Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 29th Jul 2012 10:48 UTC
Legal Groklaw nails it: "In other words, [Apple and Microsoft] want to disarm the companies that got there first, built the standards, and created the field, while the come-later types clean up on patents on things like slide to unlock or a tablet shape with rounded corners. Then the money flows to Apple and Microsoft, and away from Android - and isn't that really the point of all this, to destroy Android by hook or by crook? The parties who were in the mobile phone business years before Apple or Microsoft even thought about doing it thus get nothing much for their earlier issued patents that have become standards. Apple and Microsoft can't compete on an even field, because the patent system rewards the first to invent (or now, after the recent patent reform, the first to file). Neither Apple nor Microsoft got there first. Samsung was there, since the '90s." To illustrate: Apple is demanding $24 (!) per Samsung device for design patents, while at the same time, Apple also demands that Samsung does not charge more than $0.0049 per standards essential patent per device. This is absolutely, utterly, and entirely indefensible. And then Apple and its supporters have the nerve to claim Samsung is ripping them off. Yes, this pisses me off, and no, that's not because it's Apple doing it (Microsoft is just as guilty). It's because this is plainly, utterly, clearly, and intrinsically unfair.
Permalink for comment 528919
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Whining by proxy
by Tony Swash on Mon 30th Jul 2012 11:10 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Whining by proxy"
Tony Swash
Member since:

"[q]Which, of course, is magically different from Apple pimping its 400 million credit card numbers, associated user accounts, and which magazines, videos, books, applications, and music those users look at and buy.

Totally different. Yessiree. Very different because Google is evil, and Apple is all that is good and pure in this world.

Not to mention that iAd probably works in a very similar way to Adwords...

...and I totally forgot iCloud. [/q]

Are you arguing that Apple collects data on the content of documents stored in iCloud on a per user basis in a similar way that Google collects data in say Gmail in order to commercialise that data in a similar way that Google does?

If so then some evidence supporting that hypothesis would be useful.

It seems to me utterly obvious that Apple and Google have different business models (neither of which is 'good' or 'bad') and that those different models mean that the function of cloud storage is different in each company.

In the case of Apple it's core business is primarily, overwhelmingly in fact, as a device maker and all it's services and software offerings are intended to add value to the devices and make it inconvenient (but not impossible) to move to another company's device. Collecting data on user behaviour is a secondary and very minor aspect of what motivates Apple. iAd is a tiny part of Apple's business.

Google's core business on the other hand is selling targeted advertising, targeting that is wholly based on user data, so collecting user data is very central to what Google does, it is a prime motivator and is crucial to it's business model. So what motivates Google to offer cloud storage and services is to collect user data and to ensure that users remain with an ecosystem which allows Google to collect that data.

Is any of this news to anyone? I would be astonished if anyone found what I just said any way controversial.

Reply Parent Score: 2