and other 500+ € smartphones are selling very well here in Italy too.

Re:P0WN3D! by khipu · 2011-12-11 22:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's obvious to anyone with common sense viewing Samsung's designs that Samsung is deliberately aping Apple's designs. The dimensions are the same, the look is the same, the chargers and cables are the same, the packaging is the same. Defenders argue that there's no other way to design a tablet, but that's an example of success bias, where things that weren't obvious are only argued to be such after something successful adopts those attributes. They certainly didn't appear to be obvious before the iPad, because there was a much greater variety of tablet designs back then.

Thickness, bezel size, screen size, etc. are determined by available technology, but within that range, Samsung has made different choices (7" tablets, 4.5" and 5" phones, wide screen, horizontal setup, front cameras, etc.). Low-waste packaging was an upcoming trend. The appearance of innovation in those areas results from Apple being able to beat other companies to market by a few months, mainly because of better supply chain management, because of excellent execution, and because they charge a premium.

You are right that Apple's success with touch-only phones made those kinds of devices much more popular than they would otherwise have been, and other manufacturers have responded. But no company should be able to own a fad. In fact, I find it annoying that there aren't more hardware designs. And most of the design aspect that were not driven by technology or environment are aspects that Apple ripped off from others. There is almost nothing original in either the iPhone or the iPad.

This community has just become so incredibly bitter.

And we have reason to be as far as Apple is concerned: the company has ripped off the tech community for 30 years, claiming ideas and technologies as their own that they didn't invest a cent in developing. They have ripped off their partners and their software developers, they have made DRM widespread not just for music but for apps, and they outsource almost everything to low-cost labor in Asia. And now they are trying to monopolize the market further by using sleazy patent tactics in order to prevent others from doing what they have been doing for decades.

Yes, we're bitter as far as Apple is concerned: the company needs to be stopped, or the US computer industry and US computer nerds are in big trouble. And anybody who takes them on in court and fights them gets my cheers and my support.

Re:P0WN3D! by Runaway1956 · 2011-12-11 22:16 · Score: 2

I can't help remembering that Jobs was brought back for a reason. The company was headed downhill without him, so they begged him to come back. And, if that damned iPhone could connect to the afterlife, they'd be begging him to come back AGAIN!

--
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br

Re:P0WN3D! by khipu · 2011-12-11 22:17 · Score: 1

Samsung's design wasn't the first such design, there were many similar designs before, including other tablets and photo frames.

Furthermore, you're comparing apples and oranges. Either you need to compare product release dates, or you need to compare design patent filing dates. You can't compare Apple's design patent filing with Samsung's product release date and draw any conclusions.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 22:20 · Score: 0

To be honest the UK isn't doing that bad either. Well, Scotland anyway. England looks like it's up shit creek and the SNP are pushing for independence. We'll break off and have control of the North Sea Oil Fields. But don't fear a US Invasion. We also hold the Trident nuclear deterrent!

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-12-11 22:37 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 23:00 · Score: 0

Because Apple is a huge, influential player now after the success of the iPhone, Slashdot has decided that they don't like Apple anymore

You say you have been here for years, but this statement only have meaning if you only look at the last couple of years. Apple, their closed model and litigation happy business practices (who else than RIAA and Apple sues teenage driven fan sites?) has always been viewed negatively by a majority here on Slashdot (as judged by comments and moderation), except for a short love afair last couple of years balancing it out somewhat, which I still am uncertain was because of the old time Slashdot nerds letting shiny gadgets overrule old instincts, or just an influx of other Apple supporters, as Slashdot stories about Apple was linked around on Apple sites a lot at the time. If you feel a shift back to Apple receiving more criticism than praise for their practices, that is a shift back to normal as far as Slashdot is concerned (Slashdot user for 12 years, still wary of using nick in Apple discussions after some bad experiences last couple of years).

