Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple's 2007 Lobbying: Patent System Reform, Education Tax Breaks

CalBoy -- thank you for the kind words.

Actually, I wonder if the "fear to act" factor would be worse than what we've got today. How are we to know that anything the government does was in fact the "right" thing unless we had access to an alternate universe where the government did the opposite thing, or did nothing? The truth is we don't, really. We suspect and we believe, but we don't really know.

I sometimes wonder if taking a more chaos-centric approach and simply trying out different avenues of action -- even though this would be somewhat more costly in the short run -- might not produce better results in the long run.
 
swingerofbirch said:
I don't really get all this stuff about technology in education. To me it just seems like buzz words. Computers for the purpose of educating are evolutionary and not revolutionary. Computers bring text, media, and communication together. We've already had all those elements in books, videos, and human interaction.

To me the idea of teaching a child to use a computer is like going to school to teach a child to watch television. You're just teaching a child to be a consumer. I hope that when they say they want more technology in education they mean actually bringing children closer to the technology, in terms of programming, etc, and not just becoming proficient technology consumers.

For example, those one-to-one laptop programs to me seem like a waste of money.
Click to expand...

Buying books, videos and music isn't consumerism?

I think we're at a crossroads as far as technology in the classroom is concerned. School boards, teachers and IT departments have in many cases failed to maximize the benefits of computers.

Why buy textbooks, videos, video equipment, etc, etc, when computers can easily replace all of that? Not only replace but do so cheaper.

Textbooks are increasingly written for the lowest common denominator. Dumbed down for extremist and fundamentalist school districts. Doing so does a disservice to education.

By using computers, a teacher has the ability to expose a student to multiple viewpoints instantly. Kids aren't stupid, they know when they're being misled.

Few kids will ever grow up to become IT specialists. It would seem really stupid to force them all into the IT field.

The world is run by computers. Do you want your kid to grow up computer illiterate?
 
MikeTheC said:
Actually, I wonder if the "fear to act" factor would be worse than what we've got today. How are we to know that anything the government does was in fact the "right" thing unless we had access to an alternate universe where the government did the opposite thing, or did nothing? The truth is we don't, really. We suspect and we believe, but we don't really know.

I sometimes wonder if taking a more chaos-centric approach and simply trying out different avenues of action -- even though this would be somewhat more costly in the short run -- might not produce better results in the long run.
Click to expand...

Sure, we'll never know whether our decisions were the right ones, but if we think objectively, we can measure ourselves pretty well. For example, despite all the bad things we hear about politics, politicians, and the decision making process, there are some positives that come out of our government. For example, we now have laws which protect consumers from identity theft and laws which allow consumers to know their own credit score and credit history. Thus, there is some good that goes with the bad.

However, on balance, we humans are slow learners. We have to be taught the same lessons over and over again. Each time, it is manifested through different people, social customs, and regions. On the whole, we like to deny others what we have, because we think that it is the only way to preserve a "good" life. In reality, when we extend to others what we have, life improves for all. This concept has been repeated since the American Revolution, the Civil War, World War II, the break down of the British Empire, the Civil Rights Movement, the Women's Movement, and now the Gay Rights Movement. Each time, there was a large group of people who sought to prevent change because they thought it would bring an end to their way of life, and each time, they were proven wrong. In light of that, I guess our grade as a civilization is an F, because despite all the tests and challenges we've endured as a nation, we refuse to learn from these tests.

If we were to take a chaotic approach, there would be a lot of losers and only a few gainers. In the constant change, relatively few would be able to have what most have today. We could however have simulations and think tanks to consider many options. That is way to test chaos before adminstering it to 300 million people.
 
Wow, this isn't that large of an amount to be spent on lobbying for a big company like Apple. I would think it would be in the millions, like it is for the auto industry.
 
Apple Paid Lobbyist $720,000 or $120,000?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/20519095/for/cnbc/
Apple Paid Lobbyist $120,000
Updated: 9:47 a.m. PT Aug 31, 2007

WASHINGTON - Apple Inc. paid Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw LLP $120,000 to lobby the federal government in the first half of 2007, according to a recent disclosure form.

The firm lobbied on issues related to the European Union's intellectual property policies, according to the form posted online Aug. 13 by the Senate's public records office.

Apple is being pressured in Europe to license its digital rights management technology to rival companies so iTunes users can play the music they buy there on any digital music player.

Besides Congress, the firm lobbied the State Department, U.S. Trade Representative's office and the White House.

Under a federal law enacted in 1995, lobbyists are required to disclose activities that could influence members of the executive and legislative branches. They must register with Congress within 45 days of being hired or engaging in lobbying.

Apple is based in Cupertino, Calif.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 
Well I'm sure that money could have been spent on something more productive but there are too many laws.
 
newguineafan said:
Why, oh, why is Apple joining the evil capitalist companies by lobbying? Just kidding.

At least they're lobbying for a good cause though.
Click to expand...
Good cause? To buy a lot of white plastic boxes in account of healthy food at schools, sport, safety and outdoor activity?
 
Jenny1 said:
It is a whole lot of $$$

Letting big companies have tax breaks, Hmmm... Don't let "Big Apple" get off easy! LOL
Click to expand...

Tax breaks on R & D are a good idea. Sure, they help apple quite a bit as Apple's R&D budget is gargantuan compared to most, but tax breaks might encourage a little more life in the rest of the industry where innovation has fallen into a slump of mimicking something that comes out and breaks the mold.
 
Why is Apple lobbying for patent reform?

Unless Apple is lobbying for the elimination of software patents, I think they are only looking to make it easier for corporations to patent and go after individuals and make it harder for individuals to patent stuff themselves.
 
Not So Fast

MikeTheC said:
Putting more computers in schools in and of itself is about as useless as simply (and endlessly) pumping more and more money into the schools. Neither of them represent a direct mechanism of, nor a direct path for, the much-needed educational improvement in this country.
Click to expand...


I am not claiming to know all the statistics, nor am I COMPLETELY disagreeing with the basic idea of your statement, but my father just recently retired from the education business as the Superintendant of an entire school district here in Texas. In this position he took part in and had access to studies that test several stats regarding student achievement in several areas including academics as well as athletics in relation to the amount of money the school received each year.

Their studies showed a DIRECT correlation between student success and the wealth of the school. Richer schools were more successful in athletics and also things like standardized tests (ie: SAT, ACT) and also what Universities their kids were getting accepted to. Granted these studies pretty much only involve the state of Texas but I see no reason why it wouldn't apply nation wide.

"endlessly pumping more money into schools" when worded that way it is hard to flat out say "you're wrong" but studies do show more money for schools = more success for students

Keep in mind I say this also knowing that just having more money isn't the key, it's how the money is used of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back