The problem with that meme is that in the Apple vs Samsung case, designs for the iPhone were presented in evidence dating back to August 2005. More than a year before LG announced the LG Prada.
Which shows that nobody had to copy anybody to come up with a form factor like that, it was obvious as is proven by the fact that Apple and LG both ended up developing the same form factor device in parallel without influence from eachother.
Similar is not the same. Form factor is not design. A copy is a copy.
2001 had a flat video screen on a table, about the same dimensions as an iPad. No indication of it being any kind of computing device though.
What was it, then? I didn't see anyone with a mahl stick and beret, so it wasn't an easel. Perhaps it was for frying bacon on...
In the movie it's used to display the same video on both devices at the same time. A video that starts with a BBC logo. It has a row of buttons at the bottom. It's a TV.
Why the hell don't Apple and Samsung settle with a cross-licensing agreement?
Because Apple are dickheads and their patents are as solid as soap bubbles, then there is no reason to make an agreement with them.
So Apple doesn't want to cross-license, because their patents are worthless while Samsung's are gold - yeah, that makes sense.
1. Prove it. Seriously. I'm making a legal case, under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, so to actually prove this you'll have to read the United States Code, not an Economics Textbook. Good luck proving this one either way. As far as I can tell Amazon is the definition of a "gray area" when it comes to antitrust law.
Wiki blurb on Anti-Trust Act: "Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony [. . . ]"[13]
So has Amazon monopolized book sales? No, there are still retail bookstores who can continue to sell the books.
You are lucky that he fumbled that one - he asked if Amazon was a monopoly and then gave you the exit strategy by talking about the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, which not only talks about illegal monopolies, but doesn't even define what a monopoly is.
When writing is done to produce a product for mass consumption, the quality of literature goes down.
Funny how a lot, if not most, of the stuff found in the Gutenberg Project was written for the mass market. Dickens wrote fucking serials, Shakespeare wrote plays for fast consumption.
"Neuromancer is now horribly dated"
This is a big reason why i dont go out and seek these works that i missed when i was young. I finally read Stranger in a Strange Land a few years ago and the biggest word that comes to mind when i think about it is 'quaint'.
You don't read classic SF to understand the future, but to understand the past.
Yes. Ideally writers would eliminate publishers and Amazon, and sell direct to their readers. But that's hard to do when most readers want a central location where they can find new books to buy.
The funny part is that the publishers could have created that location with their own online store years ago, but, instead, they let Amazon do it.
Of course they all shut down their own book stores decades ago because they weren't profitable and didn't want to go into that again. And then they relied not only on Amazon, but on a whole bunch of competing ebook stores - which Amazon killed by massively selling ebooks below cost.
And with Virustotal, you're free to calculate the hash yourself and go look up the URL it goes to (in fact, VirusTotal clients do this - generate a hash, lookup the hash, and only upload if it doesn't already exist).
And why would you be uploading personal files to check for viruses? Surely your personal files are the ones you KNOW are clean? It's the random crap you download and are sent that you have to scan.
So what you are saying is that the only time you ever have to actually upload something - it's a file unique to you. Which is totally not a personal thing.
"on the internet"
"on a mobile device"
"in the cloud"
"with rounded corners"
Well, that last one is an Apple exclusive, but you get the idea.
Funny how the only such patent I have come across in the last couple of years was the one Samsung tried to sue Apple with. http://www.google.com/patents/US5579239
That doesn't seem to be the case. Take the iTunes database for example. Could have just used sqlite or something, there are plenty of open database formats.
Oh, your usual "Apple should have used stuff that didn't exist yet when development began" argument. You never grow tired of that one.
... Bill Gates' home from the 1990s... so how'd Apple get that patent, anyway?
Patents last for 20 years. Hence, something patented by Microsoft in 1990 would have expired in 2010.
Of course Occam's razor says that Bill Gates did not let Microsoft engineers develop a home automation system for his home, patent it and then let it rot. Instead he bought a turn-key solution from people in the trade for at least a decade already.
So I'll have to rewire my house every couple of years when they change from one proprietary cable standard to another?
iPod: Firewire. Buy lots of firewire connectors.