And the customers are the losers by shoehornjob · 2011-12-11 23:03 · Score: 1

Seriously? OMG why don't these little boys agree to play nice and let the customer decide who wins? This is a great way to kill innovation. Why create a new product if you have Apple or Samsung just waiting to sue you out of the market. The court needs to see the bigger issue and throw both of their claims out.

--
"We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-11 23:08 · Score: 0

Both SCSI and IDE drives have been available for PCs for as long as the technologies were around. It was a matter of whether it made sense to spend the extra money on SCSI for the particular need. Most desktop PCs did not benefit from having SCSI, so it would have been a waste of money.

Apple didn't use the 68K CPU until the Macintosh. By that time PCs had the much more powerful 80386.

Re:P0WN3D! by SenseiLeNoir · 2011-12-11 23:09 · Score: 2

headphones? The iPad doesn't come with headphones, whilst the Tab does. In addition the the Samsung headphones are an in the ear style that are arguably better that the old style ones that come with the iPhone.

--
Have a nice day!

Re:P0WN3D! by makomk · 2011-12-11 23:14 · Score: 1

At least some of Apple's iPad design patents only cover the front of the device, and the front of Samsung's tablet is a lot more similar to that photo frame than it is to the iPad...

Re:P0WN3D! by makomk · 2011-12-11 23:15 · Score: 1

Apparently their SCSI implementations were often horribly, horribly broken. They've always been of dubious quality.

Re:P0WN3D! by delt0r · 2011-12-11 23:26 · Score: 2

Lets not forget that they are also popular in Eastern Europe. Most of the students i teach in Czech had Smart phones. They seem as ubiquitous in Slovakia as well.

Lets face it, outside news reports there really is no problem here. Christmass shopping is as high as always and hot wine is selling as fast as they can heat it up here in Vienna. Debt crises? where?

--
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?

Re:P0WN3D! by gbjbaanb · 2011-12-11 23:35 · Score: 4, Insightful

disagree (and I'm not an Apple fanboi BTW). I think people here hate Apple becuase of their closed-in attitude. You buy an iPod and you only (effectively) can access it with approved Apple stuff. You buy a iPhone and you're locked into their store, etc etc etc.

We have to give Apple credit for kickstarting the whole smartphone industry and changing the world. You have to give them credit for popularising GUI interfaces and similar.

You also have to criticise them for the lock in and overpricing though, but their products aren't garbage (or no-one would keep buying them).

Re:P0WN3D! by dropadrop · 2011-12-11 23:35 · Score: 2

Both SCSI and IDE drives have been available for PCs for as long as the technologies were around. It was a matter of whether it made sense to spend the extra money on SCSI for the particular need. Most desktop PCs did not benefit from having SCSI, so it would have been a waste of money. Apple didn't use the 68K CPU until the Macintosh. By that time PCs had the much more powerful 80386.

Every time I had a SCSI drive on a workstation I felt the benefit was huge. I think it was more of a "not worth it" thing then a question of not benefitting.

Anyway, the point seemed to be that back in the day Apple computers had hardware to back up the high price, these days the price consists mainly of design, marketing and so on.

I don't agree about all points with the OP, for example I appreciate the form factor of a Mac Mini / iMac enough to justify the price, but I fully understand you can get something faster consisting of the same components in a beige box for half the price. A few years ago I ended up without a computer for a while and took home a 5 year old G4 tower from work as a loaner. It had a really fast SCSI drive in it, and for most things (where the ~400mhz cpu and 768MB ram where not bottlenecks) it really was still a fully usable machine.

Re:P0WN3D! by phonewebcam · 2011-12-11 23:36 · Score: 2

I can't wait to see what TV's Apple come up with which aren't large, square, thin, black rectangular devices controlled by a remote, of the type Samsung has led the market with for over a decade. Because if they don't, it will be "obvious to anyone with common sense viewing Apple's designs that Apple will be deliberately aping Samsungs designs. The dimensions would be the same, the look would be the same, the chargers and cables would be the same."

iTouche.

Re:P0WN3D! by Nursie · 2011-12-11 23:51 · Score: 0

"We'll break off and have control of the North Sea Oil Fields."

