No, I'm not going to read the article because the summary screams of stupid. The first warning sign of complete idiocy was the claim that if Facebook collapsed there "would be potentially huge costs to its users". Um, what cost? If Facebook fails it will cost me exactly $0.00. Nothing. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada. I don't know how to make that any clearer but Facebook's failure carries no costs for its users. Second, to suggest that social networks _must_ use open standards and that this requirement should be written into law is so staggeringly stupid it simply hurts my brain. So, no, I didn't read the article. I've been attempting to reduce the amount of stupid I'm exposed to and that summary tells me the article screams stupid.
There was a time when reading Slashdot was interesting and informative. That time seems to be quickly fading...
Accepting the fact your OS has flaw's is first stepping to make a secure OS, Apple for years claimed their OS didn't have any.
Uh, no. They didn't. The fact that they've regularly and consistently provided security updates shows that they recognize that they have flaws in their OS that need patching. What they have claimed is that they don't have a lot of viruses, which is absolutely true. Due to Macs not being worth targeting because of a smaller user base, malicious attacks against Macs were very rare compared to PCs (which is always the benchmark they compared themselves to). So their claim was true.
They have never, however, claimed they don't have flaws and their actions demonstrate clearly that they know they do have flaws that need fixing once spotted.
There's probably going to be some brand-shuffling going on. Most likely they'll rename them to "iPad" and "iPad Pro"...
It amazes me how geeks can completely misunderstand how the most successful tech company in the world operates. I find it even more baffling when most of the comments in the thread clearly explain what is going on.
Not trying to paint Apple is the Big Baddie here or anything, just saying there is a reason they get more shit.
Yes. That reason is "Apple generates page views while every other tech company does not." Don't try to pretend that there's any reason beyond that as to why people focus so heavily on Apple.
Apple generates page views. Page views generate money. People want money. Therefore, people mention Apple.
Oh look, another story that is actually about virtually every major company in existence but it's turned into a story by replacing "every company" with "Apple" to make it sensational and generate page views. *yawn*
It could place providers in the position of requiring warrants for all law enforcement requests.
Um, allow me to introduce you to an internet meme that covers this adequately: "It's working as intended." Warrants exist for a reason. This sort of situation - responding to requests from law enforcement - are exactly that situation. Working as intended. Deal with it.
Ok, seriously, I'm not defending what they did but "evil"? Really? Come on! Can we please get some sense of perspective. What they did was wrong. What they did was possibly morally unethical. But evil? No. Evil is reserved for a special breed of person/organization/action. What they did was not evil. All you're doing by branding them "evil" is utterly watering down the meaning of the word and completely weakening your stance.
Because Apple has almost $100 billion in the bank so they are a juicy target for a dad who wants to get rich blaming someone for his being a bad father and not actually being involved in raising his child.
Sorry for blending two rants into one but there it is. Apple is a target of so many lawsuits because they have the cash to make people rich. Period. Also, I'm fed up with parents trying to blame other people for their failings as a parent. Being a parent requires effort and time and is more than just giving your kid an iDevice or sitting them in front of a TV with a DVD looping some brainless kid's program so when things go wrong because you're an absent parent, don't blame the iDevice or the kids show or the TV. Look in the mirror.
Actually do expensive research and get patents that mean something, and they will label them "standards essential"...
Um, you do realize that Motorola submitted those patents for inclusion in the industry standard and were accepted into the standard in return for an agreement to license them for FRAND terms. They weren't labeled, against their will, standards essential - they asked to be included in the industry standard.
Motorola brought this on themselves. When you attempt to unfairly abuse FRAND patents against your market competition, you're eventually going to be investigated for anticompetitive behaviour. They abused their FRAND patents. They're being investigated. And they're going to be found guilty of anticompetitive behaviour and everyone knows it.
And we should be happy about that.
It doesn't matter what you think of Motorola, Apple, Microsoft, Google, or any other company. You may like or hate any of those companies - it doesn't matter. We should all be happy that Motorola's actions are going to be punished because this is precisely the sort of thing that limits innovation in an industry. This isn't about patents limiting innovation - this is about FRAND patents that are essential for involvement in an industry.
If you don't know what FRAND patents are, you should make an effort to understand them because understanding them is vital to understanding this situation.
FRAND patents are essential patents that are part of an industry standard that MUST be licensed to ANYONE who wishes to license them at _Fair, Reasonable, and Non Discriminatory_ rates. When a company gets a patent included in an industry standard, they agree to license them under FRAND terms.
