Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:29 AM   #51
NakedPaulToast
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Isn't this the time where somebody suggests Apple should just buy them?
NakedPaulToast is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:29 AM   #52
Plutonius
macrumors 601
 
Plutonius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Hampshire
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRainKing View Post
Will a day ever pass without someone being sued?
Give me your address and I'll have a lawyer contact you with the answer .
Plutonius is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:35 AM   #53
Bubba Satori
macrumors 68040
 
Bubba Satori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B'ham
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCP-511 View Post
Just forward that check from samesung to VirnetX.
It should be a 7 inch iCheck. Nobody has ever done 7 inch checks before.
And sign the iCheck with a stylus. Magic innovation.
Bubba Satori is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:35 AM   #54
kdarling
macrumors G5
 
kdarling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Device engineer 30+ yrs, touchscreens 23+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowy_River View Post
Software patents, like all patents, ARE good. If you don't provide some protection for time and money invested in research and development needed in most forms of the invention process (including software development), then there is less incentive to innovate. In some areas, that incentive might arguably drop to near zero.
I think that's a demonstrably false presumption. Software patents were rare up until the 1990s, but that didn't stop anyone from innovating anyway. The actual code (which is more like a REAL invention) was protected by copyright, and the look by trademark, design patent and trade dress.

Also, not using software patents certainly didn't stop a half million apps from being created for the Apple App Store.

Quote:
Software, an industry that move at amazing speed when compared to other more traditional industries, should arguably be given a protection time that is notably shorter than that provided to patents in other industries.
Indeed, some have proposed that if we're going to get stuck with software patents, at least drop them down to lasting only two years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordVic View Post
Analysts estimated that last year alone, over 20 Billion dollars was spent in Patent related purchases and lawsuits.
Imagine if those companies put as much effort into curing cancer or some other diseases.
kdarling is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:36 AM   #55
Bubba Satori
macrumors 68040
 
Bubba Satori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B'ham
Quote:
Originally Posted by NakedPaulToast View Post
Isn't this the time where somebody suggests Apple should just buy them?
That comes after the "Steve wouldn't let this happen" post.
Bubba Satori is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:39 AM   #56
mjtomlin
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
Oh, so when it's Apple that's guilty, the patent is broken...

Software patents are just an abheration.
The patent system is broke when you can prove you've developed the technology on your own and can still be sued when someone else comes along and said they did it first. That's just complete crap.

ALL a patent should do is make sure someone can't take your product and duplicate it. That's not what happened here. This is the Eastern District of Texas here... this isn't the first time they've refused to let companies defend themselves. It is an award happy court.
mjtomlin is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:41 AM   #57
Ryan John
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by NakedPaulToast View Post
Isn't this the time where somebody suggests Apple should just buy them?
Head over to wikipedia and read up a bit about Samsung as a company. Here's a link for you Samsung Wikipedia, then come back here and tell us why your statement is a little ridiculous.
Ryan John is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:45 AM   #58
kingtj
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Poolesville, MD
Send a message via ICQ to kingtj
It's screwed up all around....

I was going to post the same thing; that the patent system is clearly broken. But it's not to rush to Apple's defense. The fact they can waste millions at a time bickering back and forth with the likes of Samsung is just as ridiculous as this patent suit.

It's becoming a big legal battlefield, where any decent sized company has to start fighting, or else they're just a target for patent attack by someone else out there. By picking on as many other businesses as possible, you can keep winning enough settlements to cover your losses when other guys come after you for things.

I watched a video last night by a former world bank manager (giving a speech at a university). One of his main points was how the USA gave up our manufacturing base because we were sure we "didn't need to do manual labor like that anymore in a modern society". We relied on becoming a service industry. But now we've outsourced much of that to other people. So then we were a technology leader, but we've watched the Asian continent and India take that away from us in recent years too. So the question is, what does America have left to make money with?

Right now, it looks like nobody really has the answer so a lot of poaching is going on by way of the legal system and relatively baseless lawsuits.

Probably another sign of our demise ...


Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
Oh, so when it's Apple that's guilty, the patent is broken...