Is that what you think is it?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HA HA HA HA .... *GASP* ... AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

ROFL.

Re:P0WN3D! by VortexCortex · 2011-12-12 00:06 · Score: 4, Interesting

Cars are not allowed design patents or copyrights; Neither does the fashion industry. Transportation & Clothing are "too utilitarian". I'm having a hard time in this day and age NOT classifying computing devices as utilitarian.

I mean: I wan REQUIRED to use a computer to get tax forms -- They were out of stock. I could have filed an extension, but now you're just being silly. College kids are REQUIRED to use computers for learning -- In fact, I had to repair my 12 year old nephew's computer SO HE COULD DO HOMEWORK (he attends US public school). There are no pay phones in a 10 mile radius of my home (where most accidents are said to occur), I must have a mobile cellular computing device (even feature phones run Java!). I've seen government subsidization for cellular phones, and talk of Internet access being a "human right" akin to having access to water. Even if you do not argee today that computing devices are utilitarian, you will soon (this, or you'll be too dead to care).

Before you point out the fallacy that access to this technology is not NEEDED to live, I would direct you to examine 3rd world countries which are rapidly adopting my views. Furthermore, You could live without toothpaste, agriculture, CLOTHING, or AUTOMOBILES as well, this does not mean these things are not utilitarian.

We don't have to get rid of technology design, hardware & software copyright & patents altogether, just do so for consumer electronics -- People need to be free. The market will survive, indeed the fashion industry and automotive industries are some of the most successful yet least protected by copyright & patents. Trademark law still applies, which is just enough to keep counterfeit knockoffs off the shelves.

THIS IS THE INFORMATION AGE. Would you not agree stone tools were utilitarian in the stone age? Would you not agree iron tools were also in the iron age? Automobiles were revolutionary once, and are utilitarian now. Computing was revolutionary once, and now is as commonplace as any essential advancement has become in the past.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 00:13 · Score: 0

Not until the fat lady has blown her whistle at the finish line.

Re:P0WN3D! by defile39 · 2011-12-12 00:19 · Score: 1

Come on, now. Microsoft is doing the same thing, and I don't see anyone casting stones at them.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 00:31 · Score: 0

and santa claus - i mean steve jobs - flew to every cubicle all in one night leaving designs under the christmas tree! Wheeeeee!

Re:P0WN3D! by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-12-12 00:32 · Score: 2

Cars are not allowed design patents or copyrights

Err, no.

When you fire up Forza one of the legal notices, and yes I noticed this bit of fine print because of Apple's litigation crap, is that design patents are among the things that car manufacturers licensed to Turn Six for Forza.

Try again?

I don't think you're allowed to patent the steering wheel, but AFAIK you are allowed to patent things that make your product different from your competitors.

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.

Re:P0WN3D! by TheCouchPotatoFamine · 2011-12-12 00:33 · Score: 1

i love my macbook and you can pry it from my cold dead hands - i code *better* on osx, simple as that. I guess Fisher-Price has gone up a few notches when i wasn't looking! Kids these days!

--
CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 00:34 · Score: 0

I don't feel sorry for Apple, or any other company that has been exploiting Asian labor markets. Fuck 'em all.

And of course, ultimately companies have no loyalty. When it's more profitable for Apple to be an Asian company than an American company, they'll just shift their HQ oversees, appoint a board who is more in touch with their outlook and carry on as normal. That's the ultimate payoff for government pandering to the demands of big business - they'll squeeze you dry and move on to the next one.

Re:P0WN3D! by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-12-12 00:37 · Score: 1

Go on, look at their history - then come back and tell us that Apple hasn't intentionally aped a single Motorola feature.

iTunes compatible music player on a phone. :)

Oh wait...

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 00:45 · Score: 1

We have to give Apple credit for kickstarting the whole smartphone industry and changing the world. You have to give them credit for popularising GUI interfaces and similar.

They would deserve credit if they actually did that. The Palm Treo and RIM Blackberry were popular smartphones long before the iPhone was on the market.

