I still dont buy the 'less consumer choice' argument. If someone is copying then surely that is less choice than if two companies innovate themselves?!
And Apple ripped off many a tech company in its day and vice versa and we've never seen such nonsense in the courts. Or at least it was kept quite.
Apple/Samsung, stop bothering each other and start innovating! I don't want to see a slightly updated 5S or S4.
I still dont buy the 'less consumer choice' argument. If someone is copying then surely that is less choice than if two companies innovate themselves?!
Not sure if this really means anything. Maybe they are playing nice with each other
Funny, everywhere I've read is spinning this story against Samsung for making such a ridiculous statement - 'in the interest of protecting consumer choice'.
.
Funny, Macrumors spins this story against Samsung, other tech sites spin this story against Apple.
Who to trust?
I just want the companies to get back to producing kick *** phones and devices.
Apple/Samsung, stop bothering each other and start innovating! I don't want to see a slightly updated 5S or S4.
I wish people would quit with this silly innovation canard. Being involved in lawsuits doesn't prevent companies from innovating. I'm sure Apple and Samsung can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Like Apple, Kodak decided to become a patent infringment raider for profit - look what that got them.
The real solution to this patent mess is to completely eliminate all patenting.
Haha, it's because the owners of this site *really* like Apple, and spin for Apple makes Apple fans happier. All part of the Pavlovian Conditioning.Wow how is this for spin
Gizmodo says apple denied perma ban and here on macrumours I read this
A show of hands, please... Who would prefer that all future stories about Apple/Samsung legal wranglings be relegated to Page 2?
The real solution to this patent mess is to completely eliminate all patenting.
A second best solution would be a return to the original idea that patents are for very limited times and then move into the public domain. Adjusting for market lifespan changes that should be about two years.
A third best, and more likely scenario, is to put everything under FRAND like rules. All patents must be licensed to anyone in a fair manner after a period of two years from the original patent filing.
.
Wow how is this for spin
Gizmodo says apple denied perma ban and here on macrumours I read this
Nice spin Sammy. Little face-saving-spin on an untenable situation and nothing more IMO.
They both happened but MacRumors only reported one. Bad journalism.
Haha, it's because the owners of this site *really* like Apple, and spin for Apple makes Apple fans happier. All part of the Pavlovian Conditioning.
What I find funny is that MR posts this but does not post THIS
Innovation comes to a halt as no one wants to waste time on something that everyone les can freely use
Again innovation stops. Two years is not long enough to recover R&D costs for many things.