Motorola's actions have not been Fair, Reasonable, nor Non Discriminatory. They have targeted specific companies (that's discriminatory) with excessive licensing demands (ranging from 2.25% up to "your entire non-FRAND patent portfolio" which is not reasonable), all of which is not fair.
You don't have to like or hate any company involved in this to recognize that Motorola is abusing their FRAND patents and everyone should want them to be punished for doing so.
They have abused their FRAND patents. They are being investigated. They will be found guilty of anticompetitive behaviour.
They overplayed their hand and now they are going to face the consequences.
It would seem to me that the current Canadian government is one of the most corrupt in the western hemisphere at the moment.
As a proud Canadian, normally I would be outraged by a comment like that. Unfortunately, with what the Conservative party has done (manipulating the previous election) and what Harper has been doing (the list is so damn long...), I find myself entirely unable to argue against that claim... It's disgusting that I can't argue against it...
So, claims are regularly made suggesting that the music industry is failing, usually followed by claims that tougher laws are needed to protect the hard working people in the music industry.
Small problem - it's not true.
The music industry is not in as bad a situation as claims would suggest. Here are some interesting statistics:
Music publishing revenues are on an upward trend. Worldwide Music Publishing Revenues (2006 - 2011) http://grabstats.com/statmain.asp?StatID=69 $8.0 billion (2006) $8.3 billion (2007) $8.6 billion (2008) $8.9 billion (2009) $9.1 billion (2010) $9.4 billion (2011)
Live music (concert) revenues are on a upward trend. Worldwide Live Music / Concert Revenues (2006 - 2011) http://grabstats.com/statmain.asp?StatID=70 $16.6 billion (2006) $18.1 billion (2007) $19.4 billion (2008) $20.8 billion (2009) $22.2 billion (2010) $23.5 billion (2011)
The entire industry's revenues (*) are on an upward trend. Worldwide Music Industry Revenues (2006 - 2011) http://grabstats.com/statmain.asp?StatID=67 2006 ($60.7 billion) 2007 ($61.5 billion) 2008 ($62.6 billion) 2009 ($65.0 billion) 2010 ($66.4 billion) 2011 ($67.6 billion)
* The "entire industry" is defined as "Revenues are for record labels, music publishers, recording artists, performing artists, composers, concert venues and merchandise, companies; includes revenues from sales of physical recordings, digital music services (online and mobile), music publishing and live music."
What is most interesting about these numbers is it supports what I have felt for a long time - the major players in the music industry have realized that CD sales are nice but that's not how to get rich - the big money (almost 2.5 times the money...) is in concerts. That is why acts like 'N Sync and Britney and Beiber and U2 and Lady Gaga and damn near everyone are regularly on tour. They've realized that people are spending more and more on actually going to the concert to experience the music. They realized that the be financially successful means touring a lot. CD sales makes one wealthy but a concert tout makes one rich.
These numbers show that the music industry isn't failing. It isn't even shrinking. The _industry_ is growing, across the board. Yes, there are individual companies that might be suffering and there are individual bands that are suffering and there are probably specific geographic regions that are suffering but the industry, as a whole, is thriving - it is growing.
One thing I do agree with the music industry, however, is that the internet is a big reason for this - we just disagree on the direction their profits are headed...
FRAND means you _MUST_ license the patent to ANYONE at a FAIR AND REASONABLE, NON-DISCRIMINATORY rate. 2.25% is not _reasonable_ and I doubt Motorola charges that same rate to other companies which means they are discriminating. Look, it's simple - Motorola (and Samsung) are abusing FRAND patents. Pure and simple. Stop ignoring what's going on just because you don't like Apple.
Really, how much of Apple's bullshit do you think other companies are going to take, before they take some action back?
This comes _AFTER_ companies like Motorola demanded 2.25% for industry essential FRAND patents from Apple. Did you call for a boycott of Motorola for blatant and disgusting abuse of the patent system? Did you ask "how much of Motorola's bullshit are companies going to take before they take some action back?" No. Of course not.
Seriously, pull your head out of the sand. Look around and see things as they really are.
Oh my f'ing gawd! If you're going to use the term "patent troll", make damn sure you know what it means. When a company infringes a patent and is sued for doing so, the suing party is _NOT_ a patent troll. When the CEO of a suing company opens a dialogue and negotiates a settlement that is mutually beneficial to both companies, that is _NOT_ a patent troll.
