Biometric Sensor Company Valencell Accuses Apple of Stealing Technology for Apple Watch

[Iconoclysm]

How is this common knowledge? You are speaking of it like it's a fact! Were you personally present when Xerox received Apple stock in exchange for PARC access? No you weren't and there's no way you can prove it.

Xerox bought a 20% stake in Apple, 100,000 shares I believe it was. That is COMMON KNOWLEDGE...what you confuse with common knowledge is the common internet myth that Apple stole everything from Xerox.
[doublepost=1451956058,1451956000][/doublepost]

Read up on it. They lost because they waited too long to sue.

No, the suit was dismissed because the courts said they couldn't copyright the look and feel of the UI. That was serious sour grapes in that law suit anyway, they had no idea what they had going on.

Edit: wait that was when Apple's case vs. Microsoft was dismissed. It doesn't matter though, if it never went to trial then we can't even know if anything was illegal. It doesn't change the facts of what originally happened, Xerox made millions off of Apple.

 

[manu chao]

Sure, and I am sure that will reference me to macrumors.com

And that assumption doesn't make you biased? Being biased influences assumptions heavily. Sprouting out assumptions that could easily be checked but not checking them because you fear they might not be true, what is that?

 

[Iconoclysm]

Loosing doesn't mean it didn't happen. Scottsboro case was lost and Scottsboro boys were put on death row even though they were innocent. Loosing a court case doesn't mean much!

"Loosing" means letting something go. You should loose this argument, I've never seen anyone so unwilling to admit they're wrong that they've reduced all facts to conspiracy stories.

 

[dark_knight177]

You know, if your burden of proof is whether you or I was physically present when something happened than 99.9999999999999% of all human knowledge is unproven.

You know if your burden of proof is whether anything claimed on macrumors as true, humanity is in BIG trouble.

 

[manu chao]

Xerox bought a 20% stake in Apple, 100,000 shares I believe it was. That is COMMON KNOWLEDGE...what you confuse with common knowledge is the common internet myth that Apple stole everything from Xerox.

No, what the Knight considers common knowledge is stuff he wants to be true. If something says something he wants to be true, he believes it (or pretends to believe it, sometimes that is hard to separate) and if enough people say something that he wants to be true, he considers it common knowledge.

 

[Small White Car]

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/05/16/creation-myth

Forget it. Not only am I sure that the New Yorker is a biased source, I'm betting that this reply by XEROX PARC members that backs it up only proves that the XEROX team themselves are now Apple shills.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2011/05/14/xerox-says-old-apple-legend-misses-the-point.aspx

Do I have that right?

 

[Iconoclysm]

You know if your burden of proof is whether anything claimed on macrumors as true, humanity is in BIG trouble.

Considering the massive influx of people who are Apple detractors over the past few years, I don't think you'd really understand what this place was once like. Not the extremely biased, defend Apple utopian society that you've tricked yourself into thinking it was. Notice you don't see a migration of Apple fans to any Android sites? Do you wonder why that might be?

 

[dark_knight177]

That is COMMON KNOWLEDGE...

Well, I don't consider something written by anonymous user on Apple biased blog as COMMON KNOWLEDGE.

 

[manu chao]

You know if your burden of proof is whether anything claimed on macrumors as true, humanity is in BIG trouble.

So, you assume again and again (here that I receive all my knowledge on Apple from anonymous posts on Macrumors). And again, you assume something that you deep down know is not true but sometimes you don't shy away from making accusations that you know are not true if it makes you feel like you are winning the argument. Or you just get satisfaction from denigrating others, again something that is hard to tell.

 

[dark_knight177]

Considering the massive influx of people who are Apple detractors over the past few years, I don't think you'd really understand what this place was once like.

I think I understand, this place used to be Apple fans' heaven where everybody agreed with everything Apple had to say or release. Oh and I bet users also prayed to their Macbooks and iPhones, right?

 

[Iconoclysm]

Forget it. Not only am I sure that the New Yorker is a biased source, I'm betting that this reply by XEROX PARC members that backs it up only proves that the XEROX team themselves are now Apple shills.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2011/05/14/xerox-says-old-apple-legend-misses-the-point.aspx

Do I have that right?

Your reading comprehension must be pretty bad:

"In short, the post acknowledges that the legend of Xerox PARC -- the oft, oft, oft-repeated story (repeated once again by Gladwell) that Xerox "flubbed the future" by giving away its best idea ever, the personal computer, to a young Steve Jobs -- is basically true. But the essay points out that it took some circumstances unique to PARC to generate the idea in the first place, and that the story wouldn't play out the same way if were happening today."

The engineers that invented this stuff at Xerox were Apple employees at the time, perhaps you missed me telling you this earlier.

