Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 19th Sep 2012 21:40 UTC
Legal "The International Trade Commission voted yesterday to investigate Apple for patent infringement allegations launched by the Google-owned Motorola Mobility. As expected, Motorola is asking for import bans on just about every iOS device, including iPhones, iPods, and iPads. What might be surprising is that Motorola is also asking for a ban on every type of Mac OS X computer, claiming Apple's iMessage technology infringes a Motorola patent." Let's hope all those products get banned. And that all Motorola phones get banned. Let's hope everything gets banned from the US. And yes, I changed Motorola into Google for the headline.
Thread beginning with comment 535821
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Bravo!
by JAlexoid on Thu 20th Sep 2012 10:25 UTC in reply to "Bravo!"
JAlexoid
Member since:
2009-05-19

This is a spiralling escalation. Neither Apple, nor Google, nor ex-Motorola are innocent here.

Apple has a stupidest stance there , though. Claiming that bounceback is the "unique" feature of iOS, while Windows Phone happily has that as well...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Bravo!
by StephenBeDoper on Fri 21st Sep 2012 00:13 in reply to "RE: Bravo!"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

This is a spiralling escalation. Neither Apple, nor Google, nor ex-Motorola are innocent here.


Agreed. I'm not an "all commerce is evil" type, but it does seem that there's some threshold that companies inevitably reach once they get big enough or successful enough, where the legal and/or marketing departments assume control. Some would probably say that threshold is called an "IPO" - though I could name more than a few privately-operated companies that behave exactly the same way.

Apple has a stupidest stance there , though. Claiming that bounceback is the "unique" feature of iOS, while Windows Phone happily has that as well...


Hear, hear. If there were one change to patent law that I'd most like to see, it would be an end to selective/strategic enforcement of IP. Trademark owners can't pull that kind of BS, so why are patent owners allowed to? I'd say make it work just like trademark law, especially the "enforce it or lose it" aspects... especially now that the distinction is being blurred with things like "trade dress" patents.

Not that I have any real expectation that will happen. I think the sad fact of the matter is: the only people/organizations with the power to change patent law are exactly the same people who benefit from the current laws. And as long as that fact holds true, then I have no expectation that we'll see any significant changes (well, except changes for the worse).

Reply Parent Score: 2