Newer iPod/iPhone: Dock connector. Toss all of your firewire accessories and move to dock connectors.
Newer iPhones: Lightning connector. Toss all of your dock connector accessories, move to lightning.
Everyone else gets to stick with USB that doesn't carry a $10 premium per cable/device because Apple just invented another proprietary standard.
Reality:
iPod, first newer iPods: Use Firewire (later with the adapter that comes with each new iDevice)
later newer iPods, iPhone, iPad: Use USB with the adapter that comes with each new iDevice) (after USB finally became usable)
Why would Apple be interested in grabbing your data? They're the only one of the major tech companies which have so far shown no interest at all in the "you're the product" business model.
iAd Workbench is the simplest way to advertise to millions of people on their Apple devices. In a few steps, you can create a campaign that drives traffic to your website, generates video views, or promotes your iTunes Store content. Choose your audience, set your budget, and run your campaign across thousands of Apple-verified and brand-safe iOS apps.
The Apple Data Mining Lab is looking for an outstanding data mining scientist who is interested in designing, developing, and fielding data mining solutions that have direct and measurable impact to Apple.
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) - The lack of specific injury dooms a massive lawsuit accusing Apple and 14 app developers of mining iPhones and iPads for data, a federal judge said.
So we have one out of many add net works - the only one where there are complains that Apple doesn't give data about their customers to the people paying for the adds. We have an job search for a "data mining expert" - because the data mined has to be sold to others, not used to improve local services benefitting the user like SIRI. And most damning, we have a lawsuit where Apple was one of the accused simply because they own the App Store - not because they collected data.
Yeah, and? If the publisher is upset by high prices, they can cut the price they sell the books to Amazon before. If the book is taking a long time to ship, the customer can go to the local book store.
Oh, you're not going to tell me their local book store doesn't stock these books, are you?
Or they could come together and agree on a joint stand to curb Amazon's demands.
So would it also be ok if publishers colluded with cell phone stores to instead sell jailbroken iPhones that purchase and download the books directly from the publishers, bypassing Apple's app store? I mean, seems like a simple case of what you consider 'civil disobedience' to me.
What would be the point? You can already buy ebooks on non-jailbroken iPhones from several stores apart from Apple's. Just less than a few years ago, because Amazon killed a lot already. Hardly Apple's fault.
There was also the issue of capacitive touchscreens getting to a reasonable price point.
And that's why the second one was available, Apple had a system ready to announce. While Android had to wait another 9 months to hobble together a demo that didn't even use the touchscreen for much.
We wouldn't be stuck using Windows, either, if Apple hadn't killed the competetive GUI market on the PC. They drove the GEM Desktop and GeoWorks out of competition, and set a tone where no third parties could produce windowing environments.
Now that was a good one. Apple killed the Windows competitors.
Software is a MUCH better analogy than soft drinks. Pepsi and Coke are really interchangeable except for personal preference. Software or books are not interchangeable because different pieces of software have different features, and different books contain different information.
"Sorry, you can't buy Microsoft Office here. Why don't you download LibreOffice instead?" Like that?
This lawsuit makes no business sense whatsoever. Why the hell don't Apple and Samsung settle with a cross-licensing agreement?
This suit is making a bunch of lawyers very rich, which in this case I'm OK with. If the two companies don't come to their senses and settle, I will enjoy seeing them get milked by their lawyers.
You can be sure Samsung doesn't want to continue this farce.
You can tell by the fact that they stopped violating Apple's patents.
seriously, i mean you would think with how the apple culture is they would live and let be while continuing to look down upon those cretins who use android instead of the OBVIOUS superior ios. but nope, cant do that, have to try and get the courts to ban the competition
Hey, be glad they want to prevent you guys from buying copies of their designs - else somebody might think your phone is an overly expensive Apple product.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with that meme is that in the Apple vs Samsung case, designs for the iPhone were presented in evidence dating back to August 2005. More than a year before LG announced the LG Prada.
Which shows that nobody had to copy anybody to come up with a form factor like that, it was obvious as is proven by the fact that Apple and LG both ended up developing the same form factor device in parallel without influence from eachother.
