I think the solution is to throw out patent law and somehow have the government fund R&D.
I'm not sure how exactly you do that, but good R&D is good for all of mankind, so it seems like something the government should fund.
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 Loses Appeal in Samsung Case: Two Patents Ruled Invalid, $120 Million Verdict Overturned
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think the solution is to throw out patent law and somehow have the government fund R&D.
I'm not sure how exactly you do that, but good R&D is good for all of mankind, so it seems like something the government should fund.
Samsung sold these phones in boxes that matched the iPhone, with the app drawer screen open to resemble an iphone, we all saw their emails blatantly mandating that they copy the iphone, they made chargers that mimicked the iphone's...and nothing happened for doing that. AND, they have had a habit of doing this going back almost 40 years in many markets, and winning in the end. So, I don't care what any judge had to say - they got away with what is flat out ripping off a competitor. Common sense did not prevail, and you're just perpetuating that with this nonsense.
[doublepost=1456529560][/doublepost]
Insightful
if you mean 100% accurate by anyone with the ability to read even the slightest bit of the evidence...sure!
There are no words.
Uh Sam. I hate to be the one to point this out, but you are 100% wrong. I'm still not sure how you missed it since it right in front of your face.
There are 119 words. They're right there. They don't make a damn bit of sense in that arrangement, but they are there. All 119 of them standing around wondering why they're gathered together not making a valid point. All the vowels want to go sing karaoke but the consonants insist on drinking scotch and smoking cigars; like the hipsters they are. The one thing they all agree on is their congregation is a waste of time.
First off, nobody buys a phone based on a box (just look at all the flat screen TVs that come in the same brown or white boxes), and they certainly don't buy based on what the power adapter looks like... especially ones that don't even look that similar in person. Phones aren't sold in boxes on shelves anyway. The boxes are kept locked up behind a counter somewhere and you have to ask for them by name and model.
Secondly, you're confusing utility patents with design patents. While the utility patents (e.g. unlock, hot links, etc) were not that effective a weapon in the end, Samsung _did_ pay a half billion dollars for infringing design patents, which is the kind of IP you're talking about. So your "nothing happened" is patently false (pun intended).
Of course, the latter ultimately depends on whether or not the Supreme Court gets filled again so they can listen to Samsung's appeal on the matter.
The idea that copying is morally bad is a cultural thing, not a global rule. I suspect it's partly based on how capitalistic a culture is. In many lands, it's considered normal for everyone to share ideas, and compete on price and workmanship instead.
Moreover, post war Korea is still in the mode of admiring American innovation, which is a good thing. Many of us remember how post war Japan was once known for making cheap product copies. Yet decades later, American companies scrambled to copy Japanese methods and car designs.
Heck, when Apple was trying to figure out what the iPhone should look like, they had one of their Japanese designers mock up how he thought a Sony smartphone design would look, and it became the new iPhone basis, according to trial testimony.
Last edited:
What if the FBI did have the tools to do it themselves yet intentionally messed them up just because?
What if the FBI have the NSA that can also do it but decided not to and go to court instead, taking more time?
What if the kidnapper is already dead?
What if that instead of focusing on your little sister's kidnapper's phone, the FBI/DA actually also want to take the time and force 175 other unrelated phones?
What if the person having the warrant, the FBI, is also known to set up honey pots and false flags so they can keep their budget?
In the current situation, those ifs are not ifs anymore.
But you are correct. Majority of Americans sided with the FBI. Donald Trump for president?
Not a fan of that idea. I can certainly think of many examples of excellent innovation that came from government funded research or even direct research by government agencies but I can already see science being overly politicized and I don't want more of that. I don't want the speed of innovation to suffer from bureaucracy. Economic incentive driving R&D *as well as* various grants and scientists in the employ of government agencies is just fine with me. I can't get on board with that plan to completely ditch patents.
But you are correct. Majority of Americans sided with the FBI. Donald Trump for president?
