Jump to content

Awh, poor Android owners


Casper
 Share

Recommended Posts

At least your car wouldn't crash if it was made by Apple. :lol:

sure it would. macs are not immune from crashing.

it would also only have one pedal, and an oil filter would cost $900.

plus, it would only run on like 5% of the roads out there. :lol:

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we'll find out who has the higher paid patent lawyers... obviously the whole goal is to write a patent as vague as possible to cover all permutations of an idea, but even if you're granted a patent via the USPTO/International bodies, that doesn't necessarily mean you'll win in court if it's too broad.

If it's not settled and Apple really wants to press the issue -- it'll end up going to court for a judge to decide if the patent is too general (not specific enough) or not, because like tyler said... Apple's monopoly on any mobile OS would likely going to be ruled too broad. The details of what exactly makes up that patent will be hashed out and set as case precedent for any future infringements.

ITC made this ruling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ITC made this ruling.

Per the link: "The ITC is a quasi-judicial arbiter of trade complaints that has become the venue of choice for resolving patent disputes."

I'm sure the ITC isn't something to be trifled with, but are they really the end-all-be-all ruling body? By definition above, it's unclear to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-judicial_body

Awards and verdicts often depend on a pre-determined set of guidelines or punishment depending on the nature and gravity of the offence committed. Such punishment may be legally enforceable under the law of a country, it can be challenged in a court of law which is the final decisive authority.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sure it would. macs are not immune from crashing.

it would also only have one pedal, and an oil filter would cost $900.

plus, it would only run on like 5% of the roads out there. :lol:

This is all true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apple is just worried about the competition from HTC and other companies. If anything apple could license the patents out but why would they do that? Apple won't license a patent out unless they are absolutely forced to. The tech world is so full of stupid patent violations. It seems like every tech company if violating 20 patnets of another company and then it is all hashed out with expensive patent lawyers who sit back and laugh at this whole situation. I beleive there is a need for patents but the patent system is so flawed that it has become a circus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least your car wouldn't crash if it was made by Apple. :lol:

Only if it snows.

Stephenson explained the title of the novel in his 1999 essay In the Beginning... was the Command Line as his term for a particular software failure mode on the early Apple Macintosh computer. Stephenson wrote about the Macintosh that "When the computer crashed and wrote gibberish into the bitmap, the result was something that looked vaguely like static on a broken television set — a 'snow crash' ".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_crash

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, the standard method of income for a number of major companies, is to sue or threaten to sue other companies for capital gain. And it works.

Apple leads in this technique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, the standard method of income for a number of major companies, is to sue or threaten to sue other companies for capital gain. And it works.

Apple leads in this technique.

Wait, what? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, what? :lol:
Between January 2008 and May 2010, Apple, Inc. filed more than 350 cases with the US Trademark office alone, most in opposition to or taking exception to others' use of the terms 'apple', 'pod', and 'safari': those cases include sellers of apples (the fruit), as well as many others' less unassuming use of the term 'apple'. - Wiki

19116_large_Frivolous_Lawsuits_Simpsons.png

Funny is... The Beatles sued Apple for the use of the term "Apple" and won...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19116_large_Frivolous_Lawsuits_Simpsons.png

Funny is... The Beatles sued Apple for the use of the term "Apple" and won...

The Beatles didn't. The Beatles' record label did.

The fruit distributor they sued was using their logo.

As I've said, if you come up with something and someone steals, don't just stand by. Do something about it. I wouldn't consider what Apple is doing to be frivolous at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wait so apple thinks they own the rights to make phones?

I wonder if they can get out of it since android is actually linux. linux is free. if you don't make money from it, how can it be infringing on anyone's patents?

Edited by serpentracer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good God who would want to own some piece of Apple crap when you could have an AWESOME HTC phone that is relaible(as a Yugo), has great features (not so much), and a super smooth OS (and by super smooth I mean buggy as shit) with awesome apps (all 5 of them). Geez, I mean c'mon who the f*ck would pay that crazy price for Apple products???

~Sent from my iPad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Beatles didn't. The Beatles' record label did.

The fruit distributor they sued was using their logo.

As I've said, if you come up with something and someone steals, don't just stand by. Do something about it. I wouldn't consider what Apple is doing to be frivolous at all.

yeah yeah, I understand the record label did it, and people/corps should protect their rights. But the image of Apple frothing at the mouth to sue to sustain capital adventures is a hard one to avoid. It's a technique for income, and it works well. Apple invents stuff, patents the ideas, and waits for the future to bring it back to them. And currently, there is nothing wrong with that. Microsoft and Oracle do it all the time. And everyone else wants to. Spend the money on R&D and generate a profit.

What comes to mind is attempts to sue Kodak for electronic camera inventions backfired terribly. Kodak had patents from back when they were doing mil-spec work for spy satellites, and turned the tables on everyone. Lots of computer/electronic tech was mil-spec, and no one is talking about that part of the past. A lot of it is still considered secret. Those that patent ideas are not always the ones that invented it.

Call me old fashioned, but I'd rather see the "build it and the world will beat a path to your door". Not build it and hide it and and wait for everyone else to step into your trap and beat the hell out of them with a lawsuit on the cheap.

edit: And I don't think tech lawsuits would be so prevalent, if corporate profits were viable from the sale of products. Which leads me to always think that a company that does so is on shaky ground with their products.

Edited by ReconRat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good God who would want to own some piece of Apple crap when you could have an AWESOME HTC phone that is relaible(as a Yugo), has great features (not so much), and a super smooth OS (and by super smooth I mean buggy as shit) with awesome apps (all 5 of them). Geez, I mean c'mon who the f*ck would pay that crazy price for Apple products???

~Sent from my iPad

translated:

android is too complicated. i need something very simple.

macvspcbikepj2.jpg

Edited by John
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...