Re:P0WN3D! by fishthegeek · 2011-12-12 00:59 · Score: 1

And Apple copied the Crunchpad. The reason tablets look like the Crunchpad is because that is what tablets fraking look like. http://nikcub.appspot.com/posts/crunchpad-proof-obviousness-in-ipad-design

--
load "$",8,1

garbage?!? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 01:31 · Score: 0

I about spewed Diet Coke all over my Air as I read this...

yes, it wasn't cheap (to put it kindly) but I'm not aware of another laptop in the same ballpark - I ain't even aware of one that's playing the same sport (apologies to Tarantino & Samuel L Jackson).

Re:P0WN3D! by L4t3r4lu5 · 2011-12-12 01:36 · Score: 1

...it will have to be trapezoidal in shape, no multi-touch and nothing resembling a screen on one side and a back on the other

I'm seriously going to cash in on my trapezoid braille-nostril-interface tablet come 2101.

That is, of course, unless war is beginning.

--
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/

Re:P0WN3D! by tbannist · 2011-12-12 01:56 · Score: 1

Well, I have it on good authority than the General Multidynamics patent on "breathing with lungs", granted in 2047, comes pretty close to doing so. Apparently they find it more profitable to not license the patent to anyone who isn't an employee. Unfortunately for them, while they are prosecuting the 9.6 billion violators, Gosoft Utilities is granted the 2048 patent on "drinking with your mouth", the ensuing legislative battle ends up with the "liquidation" of 95% of both companies employees, that is until Microshiba is granted the 2049 patent on "liquidating employees". Then it just gets really messy.

--
Fanatically anti-fanatical

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 02:01 · Score: 0

Because Apple is a huge, influential player now after the success of the iPhone, Slashdot has decided that they don't like Apple anymore

No, I think most people here have always hated Apple - they are the Fisher-Price of consumer electronics. We do not hate them because they are popular, we hate them because their products are garbage yet they market them as if they are gold, and some people buy into it.

I would say that many people here have not loved them in a fanboi way and saw them as an anti-Microsoft not in the fanboi way but because they were just another company out to sell products to product buyers.

Re:P0WN3D! by bernywork · 2011-12-12 02:05 · Score: 2

You're holding it wrong

--
Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown

Don't hold your breath by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 02:24 · Score: 0

Maybe if _all_ the big players suffer enough then there will actually be some support for real patent reform.

Yet another trickle-down theory that doesn't work in practice. The current patent system is an amalgamation of LFEA (Lawyers Full Employment Act) and BCPFCA (Big Corporation Protection From Competition Act). As lawyers run the government, and corporations believe that business needs to heed lawyers' council, LFEA will override BCPFCA when in conflict. Thus, don't expect patent reform to trickle-down from this.

What will cause patents to hit the fan is the discovery that well-financed patent trolls can pillage corporations. Expect the wonderful new business-creating tax savings of the uber-rich to go into financing giant patent-troll corporations who have no products -it's too risky to actually have a product.

{Your choice whether to tag this “funny” or “insightful”, I’d tag it “sad”.}

Translation: Yet another apple bashing session by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 02:46 · Score: 0

Don't people forget that patents tend to be awarded to people who actually... create new things? There is a reason Apple is five years ahead of the competition, and there is also a reason there has never been malware found on any iDevice that hasn't been jailbroken.

The MP3 player market solely exists because of Apple. Same with tablets. Without the iPhone, you will still be on that Motorola RAZR v5 that might allow a person to download some MIDI ringtones for $3 apiece or maybe even a crappy MP3 song or two that only can come from VCast.

So, all this talk about patents reminds me a lot about thieves justifying a shoplifting expedition. Apple innovates; others duplicate.

Re:Translation: Yet another apple bashing session by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 03:55 · Score: 0

There is a reason Apple is five years ahead of the competition
You mean that's why their last major product is a rehash of their previous generation with only selling point being Siri, which was artificially limited to 4S just for this? "Nah, man, we're good for four more years, let's keep on selling the same phone with minor upgrades. Oh, but you know that notifications thingy in Android? Don't you think it would be nice if we'd invent it for iOS5?".