Software patents are just an abheration.
kingtj is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:48 AM   #59
Mikey7c8
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowy_River
Software patents, like all patents, ARE good. If you don't provide some protection for time and money invested in research and development needed in most forms of the invention process (including software development), then there is less incentive to innovate. In some areas, that incentive might arguably drop to near zero.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdarling View Post
I think that's a demonstrably false presumption. Software patents were rare up until the 1990s, but that didn't stop anyone from innovating anyway. The actual code (which is more like a REAL invention) was protected by copyright, and the look by trademark, design patent and trade dress.
The thing that riles me about this one was that the developers in question built something without anyone's IP, but because of the way in which they 'invented' their thing happened to be the same way as someone elses patented way they're getting screwed.

Developers the world over build things using the same tools and processes as everyone else, and we still innovate by creating products (like FaceTime in this case) that stand on their own.
Mikey7c8 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:51 AM   #60
IGregory
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
I do believe the patent system is broken but after reading Macrumors article there isn't enough information for me to form a judgement as to whether the patent system, even when fixed, would have negated this award. So, for those of you attributing this award to a faulty patent system, maybe you should investigate further.
__________________
The happy owner of a Mid-2012 Macbook Pro w/Retina Display, iPad Air and iPhone 5s .
IGregory is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:52 AM   #61
JAT
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mpls, MN
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan John View Post
Head over to wikipedia and read up a bit about Samsung as a company. Here's a link for you Samsung Wikipedia, then come back here and tell us why your statement is a little ridiculous.
I think you are in the wrong thread. Check the headline, again.


Why is nobody talking about the last paragraph? Where a claim is made that VirnetX still wants Apple to stop using this code despite winning a monetary settlement? A little odd, considering the buried/intrinsic nature of this software. It's not like...Photoshop or Office. They should want people to use it, once paid.
__________________
-- Spiky
JAT is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:56 AM   #62
Ironduke
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: England
Apple so deserve this

The shroud of the darkside has fallen

Begun the patent wars have!
__________________
iMac 21.5" 4GB Ram, ATI 4670, 500GB HD - 13" Unibody Macbook Collectors Edition 2.4GHz, 4GB Ram, 320GB HD - iPhone 3G
Ironduke is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:58 AM   #63
VulchR
macrumors 68000
 
VulchR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scotland
Perhaps it's not the system that is an issue, but the personnel who award patents. Also, any government contract should require any resulting non-classified IP to become public domain. If the article is correct, then it sounds like US citizens have paid for this patent already.
__________________
My first was a Mac+. Now I own an iPhone with 3.5x the pixels, a colour display, WiFi, 512x the RAM, >1500x the data storage, and 100x the speed. And it fits in the palm of my hand.
VulchR is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 11:59 AM   #64
ElRojito
macrumors member
 
Join Date: May 2012
How is it infringement if the Engineers at Apple didn't even know about this po-dunk company (just like the rest of us have never heard of them) and figured this technology out on their own? Seems to me like they accidentally stumbled upno the same, easy answer that this other company did. Doesn't sound like infringement to me. I am ok with awarding money, but halting FaceTime is over the top.
ElRojito is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 12:08 PM   #65
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElRojito View Post
How is it infringement if the Engineers at Apple didn't even know about this po-dunk company (just like the rest of us have never heard of them) and figured this technology out on their own? Seems to me like they accidentally stumbled upno the same, easy answer that this other company did. Doesn't sound like infringement to me. I am ok with awarding money, but halting FaceTime is over the top.
That's precisely the reason everyone says Patents are broken when relating to software, whether it's Apple's software patents or anyone else's software patents.

Because it is infringement even if you didn't know of the other's patents. Patent infringement is not about copying, it's not about theft, it's simply about coming up with the same solution as what the other guy patented.
__________________
"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   5 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 12:12 PM   #66
Ryan John
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAT View Post
I think you are in the wrong thread. Check the headline, again.


Why is nobody talking about the last paragraph? Where a claim is made that VirnetX still wants Apple to stop using this code despite winning a monetary settlement? A little odd, considering the buried/intrinsic nature of this software. It's not like...Photoshop or Office. They should want people to use it, once paid.
Indeed I am Jat, thanks for pointing that out. So many lawsuits my tiny mind got all confused
Ryan John is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 12:15 PM   #67
aristotle
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Canada
It is not just the patent system that is the problem but the entire legal system in the US that allows patent trolls to shop for jurisdictions. The East Texas district is known to be corrupt and to side with patent troll virtually 100% of the time. They should be forced to try their patent in the jurisdiction of the accused which would be California. If a company is considered an "entity" then it should have the right to be judged by its peers.
__________________
15" Retina MBP, 2.7 Ghz Quad Core i7, 16 GB RAM, 768 GB SSD (10.9.2)
24" iMac, 2.8 GHz, 4GB RAM, 320 GB HD; 128 GB iPad Air LTE (iOS 7.0.4); 64 GB iPhone 5S (iOS 7.1.1)
aristotle is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 12:19 PM   #68
Belly-laughs
macrumors 6502a
 
