Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Aug 2013 09:36 UTC
Legal Recently, the ITC ruled in favour of Samsung, issuing an exclusion order against certain Apple products, barring them from being sold in the US. Several people have called upon president Obama to step in and overrule the decision (e.g. this guy) - however, not only would this set a very bad precedent for non-US companies, it would also simply be incredibly unfair if you actually look at the ITC ruling itself. Because of this, it is quite unlikely that Obama will step in.
Thread beginning with comment 568589
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Liza on Thu 1st Aug 2013 13:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Liza
Member since:
2013-08-01

You're confused about who the aggressor is.

When Apple announced the iPhone, both Google(aka Motorola) and Nokia started to see dollar signs and both companies sued Apple. They sued Apple patents that are "crappy software patents" that were also given as part of basic cellular standards that they promised to licensed under FRAND terms.

That is what started the mobile patent wars- Nokia sued first, then Google did.

Secondly, when Apple has sued companies, it has not been over "crappy" software patents, but over patents on fairly fundamental aspects of a completely new invention: Multi-touch interaction. (Yes there were primitive touch systems before, but that doesn't mean Apple didn't invent anything new.)

Apple is not abusing the patent system. It is trying to defend genuine innovations against aggressors who are abusing it to try and use FRAND pledged patents to get away with stealing genuine innovations.

Apple's using the patent system as it was intended-- for defense. Google and Samsung are using it for offense. (Nokia offered Apple FRAND terms eventually and they settled.)

Even in Samsung's case, Apple offered to settle with Samsung, rather than go to court, but Samsung was not interested.

It's really unfortunate that Google apologists feel they can rewrite the history to pretend like Apple is the aggressor. And they tell each other this over and over and over again.... probably because, in your heart you know it's false.

But you should recgonize your need to re-write this history is proof that your interests are not in the truth, but in pushing an ideological agenda. ( And today's android zealots are the windows apologists who would say "the mac sucks because windows has %99 marketshare" back in the day.)

I guess some people just hate innovative companies. That's fine, don't buy Apple products.

But when you start committing fraud by lying about the situation, that's not fine.

The history here is no in dispute. So, why lie?

Reply Parent Score: -3

RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by Beta on Fri 2nd Aug 2013 09:26 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

You're confused about who the aggressor is.

When Apple announced the iPhone, both Google(aka Motorola) and Nokia started to see dollar signs and both companies sued Apple. They sued Apple patents that are "crappy software patents" that were also given as part of basic cellular standards that they promised to licensed under FRAND terms.

Even in Samsung's case, Apple offered to settle with Samsung, rather than go to court, but Samsung was not interested.

I guess some people just hate innovative companies. That's fine, don't buy Apple products.

But when you start committing fraud by lying about the situation, that's not fine.

The history here is no in dispute. So, why lie?


I know you’re a new account as of yesterday… so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. For people that have been using smartphones for the last decade, and watching the technology sphere for longer, your history is absolutely incorrect.

You haven’t read the article above because you’re still insisting Apples narrative of the events is gospel truth, it is not.

And please, keep it pleasant in the comments section.

Reply Parent Score: 4