Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 14th Mar 2010 15:12 UTC
Legal It's no secret to anyone that while Apple sued HTC, the lawsuit is more about Google than HTC itself. Since Android is open source, and owned by no one, it's kind of hard to go after Google itself, and as such, HTC was the prime target, since it is the number one Android smartphone maker. The New York Times has an in-depth article up about the subject, with a whole boatload of quotes from people within the two companies, and it paints a picture of all this being a highly emotional and personal vendetta - especially from Apple's side.
Thread beginning with comment 413673
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It's about marketing reach
by mrhasbean on Sun 14th Mar 2010 21:54 UTC
mrhasbean
Member since:
2006-04-03

Google own the search engine market. That combined with products such as Adsense means they have the ability to put what is effectively free advertising for their products in front of hundreds of millions of people across the world every day, even into iPhone apps. And if you market something to the average user that looks like and iPhone...

Apple do not have that luxury so they will pursue whatever avenue they can to protect their investment, and despite what many want to portray it was and continues to be a sizeable investment. If it was your money invested I'm sure you'd want them to try to protect it, but because it's Apple, and they're a company, and companies are inherently evil according to some, them trying to protect their investment is also inherently evil.

And the only people who think that coming up with a concept and seeing it brought to market doesn't deserves some protection from those who would copy it are those who've never had an original thought in their lives. Anyone who's had an idea stolen only to see someone else make millions from it has a completely different perspective on these things.

Reply Score: 2

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Except that the iPhone itself is also built upon the ideas of dozens, if not hundreds, of other people.

The iPhone is a simple touch screen phone, and a relatively limited one at that. It's a good phone, probably the best in the market, but it isn't special. It doesn't contain anything mind-blowingly original. It isn't an "invention". It's a combination of great ideas from other people, but executed better, and in a marketable fashion.

Apple fanatics ridicule Nokia and others, but if it weren't for Nokia, Apple couldn't have built the iPhone. And even if, without Nokia, they'd have been capable of building the iPhone, then the iPhone would not have been a success: Nokia has played a vital role in popularising and spreading the mobile phone around the world, by making phones and the accompanying technology cheap and within reach of everyone.

You can't patent that, so companies like Nokia get no recognition for that at all - yet it is far more impressive than bringing to market an old technology (multitouch) or designing a proper UI (gets done all the time, even by people/companies other than Apple!).

I dislike Nokia for suing Apple, and I dislike Apple for suing HTC. However, Nokia's contributions to the world are far greater than Apple's; Nokia has had and is having an impact on the world itself, allowing people of all wealth levels all around the world to communicate. Nokia contributed to the underlying technology a great deal, while also providing the actual devices. That it a major feat, and if I have to choose between the two, I'd definitely want Nokia to win this one.

Edited 2010-03-14 23:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 12

RE[2]: It's about marketing reach
by KMDF on Mon 15th Mar 2010 14:32 in reply to "RE: It's about marketing reach"
KMDF Member since:
2010-02-17

//he iPhone is a simple touch screen phone, and a relatively limited one at that. It's a good phone, probably the best in the market, but it isn't special. It doesn't contain anything mind-blowingly original.//

But wasn't it original and kind of "mind-blowing' when it came out? I can't recall another phone at the time that looked as good, had the "touch UI," and was as easy to use.

(and I don't, nor have I ever, owned an iPhone).

Just a thought.

Edited 2010-03-15 14:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: It's about marketing reach
by Soulbender on Mon 15th Mar 2010 02:50 in reply to "It's about marketing reach"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Anyone who's had an idea stolen only to see someone else make millions from it has a completely different perspective on these things.


Why don't we ask any of those many people that Apple has (by Jobs own admission) stolen ideas from.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: It's about marketing reach
by lemur2 on Mon 15th Mar 2010 02:54 in reply to "It's about marketing reach"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Anyone who's had an idea stolen only to see someone else make millions from it has a completely different perspective on these things.


No-one can steal mathematics, because it is already public property. The ideas of mathematics have been public property for over a thousand years.

Software is mathematics.

Here is an example of an algorithm within a computing device that is about two thousand years old:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism

http://amog.com/tech/decoding-ancient-computernew-astonishing-truth...

Edited 2010-03-15 03:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: It's about marketing reach
by Soulbender on Mon 15th Mar 2010 03:33 in reply to "It's about marketing reach"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Anyone who's had an idea stolen only to see someone else make millions from it has a completely different perspective on these things.


Also, and many (including the USPTO) seems not to know this, you can't patent ideas. This is why you can't patent the idea of a painkiller, only the specific ways that makes up one possible painkiller. This is also why you can't patent multi-touch in itself, only a specific implementation of it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: It's about marketing reach
by ricegf on Mon 15th Mar 2010 13:56 in reply to "It's about marketing reach"
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

Palm invented (and patented) many of the iPhone's basic operating concepts while creating the inimitable Treo. That's one reason why, when Jobs first threatened to sue Palm over WebOS and they responded with brilliant understatement, "We have a few patents, too", Apple backed down. (Another, of course, is that WebOS hasn't taken off in the way that Android has.)

Apple is on thin ice here. If Palm gets desperate and sues Apple over the iPhone, coupled with Nokia's existing patents suits for their extensive holdings based on Symbian, Apple could lose more in the courts than they would ever have lost in the marketplace.

Wouldn't an iPhone 2 with decent screen resolution, microSD support, a removable battery, and multitasking been a better investment than a lawsuit?

Reply Parent Score: 3