Apple-Motorola Judge Questions Need for Software Patents - Page 6 - MacRumors Forums
Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:01 PM   #126
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace View Post
This "judge" should have recused himself a long time ago if he's going to put out these kinds of views.
He has a right to his opinion and he has a right to the freedom of voicing it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace View Post
If there were no software patents the only thing left on the electronic shelve would be the most alluring cheerios box regardless of the nutritional value , taste or look of the food inside.
How do you figure ? Trade secrets are usually used to protect food recipes.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:03 PM   #127
vladi
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by FakeWozniak View Post
So if I developed the game Pac-Man and spent money marketing it until it was popular, then you make a copy of the game but didn't use my source code, pray tell how I am protected? The consumer gets a cheaper version of the game from you because you didn't have the development costs that I did.

How am I protected?

Without protection, I'd just say ****** it and leave the game business, then no more innovation from me and you can keep spinning off iterations of your mediocre games and then the industry languishes and the consumers suffer.
Hmmm now I can see how Spelunker stole Super Mario's thunder.

What will sell your game/movie/phone is not how good it is but how much you market it. In other words you probably want to save two to three times more of development cost just for advertising. Your development cost has nothing to do with how good your game is going to sell. Just ask EA, they have been selling biggest POS video games for a decade now and people still buy them.
vladi is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:03 PM   #128
kas23
macrumors 603
 
kas23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace View Post
I wasn't implying patents drive innovation . I was saying innovation without some kind of protection leads to droves of products that are the same.
Agreed. But we had plenty of patents pre-iPhone and yet all phones were still the same at that time.
kas23 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:04 PM   #129
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by FakeWozniak View Post
No, no, no.

Copyright does not protect look and feel, Oletros.
Copyright does protect look, so does trademark. Apple has trademarked their iOS icons. A picture is copyright to its photographer. In the case of a video game, I can't use a fat italien plumber in a red shirt with a red cap and blue overalls, because I'd probably be guilty of trademark infringement.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:06 PM   #130
FakeWozniak
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bezetos View Post
That's not the only alternative to software patents, so don't ridicule my point of view.
Chill out, brother. He didn't ridicule your view.
FakeWozniak is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:07 PM   #131
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinIllini View Post
Good point, but what if the OS is built from the ground but has all the same functions?
Like all modern OSes are ? Really, as far as OS functions go, what does Windows, OS X, HP-UX, Solaris, etc.. have that are all so different from each other ? All are multi-user systems with process schedulers, driver architectures, etc.. etc.. etc..




Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinIllini View Post
Again, I'm more referring to something that is meant to be a blatant knockoff. It happens in every other industry.
Copyright and Trademark covers those, not patents.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinIllini View Post
Ford didn't develop .mp3 technology and neither did Honda. They bought the product from a third party vendor. No radio maker would seriously create an exclusive license. Terrible example.
You're talking OS features here. Apple didn't invent HTML rendering engines or Icon grids or even process schedulers, background wallpapers, OTA updates either. So why should these features be exclusive to Apple ?
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:08 PM   #132
w00master
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace View Post
If there were no software patents the only thing left on the electronic shelve would be the most alluring cheerios box regardless of the nutritional value , taste or look of the food inside.
Isn't it amazing that all these food producers from General Mills to Nestlé to Coke to KFC to Budweiser survive without being able to patent their recipes?

Amazing isn't it?

/sarcasm


Software patents need to go, pure and simple. If Coke has been able to survive this long as the number one brand in the world without recipe patents, I'm sure Apple, Google, MS, etc can survive without software patents.

w00master
w00master is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:09 PM   #133
jmgregory1
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chicago and Spooner (when it's not 20 below)
The issue I see with the judge making comments like this is that it may give Apple a reason to call for a new judge and a re-trial, if they can show that his biased remarks have negatively impacted them (which clearly they have).

