Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 7th May 2014 10:43 UTC
Legal

One single paragraph from one of the many court documents (via!) in the ongoing legal battle between Apple and Samsung. One single paragraph that not only perfectly highlights the hypocrisy of technology companies, but also the complete and utter disjoint between a technology company's legal, marketing, and engineering departments.

Contrary to the image it has cultivated in the popular press, Apple has admitted in internal documents that its strength is not in developing new technologies first, but in successfully commercializing them. When Apple was developing its campaign to promote the first iPhone, it considered - and rejected - advertisements that touted alleged Apple "firsts" with the iPhone. As one Apple employee explained to an overly exuberant Apple marketer, "I don't know how many things we can come up with that you can legitimately claim we did first. Certainly we have the first successful versions of many features, but that's different than launching something to market first." In this vein, the employee methodically explained that Palm, Nokia and others had first invented the iPhone's most prominent features.

The marketing department has no clue about the technology it needs to advertise. The legal department cleverly writes its patent application despite knowing full well that the technology it tries to patent is not new. Meanwhile, the engineer - the actual person implementing the technology - knows exactly what is going on, but is gagged from openly speaking his or her mind. The only thing I'm not sure about is which of these three is the biggest hypocrite.

Intellectual property - and patents in particular - has ruined the technology industry with lies, deceit, and hypocrisy. We just stood by and let it happen.

Permalink for comment 588324
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Comment by henderson101
by WorknMan on Wed 7th May 2014 23:14 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by henderson101"
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

Being against bone-headed patents is a liberal thing now?


No, but writing biased, one-sided articles from a liberal point of view is. But I actually agree with them on this subject, so that's not really the point. I'm just picking on them because conservatives are not the ones who are guilty of sabotaging tech blogs and using them for their own political agendas.

Government granted monopolies over vague concepts has the possibility of really crushing the future livelihood of software developers like myself, and crushing competition from any non-giant-corporation who can't afford to file hundreds of frivolous/vague patents every year.


The question is, are software patents really impacting the little guys RIGHT NOW in a negative way? Are startups being forced to close up shop because they're being attacked by some mega corporations or patent trolls? If so, why don't tech sites report on THOSE, instead of telling us about every goddamn finger gesture-esque silly patent lawsuits that these big corporations are suing each other over?

I actually have a filter in my RSS reader that automatically purges any articles with the word 'patent' in the title. And do you know why? Because I don't give a shit anymore. If you want people like me to REALLY pay attention, then you only talk about patents and other such things when it REALLY matters. For everything else, someone needs to create a 'patentnews.com' blog where those of you who are interested in the nitty gritty details of every f**king patent case currently on the books can geek out on that stuff until your hearts content.

As it is, if you keep blasting the rest of us with this bullshit, we're eventually going to tune out, and then you won't be able to get our attention when it's really needed.

Edited 2014-05-07 23:15 UTC

Reply Parent Score: -2