Belly-laughs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: location location
Send a message via AIM to Belly-laughs
pretty sure i used video conferencing software over isdn mid 90s.

normally a patent is given if it's "innovative" and the solution is not obvious to a skilled person with knowledge of other related patents or similar known techniques. i haven't read the patent in detail but i'm sure apple is willing to have it's validity further investigated.
Belly-laughs is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 12:34 PM   #69
magbarn
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Damn AAPL is getting destroyed. WTF did I buy it at $614 again? A bargain?! lol.
__________________
13" 2012 rMBP i5/8/512
15" 2012 rMBP 2.6/8/512
magbarn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 12:38 PM   #70
RawBert
macrumors 68000
 
RawBert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Maybe now they can afford a better logo.
__________________
THE ART OF RAW
Steve Lives On
RawBert is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 12:41 PM   #71
HurtinMinorKey
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belly-laughs View Post
pretty sure i used video conferencing software over isdn mid 90s.

normally a patent is given if it's "innovative" and the solution is not obvious to a skilled person with knowledge of other related patents or similar known techniques. i haven't read the patent in detail but i'm sure apple is willing to have it's validity further investigated.

You're referring to what is known as "prior art". An inventor does not need to show that a product is innovative in order to get a patent; however, if an innovation is trivial or existed in prior technology, it can be invalidated by the courts during litigation.
HurtinMinorKey is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 12:45 PM   #72
you people smh
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by madmin View Post
So if I got that straight, anyone using dns to connect a vpn session has to pay these people who incidentally already got paid by the govt to develop their system in the first place ? Dunno bout Facetime but it sure is Facepalm !
exactly.

next thing you know anybody who puts rounded corners on something or wants to make a device in a rectangle shape will be sued....
you people smh is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 01:00 PM   #73
robbyx
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
That's precisely the reason everyone says Patents are broken when relating to software, whether it's Apple's software patents or anyone else's software patents.

Because it is infringement even if you didn't know of the other's patents. Patent infringement is not about copying, it's not about theft, it's simply about coming up with the same solution as what the other guy patented.
And the really stupid thing about software patents is that there are only so many ways to do things. It's absurd to think that every developer is going to come up with a different way of making the same type of function/feature work. Software patents are the enemy of innovation. The only people benefiting from them are patent trolls, not real live developers. These people don't create anything, don't produce anything, and are basically parasites living off the hard work of successful businesses.

I don't see developers suing other developers. I see holding companies with NOTHING to offer gouging successful businesses. I'm all for protecting the look and feel of a product, what makes the product unique and distinct. But it's a travesty that we allow patents like this one to even exist, much less be enforced.
robbyx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 01:21 PM   #74
Thunderhawks
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by FieldingMellish View Post
I'm almost glad about it. Facetime users clogged the wifi down to a crawl at a local Starbucks.
Imagine that, nothing but stress wherever we go.

Looks like the "it's all about ME" people are still everywhere.
__________________
It's ready, when it's ready !
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin
Thunderhawks is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2012, 01:28 PM   #75
hondo77
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Half

Am I the only one that noticed that Apple only has to pay about half of what VirnetX was originally asking for? Does that count as a victory for Apple?
hondo77 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 Samsung File List of Patent Claims and Accused Products Ahead of Second U.S. Patent Lawsuit MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 41 Feb 6, 2014 04:58 AM
Judge Invalidates Two Samsung Patent Claims Ahead of Second Patent Lawsuit with Apple MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 60 Jan 23, 2014 01:31 PM
Apple Ordered to Pay $3.3 Million in Japanese Lawsuit Over iPod Click Wheel Patent MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 34 Oct 26, 2013 09:16 AM
Apple to Alter VPN On Demand Behavior in iOS 6.1 and Later Due to VirnetX Lawsuit MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 108 Apr 8, 2013 06:19 PM
VirnetX Files Follow-Up Patent Lawsuit Targeting Apple's Latest Products MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 36 Nov 14, 2012 02:21 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:18 AM.

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

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