Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Sep 2013 22:49 UTC, submitted by Radio
Apple I missed this one:

The 2012 patent trial that grabbed the most headlines was Apple's $1 billion win (since reduced) against Samsung. But Apple also suffered a major patent setback of its own last year when a patent-holding company called VirnetX won a $368 million verdict against the tech giant.

The consequences of Apple's loss are now starting to become clear. This month, testimony in a court hearing showed that not only is Apple facing royalty payments that could cost it many millions more, but it has already made changes to one of its premiere products, FaceTime - changes that reportedly have degraded the service's quality.

While I won't shed a tear for Apple losing a patent lawsuit, this does illustrate once more why the system is broken.

Thread beginning with comment 573242
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by Drumhellar
by Neolander on Wed 25th Sep 2013 15:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar"
Member since:

Wait a minute, here we are talking about open protocols, which is a different issue from open source entirely.

To illustrate the difference : only geeks care about whether their TV set runs open-source software, but pretty much every sane person likes to be sure that when they buy a new TV, they will be able to plug video devices from any manufacturer into it, no matter what their relationship with the TV manufacturer is.

Open protocols may or may not help open-source software depending on their redistribution conditions : anything whose licence does not feature a "spec may be used freely for non-commercial use" clause is as good as a closed protocol as far as open-source software development is concerned.

Edited 2013-09-25 15:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 7