Apple once again sues Motorola

I wish they would all stop with this madness and use the lawyer's money to instead develop some new tech. The consumer is in the end the one who pay for their legal games :(
 
Viva said:
I wish they would all stop with this madness and use the lawyer's money to instead develop some new tech. The consumer is in the end the one who pay for their legal games :(
Click to expand...

Its not so much stopping innovation as it is blocking good ideas to become the norm. In the end we suffer because one company use something so painstakingly obviates that a child could have told you how to do it and claiming ownership to that idea blocking everyone from using it. It would be different if they allow blanket license deals like Microsoft does but no, they want to block everyone from using it.

Example: Apple new patent claims against Samsung.
U.S. Patent No. 5,946,647: a patent for data being used as a hyperlink
U.S. Patent No. 8,086,604: a unified search patent
U.S. Patent No. 8,046,721: a slide-to-unlock patent
U.S. Patent No. 8,074,172: a word completion patent
 
Elimentals said:
Example: Apple new patent claims against Samsung.
U.S. Patent No. 5,946,647: a patent for data being used as a hyperlink
U.S. Patent No. 8,086,604: a unified search patent
U.S. Patent No. 8,046,721: a slide-to-unlock patent
U.S. Patent No. 8,074,172: a word completion patent
Click to expand...

Most of that stuff comes from way before Apple used it, for example I think that Nokia was the first to use a slide-to-unlock touch screen.

Apple really are patent trolls.
 
Jola said:
Most of that stuff comes from way before Apple used it, for example I think that Nokia was the first to use a slide-to-unlock touch screen.

Apple really are patent trolls.
Click to expand...

Nope. You're wrong
"Patent troll is a pejorative term used for a person or company who buys and enforces patents against one or more alleged infringers in a manner considered by the target or observers as unduly aggressive or opportunistic, often with no intention to further develop, manufacture or market the patented invention.[1]" - Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll

Apple have products which make use of their patents
 
While I disagree with some of Apple's lawsuits, this one is spot on.
Motorolla was up to some dodgy deals based on the Qualcomm info
 
Elimentals said:
Its not so much stopping innovation as it is blocking good ideas to become the norm. In the end we suffer because one company use something so painstakingly obviates that a child could have told you how to do it and claiming ownership to that idea blocking everyone from using it. It would be different if they allow blanket license deals like Microsoft does but no, they want to block everyone from using it.

Example: Apple new patent claims against Samsung.
U.S. Patent No. 5,946,647: a patent for data being used as a hyperlink
U.S. Patent No. 8,086,604: a unified search patent
U.S. Patent No. 8,046,721: a slide-to-unlock patent
U.S. Patent No. 8,074,172: a word completion patent
Click to expand...

Do the people at the patent office ever read this stuff?
 
Elimentals said:
Its not so much stopping innovation as it is blocking good ideas to become the norm. In the end we suffer because one company use something so painstakingly obviates that a child could have told you how to do it and claiming ownership to that idea blocking everyone from using it. It would be different if they allow blanket license deals like Microsoft does but no, they want to block everyone from using it.

Example: Apple new patent claims against Samsung.
U.S. Patent No. 5,946,647: a patent for data being used as a hyperlink
U.S. Patent No. 8,086,604: a unified search patent
U.S. Patent No. 8,046,721: a slide-to-unlock patent
U.S. Patent No. 8,074,172: a word completion patent
Click to expand...

Why would it be different if they allowed it to be licenced? Either it is a valid patent, in which case they can do as they want...be the only person that uses that patent or licence it out (It's their ball, and they don't have to let the other kids play). Or the patent is not valid.

Not that either of our replies actually deal with the issue of this lawsuit :-)
 
JStrike said:
Nope. You're wrong
"Patent troll is a pejorative term used for a person or company who buys and enforces patents against one or more alleged infringers in a manner considered by the target or observers as unduly aggressive or opportunistic, often with no intention to further develop, manufacture or market the patented invention.[1]" - Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll

Apple have products which make use of their patents
Click to expand...


I'm afraid that you are wrong, in terms of your own definition - "often" does not imply always.

I will say it again : Apple are patent trolls.
 
Jola said:
I'm afraid that you are wrong, in terms of your own definition - "often" does not imply always.

I will say it again : Apple are patent trolls.
Click to expand...

I'm just quoting wikipedia. And that definition does not apply to Apple.

I think the word you are looking for is Litigious
 
news24 said:
I stand with Apple on this one. Apple is buying products from Qualcomm which uses licensed tech from Motorola.
Click to expand...

I dont, if they have an issue with Germany's ruling they should take it up with the courts in Germany. Not run to another country because they did not like what that countries ruled. If we all start using this process we should go try all cases all over the world till we find one that we like.

Thats why there is appeals processes, so you can like, erm appeal if you dont like what that court ruled?
 
Last edited:
I really would like to see what happens in Apple's boardroom. Anonymous should hack into one of their cellphones and listen to their meetings. I want to see the faces behind all this bullying.

Also, I was reading up on the court battles over Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1, and I found this on Wiki:

"The Dutch magazine Webwereld reported an investigation into evidence contrasting the two devices submitted to the German court by Apple, in which the Galaxy Tab pictured does not accurately reflect the product in terms of its shape. An example from the court document shows the Samsung device with aspect dimensions much closer to Apple's device, and the Samsung logo appears to have been digitally removed. Additionally, the Galaxy Tab is shown with the Application drawer in contrast to the iPad in its home screen, which gives the impression of a similar user interface."

Source: http://www.osnews.com/story/25065/Apple_Tampered_with_Evidence_in_German_Apple_v_Samsung_Case

If this is true, and I have a feeling it is, then this is some real shady work by Apple.
 
Anonymous?? Haha don't be fooled into thinking they're actually good programmers/hackers.
That's just what non-programmers think. Their best tools are DDOS attacks, which are amateurish.

http://xkcd.com/932/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X