Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Sep 2011 21:48 UTC, submitted by glarepate
Legal "In a scene straight out of Bizarro World, Apple's lawyers are crying foul about Samsung and recent Google acquisitions Motorola's allegedly 'anticompetitive' use of patents. Yes, this is the same Apple that has initiated a patent war with these smartphone rivals. And it's the same rival that has tried to remove competing products from the market, rather than agree to negotiate a licensing fee. And it's the same company that patented multi-touch gestures 26 years after they were invented at a research university. And it's the same company that allegedly doctored evidence in European courts to support its lawsuits against Android. Yet in Apple's rose-colored glasses it is Samsung and Motorola who are bullies. Apparently Apple is irate about these companies' countersuits, which rely largely on patents covering wireless communications."
Thread beginning with comment 487999
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: You clearly don't get it ...
by Beta on Thu 1st Sep 2011 23:37 UTC in reply to "You clearly don't get it ..."
Beta
Member since:
2005-07-06

Apple assembled a phone, using hardware and software technology that Nokia and Motorola (and others) researched to allow us all to have mobile phones. Nokia and Motorola would suitably like a fair amount of tarrif on these inventions

Motorola assembled a tablet, using hardware they built and software Linux, Google, others wrote. Apple thinks a few lines of code covering scrolling should block imports of devices to whole bloody continents.

This is why people laugh at Apple. If they obtained a fair and reasonable deal before the iPhone launched, no doubt they would not be in this pickle now… Apple tried to pay less than fair ‐ see Nokia’s court case with them. And now they cite monopoly influence! Mental.

*I hate FRAND licensing, patents and companies even less. These companies are all pissing around with rights they shouldn’t have been granted, but thats the current situation and we have to balance it.

Reply Parent Score: 26

dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

How is this different from AVC patents. Isn't MPEG pool offering everyone reasonable terms?

Reply Parent Score: 2

Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

How is this different from AVC patents. Isn't MPEG pool offering everyone reasonable terms?

Off Topic? I’ll bite.

Firstly, it shouldn’t be patented so there should not be a pool: The alleged patents covering AVC are based on simple mathematics. It is trivial to reimplement software to decode & encode, if you are in the field of video encoding.

Secondly, in the realm of FOSS, ‘fair and reasonable’ is not reasonable, Free Software cannot be shared with a RAND licence on top because it then cannot be conveyed to all parties. See http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/11/rand-not-so-rea...

Reply Parent Score: 3