A patent troll is a company that makes nothing of note (typically nothing at all) yet sues other companies for patent infringement. In fact, it can be best summed up that a patent troll's business model is generating revenues from suing other companies for patent infringement. Now, before anyone tries to be witty and claim that describes Apple, pull your head out of your ass and be honest - Apple makes BILLIONS of dollars _MAKING AND SELLING ACTUAL PRODUCTS!_ They invest a massive amount of money into R&D and thus have numerous patents covering their inventions. Thus, when a company infringes one of those patents, it is entirely within their right and understandable that they would sue for infringement but APPLE IS NOT A PATENT TROLL.
Seriously. You may not like their actions; you may not like Steve Jobs; you may think everything related to Apple is crap but be honest and understand what a patent troll is and recognize Apple is NOT a patent troll.
The major issue I have with people watering down the meaning of the term is that it weakens the debate against actual patent trolls who are leaches of the worst order. When you use "patent troll" to describe Apple, just because you don't like them, you weaken the ability to rightly vilify the real patent trolls.
Apple is NOT a patent troll. You don't have to like them - hate them all you want - but be honest and recognize they are NOT a patent troll.
And they have by voting the current BOD into their positions. So, the other shareholders who disagree with that decision need to just accept it and move on. Or just move on. Either way, the shareholders have spoken and they want the company run by this BOD in this way.
The reason you invest is because you expect the asset will grow. If all a company you have stock in is doing is holding a bunch of cash in bank accounts well; shit you could do that; without the risks.
You're right - I expect the asset to grow. And Apple has shown greater growth than virtually every other stock out there over the past handful of years. Without dividends.
And I expect my money to make more than it would sitting in a bank. And if you can show me a bank account that can offer the returns on investment that Apple stocks have provided over the past handful of years (or, heck, 25% of those returns because a bank account doesn't have risk so it shouldn't have to perform as well), I can assure you, I'll be shifting my money to a new bank account.
Apple is fulfilling their responsibility to their shareholders. If they weren't, their BOD would have been replaced long ago. Lots (and lots and lots) of people are getting returns that are very favourable, regardless of dividends.
I couldn't read the linked article (I seriously need to log in to view an AP news article hosted by Google? That's rich!) but that's not at all what I have heard Cook discussed. He downplayed the likelihood of a dividend payout and made it sound much more likely that Apple would find other ways to invest the money. In fact, his quote (re dividend payouts) was "My message there is that the board and the management are thinking about this very deeply... and we will do what we think is in the best interest of shareholders." Call me crazy but that sounds an awful lot like "look, we're not going to outright say it, but we're NOT paying dividends. We're thinking of other ways to invest the money that are better for the company which is, in our opinion, better for the shareholders."
Look, I know investors _REALLY_ want a dividend payout because it amounts to free cash (and lately the trend is "Apple, you have tons of cash - GIVE ME SOME!!") but, face facts people, the company has a history of not paying dividends, they don't feel it's a good use of their money, and they feel there are better ways to invest the money. Just accept it and move on.
Want to get dividends? Invest in stocks that pay dividends.
Translation: Look, we know we sold you the trademark and you legally have the right to use it and all but we're failing as a company, about to be de-listed from the stock exchange and _REALLY_ need the money so would you just shut the hell up and hand over some cash.
Yeah, a failing business certainly makes companies pull some stupid, desperate stunts...
I strongly hope this leads to a new election (with very strict oversight). Clearly the last election was tampered with in such a way that the outcome was altered, thus a new election is needed. While I hate elections, I hate knowing a party wrongly gained power even more.
The other companies that made cellphones had occasional hissing matches with each other, as companies seem to like to do, but it would get resolved since they realized it was in their best interests. While they'd all like to be the one and only phone provider in the world, they know that isn't going to happen so they'll settle for cross licensing and so on.
The _ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY_ is suing each other like crazy right now. Stop pretending this is just Apple getting all up in everyone's faces and everyone pushing back valiantly against Apple - this is _THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY_ going to war with each other.
And, for the record, it seems that Nokia is the most aggressive company out there, not Apple.
Please, for the love of gawd, if you're going to hate on Apple, at least base it on fact rather than made up garbage. Seriously.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I'm not going to read the article because the summary screams of stupid. The first warning sign of complete idiocy was the claim that if Facebook collapsed there "would be potentially huge costs to its users". Um, what cost? If Facebook fails it will cost me exactly $0.00. Nothing. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada. I don't know how to make that any clearer but Facebook's failure carries no costs for its users. Second, to suggest that social networks _must_ use open standards and that this requirement should be written into law is so staggeringly stupid it simply hurts my brain. So, no, I didn't read the article. I've been attempting to reduce the amount of stupid I'm exposed to and that summary tells me the article screams stupid.