The MP3 player market solely exists because of Apple. Same with tablets. Without the iPhone, you will still be on that Motorola RAZR v5 that might allow a person to download some MIDI ringtones for $3 apiece or maybe even a crappy MP3 song or two that only can come from VCast.
Ooooh, that there is one hell of heavy RDF contamination. "There is no phone but iPhone, and Jobs is the messenger"?
Re:Translation: Yet another apple bashing session by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 12:16 · Score: 0

I remember when the iPhone came out. Everything it had my old T-Mobile MDA (rebranded HTC Wizard) had, except for touch friendly gestures rather than using a stylus. The app store wasn't out until more recent versions of iOS, but the old WM device could take programs (weren't called apps) and install them via ActiveSync or a memory card.
The first thing iOS brought to the mainstream was single tasking. Switch to a new app; old app gets killed. This allowed Apple to use slower CPUs because of not having to deal with background tasks. Even in iOS 4 and 5, a background task is very limited. Contrast this to Android or WM where one could actually do some sort of workflow in copy/pasting between tasks fairly quickly without waiting for code to load into RAM. Now, people are well-trained to this one-program-at-a-time functionality for this to be winding up as a desktop metaphor, not just a way to use slow CPUs. In short, the iPhone stepped firmly back, and people got used to it.
We also had everything forced through one choke point. Want to copy data to your iPhone? iTunes or nothing (for the most part). Other smartphones, I could just use the SD card as a drive, or use MTP on Windows for moving files. In Windows, there was ActiveSync, but one could work the device and copy files to/from it without using that if needed. Even with iOS 5 and iCloud, iTunes is the only way to import/export data into apps unless one E-mails, prints, or stuffs the data onto Dropbox.
The iPhone gave one choice -- Steve's way, or no way. Want E-mail? Here is your app, and if you need to mark all stuff as read at once, you need to learn not to want things like that. Same with texts and calls. Want to block someone? The best you can do is set a silent ringtone or jailbreak and use a Cydia app. Yes, Apple's only choice in the walled garden are usually well-engineered apps, but if I want anything that isn't in the mainstream feature set, I'm SOL and better step in line, and recant that feature need. On Android, I just grab Mr. Number, and the psycho ex issue is solved without the need to go to the courthouse and fill out the restraining order paperwork.
Another thing the iPhone brought is the inability to backup your data. Unless you jailbreak, you have all or nothing. My Windows Mobile device, I could save off the game that is taking a bunch of space with its saved data, and maybe in a year or so, resume it. Android not just offers backups, but will offer to restore your data if you delete an app and reinstall it, and this is without using Titanium Backup or nandroid [1]. Even jailbroken, the backups done by AppBackup and PkgBackup are iffy, and there is no guarantee I may be able to restore the data in the future because of the automatic forced "upgrade" to the latest iOS rev. So, if I want to keep my saved games, I pretty much am forced to leave the files on my iPhone indefinitely. This sucks when some games like Chaos Rings double in size due to added content. Even now, with iCloud, it is all or nothing when it comes to restores. My Android device can be cold-reset, I load Titanium Backup from the market or SD card, and pull what apps I want to restore (and what versions) when I choose to.
These days, what does iOS offer that Android doesn't? Usability. If I went down the line of feature by feature, my old Droid X can do everything the iPhone 4S can except Siri, and Siri is not a feature of the device. I can also separate my work Exchange contacts completely on the Android device by using Nitrodesk Touchdown. Even full disk encryption is supported with the latest rev of the Droid X's ROM.
So, what has Apple put on the table? Standardization, their way. Because they are a dictatorship, there are no worries that a white Apple certified cable will work with the next iPhone. It will, guaranteed. Same with the iPhone dock. My iPhone 4 fits the dock on the nightstand. The iPhone 4S will fit it. I'm sure the iPhone 5 will fit it, as well as the next generation iPod. Because of t

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 02:47 · Score: 0

We have to give Apple credit for kickstarting the whole smartphone industry and changing the world.