I do understand his comments and agree to a point, but as someone with a few patents under my belt I also believe that there is a valid need for patent protection, even when it comes down to electronic ideas. Really, the thing that needs to change is the patent process.
jmgregory1 is offline   -3 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:09 PM   #134
devilstrider
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by FakeWozniak View Post
The judge/magistrate is a tool, IMO. Mobile device companies were putting physical slide switches on phones for a long time. It might be obvious after Apple's implementation, but before 2007 it was a physical switch. Apple's implementation was novel and actually was accepted by the IPO in the UK. Good thing that judge doesn't work in the IPO. Actually, would be better if he was on the dole. He sorta is now, but higher pay.
Apple was granted patent on slide to unlock, even though it existed 2 years before they invented it
devilstrider is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:10 PM   #135
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by FakeWozniak View Post
The judge/magistrate is a tool, IMO. Mobile device companies were putting physical slide switches on phones for a long time. It might be obvious after Apple's implementation, but before 2007 it was a physical switch. Apple's implementation was novel and actually was accepted by the IPO in the UK. Good thing that judge doesn't work in the IPO. Actually, would be better if he was on the dole. He sorta is now, but higher pay.
The Neonode N1m says you lie btw (that's what the Judge based his decision on in the UK, a 2005 touchscreen phone using Slide-to-Unlock, as patented by Neonode).
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:11 PM   #136
Limboistik
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by angrynstupid View Post
Posner isn't totally right. Some companies have paid millions for some software technologies and are not as trivial as he alludes. However, determining what's trivial and not is part of the problem.
Exactly.
The way I see it, fair or not, regardless of Apple's principles on protecting their IP, Apple's lawyers will push the line as far as they can get away with. And this is the problem, the state of patent laws.
Posner has valid points, but the problem is identifying worthy patents that protect a truly original idea, versus incremental bits which are much more vague in nature and hinders competition and innovation.
Limboistik is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:11 PM   #137
brdeveloper
macrumors 65816
 
brdeveloper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Brasil
Quote:
Originally Posted by TsunamiTheClown View Post
Is it just me or is this judge straying into Judicial Activism with this kind of pontificating?

I mean the question at hand was not "Are intellectual patents a good idea in this industry or not?", but more like "Is this particular patent being infringed upon?".

If we do away with Intellectual Property Patents i think we can agree that the motivation for innovation will be greatly hindered.
If you didn't have stolen source code, it's ok if you build something from the scratch. Unlike pharmaceutics where, once you have a formula, it's usually straightforward copying other's idea, in software there is a lot of work involved, so if you code an application that works like another one, it doesn't mean that it "came for free".

Or, on the other hand, if something is easy to copy on the software side, then it's a pretty cheap idea and it doesn't deserve any "intellectual property" protection. Let's face it, you can only call something "intellectual property" if it has a lot intellectual work involved.
__________________
15" rMBP Early-2013, 2.4GHz. After 3 display replacements, I'm still seeing uniformity problems.
2009 Unibody White MacBook, 250GB 840 EVO SSD, 8GB
Mid-2010 MacMini, 480GB Crucial M500 SSD, 16GB
brdeveloper is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:12 PM   #138
devilstrider
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by kas23 View Post
Agreed. But we had plenty of patents pre-iPhone and yet all phones were still the same at that time.
Bingo.
devilstrider is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:13 PM   #139
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmgregory1 View Post
The issue I see with the judge making comments like this is that it may give Apple a reason to call for a new judge and a re-trial, if they can show that his biased remarks have negatively impacted them (which clearly they have).
You can appeal only if the judge made errors on points of law, not because of his personal opinion.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:14 PM   #140
x-b-o
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by TsunamiTheClown View Post
Is it just me or is this judge straying into Judicial Activism with this kind of pontificating?

I mean the question at hand was not "Are intellectual patents a good idea in this industry or not?", but more like "Is this particular patent being infringed upon?".

If we do away with Intellectual Property Patents i think we can agree that the motivation for innovation will be greatly hindered.
Here in the UK at least, it is up to the judge and jury to decide whether a law is fair. If they believe it is not then they can find the defendant not-guilty, even if 'according to the book' the defendant has 'crossed the line'.