There was a time when reading Slashdot was interesting and informative. That time seems to be quickly fading...
Accepting the fact your OS has flaw's is first stepping to make a secure OS, Apple for years claimed their OS didn't have any.
Uh, no. They didn't. The fact that they've regularly and consistently provided security updates shows that they recognize that they have flaws in their OS that need patching. What they have claimed is that they don't have a lot of viruses, which is absolutely true. Due to Macs not being worth targeting because of a smaller user base, malicious attacks against Macs were very rare compared to PCs (which is always the benchmark they compared themselves to). So their claim was true.
They have never, however, claimed they don't have flaws and their actions demonstrate clearly that they know they do have flaws that need fixing once spotted.
There's probably going to be some brand-shuffling going on. Most likely they'll rename them to "iPad" and "iPad Pro"...
It amazes me how geeks can completely misunderstand how the most successful tech company in the world operates. I find it even more baffling when most of the comments in the thread clearly explain what is going on.
Early adopters? Of an iPad that has been on the market for almost a year and a half? Uh, yeah. Ok.
Not trying to paint Apple is the Big Baddie here or anything, just saying there is a reason they get more shit.
Yes. That reason is "Apple generates page views while every other tech company does not." Don't try to pretend that there's any reason beyond that as to why people focus so heavily on Apple.
Apple generates page views. Page views generate money. People want money. Therefore, people mention Apple.
Very simple.
Oh look, another story that is actually about virtually every major company in existence but it's turned into a story by replacing "every company" with "Apple" to make it sensational and generate page views. *yawn*
It could place providers in the position of requiring warrants for all law enforcement requests.
Um, allow me to introduce you to an internet meme that covers this adequately: "It's working as intended." Warrants exist for a reason. This sort of situation - responding to requests from law enforcement - are exactly that situation. Working as intended. Deal with it.
Way to miss my point - I'll spell it out for you - it was NOT evil. Not somewhat. Not a little bit. Not "in my opinion". It was NOT evil.
Seriously, it doesn't get much more clearly evil.
Ok, seriously, I'm not defending what they did but "evil"? Really? Come on! Can we please get some sense of perspective. What they did was wrong. What they did was possibly morally unethical. But evil? No. Evil is reserved for a special breed of person/organization/action. What they did was not evil. All you're doing by branding them "evil" is utterly watering down the meaning of the word and completely weakening your stance.
Seriously.
So why go after Apple?
Because Apple has almost $100 billion in the bank so they are a juicy target for a dad who wants to get rich blaming someone for his being a bad father and not actually being involved in raising his child.
Sorry for blending two rants into one but there it is. Apple is a target of so many lawsuits because they have the cash to make people rich. Period. Also, I'm fed up with parents trying to blame other people for their failings as a parent. Being a parent requires effort and time and is more than just giving your kid an iDevice or sitting them in front of a TV with a DVD looping some brainless kid's program so when things go wrong because you're an absent parent, don't blame the iDevice or the kids show or the TV. Look in the mirror.
If you're worried about the content of your files, for whatever reason, don't store the file(s) in the cloud. Period.
Actually do expensive research and get patents that mean something, and they will label them "standards essential"...
Um, you do realize that Motorola submitted those patents for inclusion in the industry standard and were accepted into the standard in return for an agreement to license them for FRAND terms. They weren't labeled, against their will, standards essential - they asked to be included in the industry standard.
Motorola isn't the victim here.
Motorola brought this on themselves. When you attempt to unfairly abuse FRAND patents against your market competition, you're eventually going to be investigated for anticompetitive behaviour. They abused their FRAND patents. They're being investigated. And they're going to be found guilty of anticompetitive behaviour and everyone knows it.
And we should be happy about that.
It doesn't matter what you think of Motorola, Apple, Microsoft, Google, or any other company. You may like or hate any of those companies - it doesn't matter. We should all be happy that Motorola's actions are going to be punished because this is precisely the sort of thing that limits innovation in an industry. This isn't about patents limiting innovation - this is about FRAND patents that are essential for involvement in an industry.
If you don't know what FRAND patents are, you should make an effort to understand them because understanding them is vital to understanding this situation.
FRAND patents are essential patents that are part of an industry standard that MUST be licensed to ANYONE who wishes to license them at _Fair, Reasonable, and Non Discriminatory_ rates. When a company gets a patent included in an industry standard, they agree to license them under FRAND terms.