Fuck right off do we. I had a Motorola A1000 in early 2006 (and it was an old phone even then), and it was a smartphone where almost the entire face was the screen (there were "Answer call" and "Hang up" buttons and some naff never-used-by-anything gaming buttons, but no number pad), plus it had Flash and a memory card slot, things that the failPhone hasn't managed even now.

Before the A1000, I had a Handspring Treo 180g. Again, full-face-screen smartphone, internet access.

Before that, I had a Nokia 9110. Smartphone, internet access.

Crapple had NOTHING TO DO with the genesis of the smartphone industry other them dumbing it down for the baa-ing lowest common denominator, the sort of person that doesn't even notice they can't change their phone's battery until their phone's a year and one day old, the battery dies and they're having to mail it to Crapple and pay $200 to have Daddy replace it for them because they aren't intelligent enough to replace it by themselves.

Seriously, fuck Crapple.

"I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone" - RMS

You have to give them credit for popularising GUI interfaces and similar.

The ones they stole wholesale from Xerox, you mean?

their products aren't garbage (or no-one would keep buying them).

Just because people buy a product doesn't mean it isn't garbage. How else can you explain Justin Bieber and Twilight?

Apple accomplishments are overshadowed by scams by walterbyrd · 2011-12-12 02:52 · Score: 1

As far as I'm concerned, whatever Apple has has accomplished is completely overshadowed by Apple's non-stop, hyper-aggressive, disgraceful, legal scamming.

Re:P0WN3D! by Dog-Cow · 2011-12-12 03:06 · Score: 1

There are no pay phones in a 10 mile radius of my home (where most accidents are said to occur)

You must live in a pretty nasty neighborhood!

Re:P0WN3D! by Dog-Cow · 2011-12-12 03:07 · Score: 2

No, the GP is correct. /. hates popular.

Apple is not evil. Mean, perhaps, but not evil.

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-12-12 03:25 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Hostile takover by Danathar · 2011-12-12 03:59 · Score: 0

Apple could buy Motorola with ease.

Re:P0WN3D! by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-12-12 05:40 · Score: 1

Beyond that, the Crunchpad imitated the ipod touch. Yes, the iPad's a giant ipod touch, but, when you make the ipod touch, you're allowed to ape your own design.

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 05:50 · Score: 0

On that same note, why is it that Apple fanatics jump in with the immediate defense that Apple bought (as opposed to stole) their GUI from Xerox and therefore it's ok, but turn around and slander Microsoft for buying products and companies?

Re:P0WN3D! by FromFrom · 2011-12-12 06:00 · Score: 1

I think you miss the point. His post seems to be about moderating that is incorrect these days.

He might be 'off topic' but he is not 'flamebait' as he is currently moderated. His complaint therefor seems proofed by the moderation of his post.

There is not much discussion possible if people moderate everybody down with another opinion.

Patents by hydrofix · 2011-12-12 06:11 · Score: 1

Patents – everyone gets hurt.

What's the point?

Reinvent the system already!

Are you serious? by roguegramma · 2011-12-12 06:40 · Score: 1

This ruling implies that Apple stole the technology from Motorola, and the lawsuit is Motorola's attempt to force Apple to relent.

No. Depending on the country the patent in question was issued in, it implies that Motorola was either the first to visit the patent office, or first to make the discovery.

Stealing would imply reading the patent, or other sources associated to Motorola, and acting upon it.

It also would imply that all of the patent is valid, in the sense that other requirements for a patent apply, as required by the various jurisdictions (that is practically none except prior art in the USA, but a certain level of inventiveness in the EU, and the exclusion of some fields in the EU, for example mathematics.).

--
Hey don't blame me, IANAB

Sounds like RISK by md65536 · 2011-12-12 06:59 · Score: 1

>> It's the latest stage in the international patent conflict that's been raging over mobile devices, which has included the recent Samsung victory over Apple in an Australian court and a defeat for Samsung in a Dutch court.

