Which doesn't make it any more valid. Did Google bother to patent their "Notification center" idea? If not, then anybody bringing that subject up as an argument is full of baloney, to put it very nicely.
Whether you, I, or anyone else is of the opinion that one idea is a rip-off of an earlier idea has nothing to do with whether the original idea was patented or not. Patent validity only matters when a dispute is ruled on in court, until then the patent is irrelevant. So until Apple make a legal claim that Google has infringed on any of their patents, or vice versa, and get a court ruling using 'patent or no patent' as an argument is irrelevant because until then it's only subjective opinion.
Did the first car maker have patents on those ideas the second maker stole? Then the first maker had the right to defend their R & D.
Look at the Windows phone. I wouldn't want one, but at least they did it the right way, licensing the parts of Apple they wanted to use, and coming up with their own ideas.
I like certain products of Google. I just dislike theft of ideas. Apple shouldn't have to do R & D for Android.
So, you're trying to make this "theft" claim into a purely legal argument about patent validity rather than your own personal perception of what was, in your opinion, stolen.
Well, then why are "theft" even being discussed when Apple hasn't even taken legal action against Google and made the claim that they are infringing on any of Apple's patents?