Motorola's actions have not been Fair, Reasonable, nor Non Discriminatory. They have targeted specific companies (that's discriminatory) with excessive licensing demands (ranging from 2.25% up to "your entire non-FRAND patent portfolio" which is not reasonable), all of which is not fair.
You don't have to like or hate any company involved in this to recognize that Motorola is abusing their FRAND patents and everyone should want them to be punished for doing so.
They have abused their FRAND patents. They are being investigated. They will be found guilty of anticompetitive behaviour.
They overplayed their hand and now they are going to face the consequences.
It would seem to me that the current Canadian government is one of the most corrupt in the western hemisphere at the moment.
As a proud Canadian, normally I would be outraged by a comment like that. Unfortunately, with what the Conservative party has done (manipulating the previous election) and what Harper has been doing (the list is so damn long...), I find myself entirely unable to argue against that claim... It's disgusting that I can't argue against it...
So, claims are regularly made suggesting that the music industry is failing, usually followed by claims that tougher laws are needed to protect the hard working people in the music industry.
Small problem - it's not true.
The music industry is not in as bad a situation as claims would suggest. Here are some interesting statistics:
Music publishing revenues are on an upward trend.
Worldwide Music Publishing Revenues (2006 - 2011)
http://grabstats.com/statmain.asp?StatID=69
$8.0 billion (2006)
$8.3 billion (2007)
$8.6 billion (2008)
$8.9 billion (2009)
$9.1 billion (2010)
$9.4 billion (2011)
Live music (concert) revenues are on a upward trend.
Worldwide Live Music / Concert Revenues (2006 - 2011)
http://grabstats.com/statmain.asp?StatID=70
$16.6 billion (2006)
$18.1 billion (2007)
$19.4 billion (2008)
$20.8 billion (2009)
$22.2 billion (2010)
$23.5 billion (2011)
The entire industry's revenues (*) are on an upward trend.
Worldwide Music Industry Revenues (2006 - 2011)
http://grabstats.com/statmain.asp?StatID=67
2006 ($60.7 billion)
2007 ($61.5 billion)
2008 ($62.6 billion)
2009 ($65.0 billion)
2010 ($66.4 billion)
2011 ($67.6 billion)
* The "entire industry" is defined as "Revenues are for record labels, music publishers, recording artists, performing artists, composers, concert venues and merchandise, companies; includes revenues from sales of physical recordings, digital music services (online and mobile), music publishing and live music."
What is most interesting about these numbers is it supports what I have felt for a long time - the major players in the music industry have realized that CD sales are nice but that's not how to get rich - the big money (almost 2.5 times the money...) is in concerts. That is why acts like 'N Sync and Britney and Beiber and U2 and Lady Gaga and damn near everyone are regularly on tour. They've realized that people are spending more and more on actually going to the concert to experience the music. They realized that the be financially successful means touring a lot. CD sales makes one wealthy but a concert tout makes one rich.
These numbers show that the music industry isn't failing. It isn't even shrinking. The _industry_ is growing, across the board. Yes, there are individual companies that might be suffering and there are individual bands that are suffering and there are probably specific geographic regions that are suffering but the industry, as a whole, is thriving - it is growing.
One thing I do agree with the music industry, however, is that the internet is a big reason for this - we just disagree on the direction their profits are headed...
(emphasis in the quote is mine)
...paying for text messaging (which literally costs carriers nothing)...
You are using that word and I literally do not think you know what it means.
FRAND means you _MUST_ license the patent to ANYONE at a FAIR AND REASONABLE, NON-DISCRIMINATORY rate. 2.25% is not _reasonable_ and I doubt Motorola charges that same rate to other companies which means they are discriminating. Look, it's simple - Motorola (and Samsung) are abusing FRAND patents. Pure and simple. Stop ignoring what's going on just because you don't like Apple.
Really, how much of Apple's bullshit do you think other companies are going to take, before they take some action back?
This comes _AFTER_ companies like Motorola demanded 2.25% for industry essential FRAND patents from Apple. Did you call for a boycott of Motorola for blatant and disgusting abuse of the patent system? Did you ask "how much of Motorola's bullshit are companies going to take before they take some action back?" No. Of course not.
Seriously, pull your head out of the sand. Look around and see things as they really are.