Sounds like a game of RISK. I hope they're not spending any more to decide these battles than the cost of a few dice! I trust that since it's all just a pointless game played for fun, that there won't be any real consequences for people in the countries that these companies are fighting over.

Re:P0WN3D! by GauteL · 2011-12-12 07:06 · Score: 1

It is so very typical that a post that essentially refers to a considerable portion of electronics consumers as idiots who's opinions are worthless, gets modded up on Slashdot. This is a childish post and childish moderation. There are plenty of reasons to dislike Apple, but when it comes to their products, many Apple customers know full well what the competition is like and what limitations the Apple products have and still prefer them, for reasons separate from marketing and shininess-factor.

For many people, Apple products are still the most convenient solution. Convenience is very high on my priority list. If you prefer Android phones, Blackberries or Nokia smart phones, that is your choice, they may be a much better fit for yourself.

Re:P0WN3D! by Hognoxious · 2011-12-12 07:27 · Score: 1

Read what I wrote, you dumb fucking twat. Those tinpot countries are almost as indebted as the PIIGS.

Hint: a credit limit isn't income.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

Re:P0WN3D! by khipu · 2011-12-12 07:34 · Score: 1

You can play this game until the cows come home. It doesn't change the fact that every aspect of the iPad design that Apple has tried to protect is utilitarian, and design patents on utilitarian aspects of devices are not valid.

Also, if you actually take Apple's design patent at face value, it does not depict the iPad: the device it shows is much thicker than the iPad, its bezels is thinner, and its edge and back are different. Apple's design patent is as different from its own iPad as the iPad is from the Samsung.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 07:44 · Score: 0

"They have ripped off their partners and their software developers"

"There is almost nothing original in either the iPhone or the iPad."

"they have made DRM widespread not just for music"

Seems the bar has been lowered for getting modded up on slashdot these days - if you write with the appropriate anti apple stance. Any chance at all of citing references at all, or are we accepting any old specious reasoning now?

Occupy Main Street by pseudorand · 2011-12-12 08:59 · Score: 1

Fuck Occupy Wall Street, what we need is an Occupy Main Street. As in when are consumers rising up against patten idiocy. Just give me my god damn technology already. I don't give a crap about patten this or copyright that. Why the hell shouldn't I be able to just buy what I want. Let the best product at the best price win! And I'd guess if they stopped paying all the lawyers, there'd be plenty of profit to go around.

The republicans are right. Let the rich be fucking rich already. I don't care if .01% control 99.99% of the money, as long as I can go buy shit at a reasonable price compared to my salary. Maybe government wealth redistribution is the only way to go, but let's first try making the big corps stop their stupid "why can't I have a monopoly on this, that and the other" whining already and see if we can't innovate our way to cheap food, cloths, housing, consumer electronics and media (you know, the bare essentials) for everyone!

Re:P0WN3D! by Daniel+Phillips · 2011-12-12 09:21 · Score: 1

Mean and evil.

--
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 09:31 · Score: 0

True, but the photo shown by the AC is deceitful in that the Samsung frame, in real life, looks very little like an iPad...

Just like in real life the Galaxy Tab looks very little like an iPad. From any angle other than the front it looks completely different and even on the front it has SAMSUNG emblazoned on it, it has no physical buttons on the front, it's a different size and a different aspect ratio. Apple apologists only compare the front of the devices because that's the only one with any kind of similarity at all which is why I only showed the front of that photo frame.

Re:P0WN3D! by MenThal · 2011-12-12 09:57 · Score: 1

Christmass shopping is as high as always and hot wine is selling as fast as they can heat it up here in Vienna. Debt crises? where?

They're going out with a bang, partying like its 1999 (or 2011, the year before the Mayan apocalypse, if the news on the Intarwebs are credible...)

Re:P0WN3D! by Spugglefink · 2011-12-12 10:50 · Score: 1

Slashdot has decided that they don't like Apple anymore...