Similar is not the same. Form factor is not design. A copy is a copy.
So why does Samsung still sell them?
What was it, then? I didn't see anyone with a mahl stick and beret, so it wasn't an easel. Perhaps it was for frying bacon on...
In the movie it's used to display the same video on both devices at the same time. A video that starts with a BBC logo. It has a row of buttons at the bottom. It's a TV.
Why the hell don't Apple and Samsung settle with a cross-licensing agreement? Because Apple are dickheads and their patents are as solid as soap bubbles, then there is no reason to make an agreement with them.
So Apple doesn't want to cross-license, because their patents are worthless while Samsung's are gold - yeah, that makes sense.
1. Prove it. Seriously. I'm making a legal case, under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, so to actually prove this you'll have to read the United States Code, not an Economics Textbook. Good luck proving this one either way. As far as I can tell Amazon is the definition of a "gray area" when it comes to antitrust law.
Wiki blurb on Anti-Trust Act: "Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony [. . . ]"[13]
So has Amazon monopolized book sales? No, there are still retail bookstores who can continue to sell the books.
You are lucky that he fumbled that one - he asked if Amazon was a monopoly and then gave you the exit strategy by talking about the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, which not only talks about illegal monopolies, but doesn't even define what a monopoly is.
When writing is done to produce a product for mass consumption, the quality of literature goes down.
Funny how a lot, if not most, of the stuff found in the Gutenberg Project was written for the mass market. Dickens wrote fucking serials, Shakespeare wrote plays for fast consumption.
"Neuromancer is now horribly dated" This is a big reason why i dont go out and seek these works that i missed when i was young. I finally read Stranger in a Strange Land a few years ago and the biggest word that comes to mind when i think about it is 'quaint'.
You don't read classic SF to understand the future, but to understand the past.
Protip: There is no good guy here.
Yes. Ideally writers would eliminate publishers and Amazon, and sell direct to their readers. But that's hard to do when most readers want a central location where they can find new books to buy.
The funny part is that the publishers could have created that location with their own online store years ago, but, instead, they let Amazon do it.
Of course they all shut down their own book stores decades ago because they weren't profitable and didn't want to go into that again. And then they relied not only on Amazon, but on a whole bunch of competing ebook stores - which Amazon killed by massively selling ebooks below cost.
Nobody's making you do it.
And with Virustotal, you're free to calculate the hash yourself and go look up the URL it goes to (in fact, VirusTotal clients do this - generate a hash, lookup the hash, and only upload if it doesn't already exist).
And why would you be uploading personal files to check for viruses? Surely your personal files are the ones you KNOW are clean? It's the random crap you download and are sent that you have to scan.
So what you are saying is that the only time you ever have to actually upload something - it's a file unique to you. Which is totally not a personal thing.
Only by adding one of the following phrases:
"on the internet" "on a mobile device" "in the cloud" "with rounded corners"
Well, that last one is an Apple exclusive, but you get the idea.
Funny how the only such patent I have come across in the last couple of years was the one Samsung tried to sue Apple with. http://www.google.com/patents/US5579239
That doesn't seem to be the case. Take the iTunes database for example. Could have just used sqlite or something, there are plenty of open database formats.
Oh, your usual "Apple should have used stuff that didn't exist yet when development began" argument. You never grow tired of that one.
Patents last for 20 years. Hence, something patented by Microsoft in 1990 would have expired in 2010.
Of course Occam's razor says that Bill Gates did not let Microsoft engineers develop a home automation system for his home, patent it and then let it rot. Instead he bought a turn-key solution from people in the trade for at least a decade already.
So I'll have to rewire my house every couple of years when they change from one proprietary cable standard to another?
iPod: Firewire. Buy lots of firewire connectors. Newer iPod/iPhone: Dock connector. Toss all of your firewire accessories and move to dock connectors. Newer iPhones: Lightning connector. Toss all of your dock connector accessories, move to lightning.
Everyone else gets to stick with USB that doesn't carry a $10 premium per cable/device because Apple just invented another proprietary standard.
