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.
Thread beginning with comment 528870
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by NuxRo
by Nico57 on Mon 30th Jul 2012 00:10 UTC in reply to "Comment by NuxRo"
Nico57
Member since:
2006-12-18

German panzers. (And Nazi officers.)

There's no political inclination in a bunch of steel plates.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by NuxRo
by lucas_maximus on Mon 30th Jul 2012 21:12 in reply to "RE: Comment by NuxRo"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Well what other army used them?

Other than that ... way to go guys lets Godwin the thread at level 1.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by NuxRo
by cyrilleberger on Tue 31st Jul 2012 04:57 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by NuxRo"
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

Well what other army used them?


Panzer I were used by the Nationalist during the Spanish civil war, and quiet ironically, by the Republic of China against Japan. And later versions were also sold to other countries.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by NuxRo
by mrstep on Tue 31st Jul 2012 18:06 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by NuxRo"
mrstep Member since:
2009-07-18

Calling German WWII tanks 'Nazi' tanks is like calling the M1 tank a 'Republican tank' because Bush used it while invading Iraq. The US Army invaded, not the Republican party, though they gave the directions to.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by NuxRo
by zima on Fri 3rd Aug 2012 22:12 in reply to "RE: Comment by NuxRo"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

German panzers. (And Nazi officers.)

There's no political inclination in a bunch of steel plates.

Or is it? Vast majority of those tanks quite possibly wouldn't be around if it weren't for the Nazis (well, and the Soviets - because they would probably attack Poland, like they did together with the Nazis in IX'39, all by themselves eventually ...likely not stopping there), and for the industry building them that was largely composed of slave labour and so on.

So there is some point in naming them like that, reminding about history, what led to the very existence of those tanks.

Reply Parent Score: 2