Oh my f'ing gawd! If you're going to use the term "patent troll", make damn sure you know what it means. When a company infringes a patent and is sued for doing so, the suing party is _NOT_ a patent troll. When the CEO of a suing company opens a dialogue and negotiates a settlement that is mutually beneficial to both companies, that is _NOT_ a patent troll.
A patent troll is a company that makes nothing of note (typically nothing at all) yet sues other companies for patent infringement. In fact, it can be best summed up that a patent troll's business model is generating revenues from suing other companies for patent infringement. Now, before anyone tries to be witty and claim that describes Apple, pull your head out of your ass and be honest - Apple makes BILLIONS of dollars _MAKING AND SELLING ACTUAL PRODUCTS!_ They invest a massive amount of money into R&D and thus have numerous patents covering their inventions. Thus, when a company infringes one of those patents, it is entirely within their right and understandable that they would sue for infringement but APPLE IS NOT A PATENT TROLL.
Seriously. You may not like their actions; you may not like Steve Jobs; you may think everything related to Apple is crap but be honest and understand what a patent troll is and recognize Apple is NOT a patent troll.
The major issue I have with people watering down the meaning of the term is that it weakens the debate against actual patent trolls who are leaches of the worst order. When you use "patent troll" to describe Apple, just because you don't like them, you weaken the ability to rightly vilify the real patent trolls.
Apple is NOT a patent troll. You don't have to like them - hate them all you want - but be honest and recognize they are NOT a patent troll.
And they have by voting the current BOD into their positions. So, the other shareholders who disagree with that decision need to just accept it and move on. Or just move on. Either way, the shareholders have spoken and they want the company run by this BOD in this way.
The reason you invest is because you expect the asset will grow. If all a company you have stock in is doing is holding a bunch of cash in bank accounts well; shit you could do that; without the risks.
You're right - I expect the asset to grow. And Apple has shown greater growth than virtually every other stock out there over the past handful of years. Without dividends.
And I expect my money to make more than it would sitting in a bank. And if you can show me a bank account that can offer the returns on investment that Apple stocks have provided over the past handful of years (or, heck, 25% of those returns because a bank account doesn't have risk so it shouldn't have to perform as well), I can assure you, I'll be shifting my money to a new bank account.
Apple is fulfilling their responsibility to their shareholders. If they weren't, their BOD would have been replaced long ago. Lots (and lots and lots) of people are getting returns that are very favourable, regardless of dividends.
I couldn't read the linked article (I seriously need to log in to view an AP news article hosted by Google? That's rich!) but that's not at all what I have heard Cook discussed. He downplayed the likelihood of a dividend payout and made it sound much more likely that Apple would find other ways to invest the money. In fact, his quote (re dividend payouts) was "My message there is that the board and the management are thinking about this very deeply... and we will do what we think is in the best interest of shareholders." Call me crazy but that sounds an awful lot like "look, we're not going to outright say it, but we're NOT paying dividends. We're thinking of other ways to invest the money that are better for the company which is, in our opinion, better for the shareholders."
Look, I know investors _REALLY_ want a dividend payout because it amounts to free cash (and lately the trend is "Apple, you have tons of cash - GIVE ME SOME!!") but, face facts people, the company has a history of not paying dividends, they don't feel it's a good use of their money, and they feel there are better ways to invest the money. Just accept it and move on.
Want to get dividends? Invest in stocks that pay dividends.
Translation: Look, we know we sold you the trademark and you legally have the right to use it and all but we're failing as a company, about to be de-listed from the stock exchange and _REALLY_ need the money so would you just shut the hell up and hand over some cash.
Yeah, a failing business certainly makes companies pull some stupid, desperate stunts...
I strongly hope this leads to a new election (with very strict oversight). Clearly the last election was tampered with in such a way that the outcome was altered, thus a new election is needed. While I hate elections, I hate knowing a party wrongly gained power even more.
The other companies that made cellphones had occasional hissing matches with each other, as companies seem to like to do, but it would get resolved since they realized it was in their best interests. While they'd all like to be the one and only phone provider in the world, they know that isn't going to happen so they'll settle for cross licensing and so on.
Um. No.
http://flowingdata.com/2010/10/11/mobile-patent-lawsuits/
The _ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY_ is suing each other like crazy right now. Stop pretending this is just Apple getting all up in everyone's faces and everyone pushing back valiantly against Apple - this is _THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY_ going to war with each other.
And, for the record, it seems that Nokia is the most aggressive company out there, not Apple.
Please, for the love of gawd, if you're going to hate on Apple, at least base it on fact rather than made up garbage. Seriously.