Reality:
iPod, first newer iPods: Use Firewire (later with the adapter that comes with each new iDevice)
later newer iPods, iPhone, iPad: Use USB with the adapter that comes with each new iDevice) (after USB finally became usable)
Why would Apple be interested in grabbing your data? They're the only one of the major tech companies which have so far shown no interest at all in the "you're the product" business model.
iAd Workbench is the simplest way to advertise to millions of people on their Apple devices. In a few steps, you can create a campaign that drives traffic to your website, generates video views, or promotes your iTunes Store content. Choose your audience, set your budget, and run your campaign across thousands of Apple-verified and brand-safe iOS apps.
http://advertising.apple.com/t...
The Apple Data Mining Lab is looking for an outstanding data mining scientist who is interested in designing, developing, and fielding data mining solutions that have direct and measurable impact to Apple.
http://www.linkedin.com/jobs2/...
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) - The lack of specific injury dooms a massive lawsuit accusing Apple and 14 app developers of mining iPhones and iPads for data, a federal judge said.
http://www.courthousenews.com/...
So we have one out of many add net works - the only one where there are complains that Apple doesn't give data about their customers to the people paying for the adds. We have an job search for a "data mining expert" - because the data mined has to be sold to others, not used to improve local services benefitting the user like SIRI. And most damning, we have a lawsuit where Apple was one of the accused simply because they own the App Store - not because they collected data.
So back 2 years ago, their i Ads system where they mandated ALL ads on their i Devices must go through them has nothing to do with it...
Well, considering your claim isn't true, why would we believe your other claims?
Yeah, and? If the publisher is upset by high prices, they can cut the price they sell the books to Amazon before. If the book is taking a long time to ship, the customer can go to the local book store.
Oh, you're not going to tell me their local book store doesn't stock these books, are you?
Or they could come together and agree on a joint stand to curb Amazon's demands.
But then Amazon would go whining to the DOJ.
So would it also be ok if publishers colluded with cell phone stores to instead sell jailbroken iPhones that purchase and download the books directly from the publishers, bypassing Apple's app store? I mean, seems like a simple case of what you consider 'civil disobedience' to me.
What would be the point? You can already buy ebooks on non-jailbroken iPhones from several stores apart from Apple's. Just less than a few years ago, because Amazon killed a lot already. Hardly Apple's fault.
There was also the issue of capacitive touchscreens getting to a reasonable price point.
And that's why the second one was available, Apple had a system ready to announce. While Android had to wait another 9 months to hobble together a demo that didn't even use the touchscreen for much.
We wouldn't be stuck using Windows, either, if Apple hadn't killed the competetive GUI market on the PC. They drove the GEM Desktop and GeoWorks out of competition, and set a tone where no third parties could produce windowing environments.
Now that was a good one. Apple killed the Windows competitors.
The publishers colluded with apple to raise prices across the board.
That's why they provably fell across the board for all stores but Amazon - because they sold them at a loss.
Even if Apple's cut was higher than anyone else.
In the Agency Model pushed by Apple, all agents get the same cut.
That means that Apple had no control over pricing.
No, that presumably meant Apple's competitors couldn't sell books for less than Apple.
Just like Amazon's competitors can't sell cheaper than Amazon. But when the monopolist does it, it's okay.
Software is a MUCH better analogy than soft drinks. Pepsi and Coke are really interchangeable except for personal preference. Software or books are not interchangeable because different pieces of software have different features, and different books contain different information.
"Sorry, you can't buy Microsoft Office here. Why don't you download LibreOffice instead?" Like that?
This lawsuit makes no business sense whatsoever. Why the hell don't Apple and Samsung settle with a cross-licensing agreement?
This suit is making a bunch of lawyers very rich, which in this case I'm OK with. If the two companies don't come to their senses and settle, I will enjoy seeing them get milked by their lawyers.
You can be sure Samsung doesn't want to continue this farce.
You can tell by the fact that they stopped violating Apple's patents.
seriously, i mean you would think with how the apple culture is they would live and let be while continuing to look down upon those cretins who use android instead of the OBVIOUS superior ios. but nope, cant do that, have to try and get the courts to ban the competition
Hey, be glad they want to prevent you guys from buying copies of their designs - else somebody might think your phone is an overly expensive Apple product.