I certainly hope not.
And I've said that I wouldn't trust the FBI with tools they could use on their own.
Likewise, corporations are not above the law.
So what about your kidnapped sister? Are you going to sacrifice your sister?
At the same token, government officials should not be above the law as well, let alone the constitutions.
The San Bernardino case is much different than the scenario your suggesting. It was after the fact and both perpetrators are dead. Allowing Apple to create a hackable iOS could be dangerous if leaked and could put families at risk by robbers, pedofiles and stalkers.
"Right away" being three to four weeks of development time. Setting public policy off of singular emotional instances is not a good idea.
Totally agree. That's why we have courts and Congressional oversight.
Apple is not just balking at the current case, but in general.
Apple has a hackable OS now, and it has been so since the beginning.
Which is why there needs to be a way that's available when needed and approved by a court.
Anyway, this has veered into PRSI territory. Mods fell free to rip it over.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that for every edge case in which hypothetically easy access to the device would save a life there will be multiple scenarios in which access to a device will result in a life irrevocably ruined. As you've pointed out, there is a lot of existence outside of the USA with their own cultures, governments, and legal systems. Those lawful court orders can originate from authoritarian governments unlocking phones of dissidents and using those data to track down and persecute their opposition. That hypothetical is at LEAST as likely as a kidnapping in which the only method of rescuing the victim is stored in a phone within the possession of the FBI.
As I've said, emotional anecdotes and edge cases make for bad policy.
I was wondering if the patent bureau is liable when a patent is invalided. After all, companies and people pay to get and keep patents. But why if the service is worth nothing or is bogus?
Last edited:
Please cite your evidence showing that Samsung lawyers bribed the judges.
Maybe you read the article on the top of macrumors about Apple hiring hundreds of engineers with car expertise from other companies to build the Icar....
It might not be the first factor on everybody's list, but good packaging does contribute towards brand image and making a good first impression. Not every manufacturer bothers - but Apple have been noted (since the iPod, if not before) for their distinctive packaging design (e.g. see this Mickey-take of Microsoft vs. Apple packaging from 2005 or just google 'Apple packaging design' for more references). Look at all the "unboxing videos" you see these days - do you think they don't influence people?
...none of which are made by Apple. If the Apple TV set ever happens, I bet it comes in a nice box that you'll want to keep (the 27" iMac does, AFAIK).
Of course, the larger the product, the more you'd pay for a full-colour print on glossy card, and the strength becomes an issue, plus it is increasingly likely that the boxes won't be on display in shops.
I haven't ever seen the box for my phones until I've actually decided to pull the trigger and purchase the phone.
The staff member has wandered out to the stock room to retrieve my package, which I've only then seen after confirming purchase.
The box played no part in my decision to by a phone.
Most stores here in NZ don't display the box, these companies spend money on retail displays and the last thing they want is a cardboard box cluttering up the display.
I can't vouch for the rest of the world but I'd say the box on display wouldn't be that common compared to the box not being on display....
The box is pretty much a non factor, would people really not want a phone because of the the packaging ?
The staff member has wandered out to the stock room to retrieve my package, which I've only then seen after confirming purchase.
The box played no part in my decision to by a phone.
Most stores here in NZ don't display the box, these companies spend money on retail displays and the last thing they want is a cardboard box cluttering up the display.
I can't vouch for the rest of the world but I'd say the box on display wouldn't be that common compared to the box not being on display....
The box is pretty much a non factor, would people really not want a phone because of the the packaging ?
Well Apple should not have won in the first place but this is just tedious now. It's a waste of time and money. I'm sure the lawyers are happy that this nonsense is dragging on.
Last edited:
...
But you are correct. Majority of Americans sided with the FBI. Donald Trump for president?
Actually they didn't. and did.
It all depends on whose poll you use.
There are plenty out all as valid as the next.
Don't lock in on just one.