Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Aug 2012 23:54 UTC
Legal And just like that, within a matter of days, the jury has reached a verdict in Apple vs. Samsung. The basic gist is simple: Apple's software patents are valid, and many Samsung devices infringe upon them. Apple's iPhone 3G trade dress is valid, and Samsung's Galaxy S line infringes, but other devices did not. Samsung did not infringe Apple's iPad design patent. Apple did not infringe any of Samsung's patents. Apple is awarded a little over $1 billion in damages. Competition lost today, and developers in the United States should really start to get worried - software patents got validated big time today.
Thread beginning with comment 532315
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: UI conventions
by Neolander on Sat 25th Aug 2012 20:38 UTC in reply to "RE: UI conventions"
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

Rather than arguing about how ridiculous Apple's patents are, I'll just point out that there should be a clause in patent laws that specifies that a year or so after competitors have started to widely use the patented invention in commercial products, if the patent holder has done nothing about it, the patent must be invalidated.

Otherwise, what you get is people silently patenting random stuff, waiting until it has fallen in widespread use, and only then asserting their patent holder rights. This does nothing more for innovation than immediate litigation, and only help companies that want to engage in downright anticompetitive behaviours such as patent trolling or achieving monopolies on de facto standards.

If companies have to litigate immediately instead, such legal backstabbing becomes impossible. They must show immediately what kind of crap they have patented, and competitors can smoothly reinvent the wheel before people have become used to the original one.

Edited 2012-08-25 20:54 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: UI conventions
by Lennie on Sun 26th Aug 2012 12:11 in reply to "RE[2]: UI conventions"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I believe such a clause exists, but the period is to long for how fast everything now changes.

Reply Parent Score: 2