This I hope is true for the US too.

It's worth noting however that even in UK many judges will insist to the jury that their 'oath' means they must rule in accordance with 'the law / the book'. However this is not true.
x-b-o is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:16 PM   #141
genovelle
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by sishaw View Post
Of course that's true, but Posner is a respected and influential judge. Some good may come of this statement.
I completely disagree with this. I find it offensive that someone who has never created a single thing in his life can decide that your work does not deserve protection. If I can be thrown out of school because I had the same idea as someone else then software patents are needed. There are a number of companies who no longer exists because people stole their ideas and ran them out of business by copying them. Apple was almost one of them. They got lucky. This makes me so angry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am a creator not a thief!!!!!!
genovelle is offline   -5 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:17 PM   #142
w00master
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by angrynstupid View Post
Posner isn't totally right. Some companies have paid millions for some software technologies and are not as trivial as he alludes. However, determining what's trivial and not is part of the problem.
Many food companies have spent billions on their recipes, but guess what

You cannot patent a food recipe.

Amazingly... These food companies still do amazingly well.

Software patents need to go, pure and simple. Frankly, many of these software patents are so broad, it would be like Nestlé patenting chocolate chip cookie recipes. That's how ludicrous software patents are. They need to go.

w00master
w00master is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:17 PM   #143
angelneo
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: afk
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaldiMac View Post
By what metric? Seems pretty logical that large companies would hold more patents than small companies, and that large companies would have more resources to protect those patents through litigation.
It's not just that. Patent process takes effort and because of that, small companies usually only go through it if they feel it's worth the effort. That is not the same as to how these big companies work the patent system. To them, it's like throwing spagetti onto the wall and see if it stick. Anything remotely new, they will just submit them. I believe some big companies even use patents count as a performance gauge for employees.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FakeWozniak View Post
So if I developed the game Pac-Man and spent money marketing it until it was popular, then you make a copy of the game but didn't use my source code, pray tell how I am protected? The consumer gets a cheaper version of the game from you because you didn't have the development costs that I did.

How am I protected?

Without protection, I'd just say ****** it and leave the game business, then no more innovation from me and you can keep spinning off iterations of your mediocre games and then the industry languishes and the consumers suffer.
I don't think the game business is a good example. Game mechanics (or the codes) are pretty similar all over the place in the industry.
__________________
This is good, isn't it?
angelneo is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:18 PM   #144
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
You're talking OS features here. Apple didn't invent HTML rendering engines or Icon grids or even process schedulers, background wallpapers, OTA updates either. So why should these features be exclusive to Apple ?
This is one half on the same argument that will keep these "copying" discussions going on and on and on. All invention is built on ideas that were discovered/invented by others. The fact that Apple, for example, didn't invent the parts does not mean that it did not invent the whole. Prior art for parts is not prior art for the whole.

(The other, equally divisive, half of the argument is that people cannot discern the difference between legally copying ideas and stealing IP. )
BaldiMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:20 PM   #145
FakeWozniak
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
Copyright does protect look, so does trademark. Apple has trademarked their iOS icons. A picture is copyright to its photographer. In the case of a video game, I can't use a fat italien plumber in a red shirt with a red cap and blue overalls, because I'd probably be guilty of trademark infringement.
Bzzt! Wrong! Remember Apple suing Microsoft over the look and feel of Macintosh and losing?
FakeWozniak is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:21 PM   #146
w00master
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by genovelle View Post
I completely disagree with this. I find it offensive that someone who has never created a single thing in his life can decide that your work does not deserve protection. If I can be thrown out of school because I had the same idea as someone else then software patents are needed. There are a number of companies who no longer exists because people stole their ideas and ran them out of business by copying them. Apple was almost one of them. They got lucky. This makes me so angry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am a creator not a thief!!!!!!
Wow. You seem a bit emotional about is. Did you code iOS? Do you work for Apple? Are you a stockholder of Apple?

I'm betting no.

Why so emotional about this?

Also, since you're so "hard up" in support for apple and their software patents, answer this one question:

Why can't Coke patent their recipe for Classic Coca-cola?

