Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple and Google's Motorola Unit Seeking Arbitration to Resolve Patent Dispute
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
...and no smartphone existed before mid-2007.
I forgot that one. There were no smartphones before the iPhone, nor tablets before the iPad. And even though Android is an OS, it copied the design of the iPhone hardware.
this is the definition of troll: Send (an e-mail message or posting on the Internet) intended to provoke a response from the reader by containing errors
it doesnt take a genius to see this who are 'trolls'. even in this page there are some. but i do not want to call anyone as it is derogatory.
i havent posted any incorrect information.
i havent posted any incorrect information.
Except all the points I had to correct you on. Your definition and mine are the same. So, stop doing what you're doing, it's not bringing up the level of conversation, it's ruining the forum.
i feel ashamed to see an asian company who steals things shamelessly and proclaim they worked day and night to 'invent' ...'every'thing in their phones, including the look and icons.
second, i want to make the those 'happy' who has no life and comes to macrumors just to post negative stuffs against apple
-
1) Why do you feel ashamed over a company you don't work for or have vested interest just because it's an Asian company. How many other companies do you feel "ashamed" for?
2) I don't think any company has ever claimed that they invented everything in their phones. Not even Apple.
3) If you're posting with the intent to rile someone on a forum - that's trolling. Here's a definition for you from Wikipedia
"In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, , or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response"
So KnightWRX was spot on.
If anyone is spreading FUD and making fanboy arguments, it's you. Windows was definitely a reaction to the Mac, and copied many elements of it. As you may recall, in 1985 Apple was still on a high, the dominance of Microsoft was anything but assured. IBM still dominated the X86 market though "IBM compatible" clones had built a major following. The common complaint (quite correct) was that DOS was difficult for the average user, and that something needed to be done. "User friendly" interfaces consisted mostly of DOS shells like QEMM's DESQ (later DESQView) and Tandy's DeskMate.
The lawsuit came down to an interpretation of copyright law and Microsoft's contractual agreements with Apple.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corporation
Now that you brought it up....
Geez Samcraig, by reading that definition it sounds exactly like what you, Knightwrx and your little well known group here do.
Then again, Knightwrx self proclaimed hobby on his profile page is and I quote, "trolling Internet forums" - but was only until the mods had him remove that from his profile.
Could calling such a person a troll be reason for reprimand? Hardly, not when the person brags about it and boasts it on his profile page. Its okay, enough of us here are now wise to this garbage.
Here's much better, more detailed explaination:
A "Forum Troll" is a person who posts to bait people to answer. Forum Trolls delight in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion.
A classic troll is trying to make us believe that he's genuine with no hidden agenda. He is divisive and argumentative with a need-to-be-right attitude provoking people to insult him.
He is generally interested to make other forum members look stupid. A troll will provoke other people to insult him. Then, he will complain to moderators of being insulted and will request that his opponents get banned from further discussion.
Describes some people here to a 'T' doesn't it? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, lol. Gmafb.
Not insulting anyone. Going by the facts at hand and by definition of the topic you brought up the accusers seem to be the guilty ones. But most us here already know that anyway.
Thank you and have a nice day!
Oh please. Knight's profile was clearly sarcasm. Especially since he, myself and others are constantly called trolls which we clearly aren't. And "facts on hand" are nothing like facts but your opinion.
See - there's a very important part of the definition."delight in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. "
I don't take delight in posting clarifications over and over for people who can't read full articles, threads or research topics on their own. I don't purposely provoke people - unless you consider that presenting them with information that is contrary to theirs but based on facts as purposely trying to provoke vs - you know - trying to clear the air. I don't post to create flames.
I don't need to be right. I have apologized on several occasions when I've been wrong. I've posted several times how much I respect other people's posts whether or not I agreed with them.
I sincerely don't think my posts invite people to insult me. I think it might invite people to disagree with me. And except for one or two individuals who have consistently broken forum rules - I've never asked or anyone to be banned or put in a time out.
Have a nice day too.
ETA:I hope we can move past this discussion and onto the actual topic which is that I think it's great that Apple and Google's Motorola Unit are working towards a resolution. My opinion is that Motorola's handsets pose a considerable less threat than Samsung's. That and the fact that there's so much fuel in the fire between Apple and Samsung - that it will/would be much harder for both of those companies to go to arbitration anytime soon. But stranger things have happened.
See - there's a very important part of the definition."delight in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. "
I don't take delight in posting clarifications over and over for people who can't read full articles, threads or research topics on their own. I don't purposely provoke people - unless you consider that presenting them with information that is contrary to theirs but based on facts as purposely trying to provoke vs - you know - trying to clear the air. I don't post to create flames.
I don't need to be right. I have apologized on several occasions when I've been wrong. I've posted several times how much I respect other people's posts whether or not I agreed with them.
I sincerely don't think my posts invite people to insult me. I think it might invite people to disagree with me. And except for one or two individuals who have consistently broken forum rules - I've never asked or anyone to be banned or put in a time out.
Have a nice day too.
ETA:I hope we can move past this discussion and onto the actual topic which is that I think it's great that Apple and Google's Motorola Unit are working towards a resolution. My opinion is that Motorola's handsets pose a considerable less threat than Samsung's. That and the fact that there's so much fuel in the fire between Apple and Samsung - that it will/would be much harder for both of those companies to go to arbitration anytime soon. But stranger things have happened.
Last edited:
The mods had nothing to do with that, I don't know where you got that impression or information from. I just got tired of people bringing it up as if it was serious. Obviously, sarcasm doesn't work on the Internet.
Because if I put it on my profile page, it's because it's serious.
I am not here to post inflammatory material. Because you don't agree with my opinion and with the facts I post doesn't mean I'm a troll, it just means that you don't like the reality I post when I post facts and that we don't have the same opinions when it comes to certain subjects (like I would venture IP protection).
Now someone who openly admits to trying to piss off certain users. That's pretty much the very definition of a troll. He then is too coward to post which people he's referring to, just in case those people might have legitimate gripes. Talk about not addressing the topic.
It's sad these lawsuit topics always devolve into this off-topic discussion of "KnightWRX is a troll, nyuh uh, yeah uh". Why can't you people address my arguments ? I just happen to have a different opinion than you guys as far as IP protection goes and I have a lot of interest in IP law, been reading about cases in the tech world since the SCO/IBM lawsuit.
It is assumed as a matter of law that every smartphone uses Motorola's FRAND patents, so an injunction would force Apple to settle very quickly every case Google was interested in and at very advantageous terms for Google. Preventing Google from using a FRAND based patent to get an injunction counts as a win for Apple and Microsoft. It is only a matter of finding a fair price from here on out, at least for those set of patents.
As far as I know only one German court has granted an injunction based on a FRAND patent against Microsoft, but Google/Motorola is barred from enforcing it due to another court ruling in the US. It seems a lot of jurisdictions disagree with you on granting injunctions based on FRAND patents.
What is your basis that $1 per device is "quite unfair"? What makes you think 2% is the fair term? There are tons of FRAND patents in cellular communications. If Google/Motorola's argument wins the day and every company that has even one FRAND patent is entitled to 2%, how much money can any phone maker make? Does that sound reasonable to you?
It's important to look at the full details of the agreements rather than quote arbitrary amounts as if they mean something. You cannot simply assume that the entire value of these agreements is based on monetary compensation. Cross licensing agreements have come up on multiple occasions, and such things would allow for some control of costs on both sides.
