I'm not going to give this argument any time after this,
as clearly you are here to troll. But for the purposes of those interested in this topic I'll bite.
Apple's patent claims against Samsung, Motorola, et al are their own inventions and are legally granted patents.
Apple is completely within their rights, legally and morally, to use the legal system to redress their complaints of illegal use patents. Any "dirtiness" you perceive, is because of Apple's refusal to license, and instead force their competition to find alternatives. If you have issue with anything more than this your problem is with the broken patent system that says everything Apple is doing is fine.
You anti-Apple folks should really have issue with U.S Patent law, and specifically the USPTO itself. Understandably, following Apple's legal aggression there is a lot of scrutiny within the USPTO to review Apple's existing patents. Even as someone who likes Apple, I think this is a good thing, as I don't think most patents are given due diligence to investigate "prior art" or "obviousness". We can expect more than a few of Apple's patents will be declared invalid and this is probably a good thing.
Now why is Google's side being more "dirty"? Well, I'm guessing your world view won't accept facts in this area because it's complex and goes against your belief that Apple is somehow the villain (Hint: the villain is the broken pay-to-play patent system):
Apple's patents are all mushy "look and feel" and "experiential", both of which can easily be designed around by competitors even if the patents themselves are questionable (again the problem is with the patent system that granted the damn patents in the first place).
FRAND patents aren't like "normal" patents that Apple is using. Their enforcement is strictly controlled because they are essential to standards-based technology. Samsung, Motorola, etc offered their patents to the entire industry in good faith in order to make them standards-essential patents. In return for accepting them as standards, the competition asked that FRAND patents be offered in a "fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory" fashion. Everyone agreed and the industry accepted their technology, standardized it, and licensed it in good faith.
This is how all of our crap works together and is fundamental and essential part of innovation.
What you have now, is a renegade company like Samsung, desperate for anything against Apple,
trying and failing to use their FRAND patents against Apple in a discriminatory way. So far they are being slammed down every time, and even being investigated by the U.S and EU, because
to allow Samsung to proceed with FRAND cases against Apple, threatens the whole industry and has a chilling effect on innovation on a fundamental level that Apple's touchy-feelie patents (questionable though they are) cannot touch.
Apple's patents can always be declared invalid, and if not, competition can design around them. On the other hand, if Samsung succeeds in utilizing their FRAND patents against Apple it threatens the legal basis for companies to share their intellectual property in a manner fundamental to the advancement of technology.
I'm an abashed obsessive reader of
http://www.fosspatents.com which is utterly fantastic if you find the broken patent system as interesting as I do.
----------
Tell me, is "mega broad" a legal term since you are apparently such an expert on Apple's patent portfolio?
Apple has plenty of famously ridiculous patents, but even more that are
incredibly specific.