Isn't it amazing they survive and are the number one brand in the world? Amazing! All without recipe patents.

Software patents are unnecessary and need to go away.

Period.

w00master
w00master is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:24 PM   #147
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Quote:
Originally Posted by FakeWozniak View Post
Bzzt! Wrong! Remember Apple suing Microsoft over the look and feel of Macintosh and losing?
Apple never sued microsoft over the look and feel of the macintosh. Apple sued microsoft over the use of the GUI of windows and Microsoft calling it windows.
__________________
Throw us one Russell---John Fox Super Bowl 48
Peace is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:26 PM   #148
TsunamiTheClown
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: On the verge
Quote:
Originally Posted by brdeveloper View Post
If you didn't have stolen source code, it's ok if you build something from the scratch. Unlike pharmaceutics where, once you have a formula, it's usually straightforward copying other's idea, in software there is a lot of work involved, so if you code an application that works like another one, it doesn't mean that it "came for free".

Or, on the other hand, if something is easy to copy on the software side, then it's a pretty cheap idea and it doesn't deserve any "intellectual property" protection. Let's face it, you can only call something "intellectual property" if it has a lot intellectual work involved.
I was initially commenting on the _relevance_ of the judge's opinion on the matter at hand, not the particulars of patent law. He is a Judge, and while he is duly entitled to his opinion just like everyone else, as far as i know, patents are still legally valid.

So if he is going to express his concern that they are abused (which we have illustrated in the discussion here for sure) then he needs to be careful not to just ignore them and let legal infringements pass. There is a great way to change law, but afaik this was not the case that would determine the validity of software patents.

That case may be around the corner tho, unless the patent laws are updated.

What happened to the days of patenting something that was truly novel. The truly novel is often the most sensitive to cheap rip-offs. I don't think much of what is patented that we are discussing in the way of software fits the intent of patent law.
__________________
Bronie
TsunamiTheClown is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:26 PM   #149
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by FakeWozniak View Post
Bzzt! Wrong! Remember Apple suing Microsoft over the look and feel of Macintosh and losing?
Remember apple suing Samsung over the look of their icons based on trademarks ?

Try to use Mario or Luigi in a video game you wrote with 0 Nintendo code and comeback to tell me how it went.

How the hell am I wrong ? video games don't use patents for protection and are doing just fine. You're the one who brought up the analogy. Microsoft didn't not take any trademarked/copyrighted elements from Apple and you can't exactly patent "Look and feel", only specific designs.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2012, 12:28 PM   #150
brdeveloper
macrumors 65816
 
brdeveloper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Brasil
Quote:
Originally Posted by angelneo View Post
Patent process takes effort and because of that, small companies usually only go through it if they feel it's worth the effort. That is not the same as to how these big companies work the patent system. To them, it's like throwing spagetti onto the wall and see if it stick. Anything remotely new, they will just submit them. I believe some big companies even use patents count as a performance gauge for employees.
THIS is a threat to innovation. Without startups, we are stuck in a monopoly.
__________________
15" rMBP Early-2013, 2.4GHz. After 3 display replacements, I'm still seeing uniformity problems.
2009 Unibody White MacBook, 250GB 840 EVO SSD, 8GB
Mid-2010 MacMini, 480GB Crucial M500 SSD, 16GB
brdeveloper is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple and Motorola Agree to Drop 14 Patents From Impending Trial MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 35 Aug 6, 2013 02:26 PM
Judge Koh Rules That Samsung Did Not Willfully Infringe Apple Patents MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 67 Jan 31, 2013 12:12 AM
Judge Will "Consider" Questions on Jury Foreman in Samsung v. Apple Trial MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 154 Nov 27, 2012 06:36 PM
Google goes after Apple via Motorola patents Dolorian Alternatives to iOS and iOS Devices 32 Sep 20, 2012 07:14 AM
Judge dismisses jury trial for Apple and Motorola case kdarling Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 1 Jun 8, 2012 09:41 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:54 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC