In all likelihood he is getting a unlimited-use license from IBM. But he cannot sell the patent to somebody else, nor can he obtain royalties.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Hit With $625 Million Judgment in Patent Suit Over Cover Flow, Spotlight, Time Machine
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In all likelihood he is getting a unlimited-use license from IBM. But he cannot sell the patent to somebody else, nor can he obtain royalties.
Didn't Microsoft also rip off Cover Flow for Xbox Live?
eh, microsoft is all about infringing on other people's work. It's how the company does things. They've gotten good at making things different enough so that any patent suit would fail. So, it's not even worth worrying about.
But i am confused, I have been told that Apple never copies or steals anything from other companies. Now they are being sued(knowingly or unknowingly) for taking something that wasnt theres to begin with??
/sarcasm
Dude, they didn't steal anything. They most likely had no idea of this patent's existence due to the fact that 1. It was a rather old patent, and 2. The patent was never used to make any tech that apple could see and be worried about. The word "invisible" comes to mind. That's how it works. People patent something awesome that comes to their head, and wait for someone, someday, to infringe on that patent. It's nonsense. Apple didn't copy anything.
The only way they could have copied this patent is by reading the patent itself, since no product was ever released, which would mean that apple would have to have been stupid enough to just go ahead and make the product even after just reading the patent, which they wouldn't do. No company would.
Wrong. Lots of companies do. Typically what happens is the inventors send out letters to companies asking if they would be interested in licensing the patent. The companies refuse, either because they don't think they infringe, or they don't think the patent will stand up to a validity attack.
I agree, they should sell droids with IOS and PC's pre-installed with OSX.
I can't figure out for the life of me, why Apple doesn't just give it to them for free.
How exactly is a carburetor fitting together math? You could extend the same argument to say that music is just really a mathematical representation of sine waves. Boiled down to its very essence, the entire universe could be argued to essentially just be the representation of math in action.
Software patents are one thing, debatable as to whether they are useful or not.
However these overly broad BS patents are simply a total failure of the Patent Office to have the slightest clue how to do their job correctly. All patents need to be revisited by true experts and anything which is overly broad or obvious needs to be simply invalidated.
However these overly broad BS patents are simply a total failure of the Patent Office to have the slightest clue how to do their job correctly. All patents need to be revisited by true experts and anything which is overly broad or obvious needs to be simply invalidated.
Green™;11173287 said:I hope they go Bankrupt, the thieves.
While I agree that apple is full of thieves, I don't want them to go bankrupt, I love my iPod.
It reminds me of Rambus, who have been suing every tom dick and harry ever since RDRAM failed miserably. In fact they survive only because of the income generated from patent lawsuits. I think 5 years is more realistic to get a patent to retail after which time it becomes effectively open source.
He is a smart slighly off center professor at Yale. He wrote a book among other things said that the OS of today all sucked. That they only mimic the real world with files and folders. That things on a computer aren't real and we should take advantage of that fact.
My jaw dropped when Apple unveiled Time Machine. It was EXACTLY the concept that he was pitching for 15 years. He had some programming skills but they were too dated and too limited for him to pull this off by himself.
So like a Movie studio who rips off a regular guy with a great movie idea. That's what Apple did. It was so much like his drawings that it seemed they were trying to pay homage to him. Never dreaming that he might want some money.
As a post script: A long time ago some guy called the Unibomber sent him a package that blew some fingers off him and almost had him bleed to death in his own home. He dragged himself to the street where someone found him and took him to the hospital.
The Unibomber ironically took him as someone 'establishment' though he clearly is quite the opposite.
It is impossible that they didn't know about his work. He is quite well know in the field.
Junk Lawsuits
I think when a company becomes large like Apple people try to find a reason to sue. If Apple had not done so good over the last year they lawsuit wouldn't be happening.
But some patent troll start mulling around old obsolete patents to find one that just may stick and well they found it.
I agree that once technology moves forward some patents should become obsolete.
I though Apple invented spot light, cover flow and Time Machine? What's the loop hole some little line of code that someone else claims they made?
You know minds all think a like. I write down software ideas all the time cuz I am learning to make iPhone apps. You wouldn't believe home many times someone else has made the same app I thought of. Writing apps/software is like music. There are only so many notes out there and at some point someone is going to copy someone else without knowing it.
I think when a company becomes large like Apple people try to find a reason to sue. If Apple had not done so good over the last year they lawsuit wouldn't be happening.
But some patent troll start mulling around old obsolete patents to find one that just may stick and well they found it.
I agree that once technology moves forward some patents should become obsolete.
I though Apple invented spot light, cover flow and Time Machine? What's the loop hole some little line of code that someone else claims they made?
You know minds all think a like. I write down software ideas all the time cuz I am learning to make iPhone apps. You wouldn't believe home many times someone else has made the same app I thought of. Writing apps/software is like music. There are only so many notes out there and at some point someone is going to copy someone else without knowing it.
First, that's exactly my point. Treating software specially is An artificial distinction because all engineering is math.
And if you don't believe the operation and manufacture of a carburetor involves mAth, you're clearly not an engineer.
Movies and Music are a Copyright
Movies and Music are a Copyright not a patent.
Patents should be reserved for real inventions and algorithms; not ideas.
I have an idea for a new oblong book, should that be patentable? No because it's an idea. If you can't put it into practice you cannot patent it.
Software should not be patentable. The algorithms can be patented. By the current reasoning there could only be one word processing program because someone invented/write the software first.
Just plain stupid.
Movies and Music are a Copyright not a patent.
Patents should be reserved for real inventions and algorithms; not ideas.
I have an idea for a new oblong book, should that be patentable? No because it's an idea. If you can't put it into practice you cannot patent it.
Software should not be patentable. The algorithms can be patented. By the current reasoning there could only be one word processing program because someone invented/write the software first.
Just plain stupid.
Time Machine
Sorry but allApple did was put a pretty face on a technology called a "snapshot". NetApp does it along with most decent storage boxes. They put a pretty face on something that is decades old. Look up NetWorker by Legato, now EMC owns it. Time Machine is nothing new or innovative. It's simply a snapshot with a gui.
You can't patent an idea!
Sorry but allApple did was put a pretty face on a technology called a "snapshot". NetApp does it along with most decent storage boxes. They put a pretty face on something that is decades old. Look up NetWorker by Legato, now EMC owns it. Time Machine is nothing new or innovative. It's simply a snapshot with a gui.
You can't patent an idea!
Algorithms cannot be patented as they are merely abstract ideas. An oblong book could be patented, as it is a "manufacture."
It's Machine Design, Dynamics, Material Science, Manufacturing Engineering and Fluid Dynamics all in one.
How the design of a carburetor interfaces are positions, the types of materials used for reduced wall friction, to Hook's law applied to opening and closing the floats and more offers a wide variety of patentable options, and should because the design must accomodate itself with the rest of the engine design.
I should have patented stupidity. I'd be the richest person on the planet by now
Do you really want to send the rest of your life writing detailed methods of stupidity?
You have to come up with new ones, the Darwin awards would be prior art.
You forgot the details from 4 hours ago already?
Sorry, I can't always read entire threads.
I guess if Apple eventually loses it's appeals, Apple will be suing Steel Skies. I have a feeling Apple could handle the finacial hit, Steel Skies not so much.