Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 20th Dec 2011 11:27 UTC
Legal I'm guessing Apple is getting desperate, since its software patent lawsuits aren't doing particularly well. Moving on from software and design patents, the company is now suing Samsung over... Patents for mobile phone and tablet cases (more at The Verge). I think Apple has more offensive lawsuits than products now, so technically, "patent maker" is more accurate than "gadget maker" or "device maker". Fun times.
Permalink for comment 500840
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[13]: two sides of the coin
by lustyd on Wed 21st Dec 2011 16:33 UTC in reply to "RE[12]: two sides of the coin"
Member since:

"Guess what, what has Microsoft invented? What about Google? By your criteria: Nothing.
Everything they did was already done, they just improved it or made small innovations along the way.

Exactly! See, we're actually in full agreement!

That's the whole point I, and so many without a special affinity for any one company, are trying to make. Apple, Google, Microsoft - they're all standing on the shoulders of the giants that came before them. Especially the software world is a world of organic, almost evolutionary progress. Everybody builds upon everybody's work, and this is precisely the reason why software patents are universally despised by programmers.

Apple is very good at taking existing ideas and making them better - however, they have never invented anything. That's a very important distinction in this case, because only inventions ought to be patentable.

I know it's tough to accept, but everything the iPhone did could already be done with most smartphones that came before it - heck, older smartphones could even do more. However, the iPhone did it better - but that doesn't mean Apple invented it.

This is a reality check. Especially now with Jobs' death, the guy is being deified to an almost hurl-inducing degree, even though he himself can only ever hope to stand in the shadow of the truly great visionaries of computing, the people that actually invented entirely new things decades before they were even remotely feasible - Alan Kay, Douglas Engelbart, Ian Sutherland, and so on.

The Google guys, Jobs, Gates - they're ordinary salesmen compared to those guys.

Absolute nonsense. If you were right, we'd see all sorts of innovation in the open source world but we don't. All open source gets you is a copy of some better software written by a proper company, or a cheaper option to integrate into something without licensing restrictions. You cannot argue that whatever it is that Apple does is not worthy of protection since they are clearly doing things that nobody else is capable of doing first due to lack of imagination or resource.
Microsoft too may be "standing on the shoulders of giants" but they have introduced an enormous amount of value and are now one of those giants who need protection. The difference is that Microsoft were willing to pay the licence fees of those they took from, and so were Apple.

Reply Parent Score: 0