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 528991
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Any point to the complaining?
by Alfman on Tue 31st Jul 2012 03:37 UTC in reply to "Any point to the complaining?"
Member since:


"It's funny how people keep pretending like Apple and Microsoft are some sort of schoolyard bullies while poor little Google and Samsung are the defenceless nerdy kids being pushed around."

"So what if Apple wants $24/device from Samsung?"

The trouble is that the costs of these lawsuits are necessarily passed on to the consumers. These multinational corporate lawsuits shift a great deal of our human resources away from productive endeavours and divert them to litigation instead. More often than not, this places companies in the silly position of having to de-engineer their products with intentionally less optimal solutions, if not banning them outright.

"Why spend all this time whining about how this or that isn't fair? It's different when big companies use their might to squash little companies, but why on earth anyone would feel sorry for Google or Samsung is absolutely beyond me."

Solid principals should not really depend upon who the defendant is. I was no hypocrite when MS was successfully sued by the much smaller company i4i over XML patents. As much as MS deserved a taste of it's own medicine, I could see that the lawsuit was a blow to developers everywhere.

Sure, you might have more sympathy for a small time dev who gets a cease and desist order, but unknown players have never been newsworthy. You might as well be complaining about the news coverage for small cases instead of about the expression of our opinions over big ones.

Edit: In short, it's not really about being sorry for google/samsung, it is about taking a stance on the future of computing and asking ourselves what kind of future we want to live in.

Edited 2012-07-31 03:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2