Hey, in fairness, I've consistently disliked Apple my entire life.

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 11:55 · Score: 0

Evil and mean.
Mean not evil.
And always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom.

Re:P0WN3D! by kaffiene · 2011-12-12 15:26 · Score: 1

No, Apple is very definitely evil.

Re:P0WN3D! by godglike · 2011-12-12 16:15 · Score: 1

Apple and Microsoft cross-licensed many years ago.

The current problems are from a predominately computer industry company moving into the telecoms sector as a predominately telecoms sector company moves into the computer industry. The 2 different ways of doing business, cross-licensing versus common standards over expensive infrastructure, are clashing spectacularly.

Which one will win? I don't know but I hope software patents die.

Re:P0WN3D! by dave87656 · 2011-12-12 19:15 · Score: 1

The interesting thing is, in my opinion, is that Apple is getting hurt more than Samsung, since it has a lot more to lose. Sure, it has more money, but, the first serious dent is being put into their armor. Let's not forget that Apple got where it is today by copying other's technology (and perhaps making it better) (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU ). Now that others are doing it to them, they want different rules.

Samsung has a real hardware patent that will be difficult to challenge though Apple could just pay the royalties and be done with it.

Re:P0WN3D! by dave87656 · 2011-12-12 19:17 · Score: 1

Good Point. This game is closed for outsiders now. Sad state of affairs.

Re:P0WN3D! by dave87656 · 2011-12-12 19:22 · Score: 1

It's obvious to anyone with common sense viewing Samsung's designs that Samsung is deliberately aping Apple's designs. The dimensions are the same, the look is the same, the chargers and cables are the same, the packaging is the same.

Apple started the copying game (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU). They just don't like it when others play the same game. BTW, the first IPOD was a very close copy to a Samsung MP3 device (same shape, icons, etc).

Re:P0WN3D! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-12 22:35 · Score: 0

Grow Up!

Am I being a bit naive? by brianhig · 2011-12-13 04:26 · Score: 1

The only people being hurt by all of this nonsense is the consumer. The threat of litigation is stifling innovation. If these companies are that worried about losing sales to their rivals then they should put their money into building a better product than their rivals and not into the coffers of some fat slimy lawyer. Most people would rather spend their hard earned cash on a better, faster, more feature rich product than one that has a shinny logo or nice rounded corners.

Re:Am I being a bit naive? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-13 07:17 · Score: 0

The only people being hurt by all of this nonsense is the consumer.
If Cadillac had patented their arrangement of accelerator, brake, and clutch pedals from the Type 53 how different things would be automotively.

No expert do choose the solutions by aepervius · 2011-12-13 06:59 · Score: 1

At least in my country , and I bet in yours too, the expert PROPOSE solutions which are then filtered through lobbyist and maybe voted on if it advantage local corportations.Proof ? If expert had any say in, the politcs would be devising solutions on global warming. but that is not what happens : the expert are quasi unanimous, and the politics/lobbyist break with all 4. None the less the method I proposed , could also take that into account by allowing expert to present their version of advantage / disadvantages of all methods.

--
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org

Re:P0WN3D! by Plammox · 2011-12-15 10:41 · Score: 1

Gee, aren't you a nice guy.

You really seem to have the finger on the pulse of a continent you don't live on.

Re:P0WN3D! by Plammox · 2011-12-15 10:47 · Score: 1

Never mind Scandinavia, they're not in the Euro, but just as smartphone crazy as the rest.

Re:P0WN3D! by delt0r · 2011-12-15 14:37 · Score: 1

Well they are in the EU. Unless there is a joke i missed

--
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?

Re:P0WN3D! by Plammox · 2011-12-16 09:02 · Score: 1

Somewhere upthere it was said:

I thought the poetic part was that the German economy was the only one in the Euro where people might actually be able to afford an iPhone/Pad.--

EU-members Sweden and Denmark are not in the Euro.

Slashdot Mirror

German Court Issues Injunction Against iPhone & iPad

349 comments