Slashdot Mirror
Tim Cook Never Wanted To Sue Samsung
colinneagle writes "While Steve Jobs' ire in regards to Android is well known, a recent report from Reuters relays that current Apple CEO Tim Cook never wanted to sue Samsung in the first place. 'Tim Cook, Jobs' successor as Apple chief executive, was opposed to suing Samsung in the first place, according to people with knowledge of the matter, largely because of that company's critical role as a supplier of components for the iPhone and the iPad. Apple bought some $8 billion worth of parts from Samsung last year, analysts estimate.' In various earnings conference calls, Tim Cook has repeated that he hates litigation, but has still toed the party line by exclaiming that Apple welcomes innovators but doesn't like when other companies rip off their intellectual property."
Sorry, this excuse just doesn't fly with me. If the company he's supposed to be in charge of is doing things like suing competitors without his permission or knowledge, then he's a failure as a CEO.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
"Apple welcomes innovators but doesn't like when other companies rip off their intellectual property"
Okay, put your money where your mouth is. Remove the notification shade from iOS. You ripped it off wholesale from Android.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Just gonna repeat what everyone else is saying. This is ridiculous.
Apple is getting a lot of negative press on their current legal activities. Their pattents are being eroded. Details of their cases are being foiled in courts around the globe. That billion-dollar judgement will not stand and it is simply unimaginable that the jury verdict will stand in light of the jury misconduct which definitely happened. The numerous cases brought and initially won using doctored/edited visuals for evidence is simply dirty.
And the idea that the CEO didn't want to do this? Explain to me what a CEO does again?
Apple is losing a lot more than cases and patent claims. They are losing their customers. I know, people will cite last years figures and reports to claim they are a reflection of today's and tomorrow's popularity figures. I just don't see it. Everywhere I look, the use of iPhone is decreasing. That's not to say people using Android are excited fans or anything. They're not. The excitement over touchscreen smartphones and fart-apps is over. Now it's about practical matters which matter to people; Cost, Apps, Usability, Restrictions and other considerations.
Brand recognition is important to consumers for some reason. Apple's brand is being diminished. It is having an affect.
Ray Noorda was willing to say "bad idea" when Novell bought out the UNIX rights from AT&T and stopped/settled the BSD/AT&T lawsuit once he became "in charge" over it.
Thusly Mr. Cook is trying to BS ya all.
Can I just say that repeating the nonsense of "patenting shit like rounded corners" marks you as either a troll or an imbecile.
Apple didn't patent rounded corners. Apple has a _design patent_ for a design consisting of many items, one of them rounded corners. To infringe on this _design patent_, you have to copy the complete design, every single item listed in the design patent. You can have as many rounded corners as you like. As long as your design is in some way different from Apple's design patent.
Here's for your enjoyment an example of Samsung patenting rounded corners:
http://www.patentbolt.com/2012/12/samsung-wins-a-design-patent-for-one-of-their-galaxy-phones.html
See, when people say silly things like "patenting shit like rounded corners", we know you never actually looked into what was patented, nor understood it, but instead, just like repeating talking points you were given.
Luckily, in the court of law, people actually examine evidence.
Isn't that one of the many Samsung phones Apple sought an injunction for claiming that it infringed on their iPhone design patent because among other ambiguous design concepts it had rounded corners and was therefor indistinguishable from an iPhone? (yes)
No I didn't get that from the Android talking points, if such a thing exists, I closely followed the court cases on Groklaw as they happened.
theRunicBard was correct, and you're just parsing words like an Apple lawyer.
How were they in the same position SCO was in? SCO was suing IBM for copyright infringement, and then later breach of contract for stuff that IBM had nothing to do with and where there was possible infringement they themselves (i.e. Caldera) was mostly responsible. SCO got rid of their entire technology team and made themselves a copyright troll.
Apple was suing Samsung for Samsung products that Apple played no part in. Apple continues to be a major technology provider and innovator.
One can agree or disagree with Apple's infringement claims, but the analogy with SCO is unfounded.
Really. Show me a web browser prior to Safari that bounced on overscroll. That was one of the patents that Samsung lost on. So show me the 2006 browser.
You mean the one that got invalidated as a patent?
http://www.macnewsworld.com/story/76470.html
-]Phreak Out[-