But, let's create an analogy with today's Apple. A guy works for Apple and has an idea to create a smart thermostat. Apple's CEO says, we don't want to use your idea. Then, the guy leaves Apple to create the thermostat without them. What would Apple do? Sue him for taking an idea that belongs to them by virtually every employee agreement in the country...or wish them luck and encourage their success? Hence, Nest. What you're saying is that those two guys who created this great idea at Xerox should not have been able to take their idea with them, EVEN IF XEROX CORP MADE AN EXCHANGE FOR IT!!!!! Oh man...

 

[manu chao]

Well, I don't consider something written by anonymous user on Apple biased blog as COMMON KNOWLEDGE.

There is an art to differentiate between guessing something is true because it make sense (a way of saying it is consistent with many other pieces of information you are aware of) and guessing something is true because one wants it to be true. Few people are immune to the latter but you are swinging so massively towards the latter that it isn't even funny anymore.

 

[Iconoclysm]

I think I understand, this place used to be Apple fans' heaven where everybody agreed with everything Apple had to say or release. Oh and I bet users also prayed to their Macbooks and iPhones, right?

That's exactly what I said in the next sentence you'd think it was. You really don't pay attention to detail, do you? No, it wasn't ANYTHING like that! I was a Microsoft employee when I started coming here, there was very little bias in any direction, and most of all - there weren't people like yourself who perpetrate myths despite facts to the contrary. You, in this very thread, claimed that Apple is CLEARLY guilty of theft. CLEARLY!!!??? Even if they did steal from Xerox PARC in your imaginary world, how would that apply right now?

 

[Tech198]

wow. this didn't take long..

A new product calls for more lawsuits.

 

[dark_knight177]

That's exactly what I said in the next sentence you'd think it was. You really don't pay attention to detail, do you? No, it wasn't ANYTHING like that! I was a Microsoft employee when I started coming here, there was very little bias in any direction, and most of all - there weren't people like yourself who perpetrate myths despite facts to the contrary. You, in this very thread, claimed that Apple is CLEARLY guilty of theft. CLEARLY!!!??? Even if they did steal from Xerox PARC in your imaginary world, how would that apply right now?

Companies don't sue, if they think their chance of winning is low and their chance of winning is low when they are wrong. Besides, they most definitely have proof of Apple meeting with them and examining their tech in detail, otherwise they wouldn't have mentioned it

 

[Small White Car]

What you're saying is that those two guys who created this great idea at Xerox should not have been able to take their idea with them, EVEN IF XEROX CORP MADE AN EXCHANGE FOR IT!!!!! Oh man...

I said that Apple paid XEROX for Jobs' visit and that a modern post by PARC employees backs that up.

That really sounds nothing like what you just said.

Not sure where any of that came from.

 

[manu chao]

No, it does not...where are you getting this info? Apple pays above 30%, one of the highest of all companies in the US. What you're referring to is their global revenue being held in Ireland instead of repatriating it, it's quite different, they've already paid taxes on that in other countries to begin with.

I am talking about the profits booked at their Irish subsidiary (which are a big chunk of the profits derived from the sales made through that subsidiary, essentially all sales made in Europe, don't remember whether the sales in the Middle East are also booked there). Yes, Apple would have to pay the standard U.S. corporate tax rate if and when it repatriates those profits but they of course are hoping for a tax holiday on repatriating foreign earnings or least a lowering of the general tax rate.

I got the info from among other places by watching the Senate hearing where Tim Cook and, I think, two other Apple executives were probed on this matter and where Apple confirmed as much.

 

[Iconoclysm]

Companies don't sue, if they think their chance of winning is low and their chance of winning is low when they are wrong. Besides, they most definitely have proof of Apple meeting with them and examining their tech in detail, otherwise they wouldn't have mentioned it

"In what appears to be a sweeping victory for Apple, Judge Vaughn R. Walker of the Federal District Court in San Francisco threw out five of the six counts in Xerox's lawsuit, saying, in essence, that Xerox's complaints were inappropriate for a variety of legal reasons."

There is definitely proof of Xerox's engineers, Bill Atkinson and Larry Tesler being Apple employees...who invented the Mac's GUI....who came from Xerox PARC where they invented the GUI that eventually ended up in the Star PC that the lawsuit stems from. There was little "explanation" needed of the tech in detail so much as a convincing of this tech being the right way to go for the Mac to Steve Jobs. It amazes me how little you're capable of putting together yourself without going down the Apple hate route.

 

[mdelvecchio]

Maybe you can explain why Xerox sued Apple then.

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/15/b...-apple-computer-over-macintosh-copyright.html

that was 5 years after the Mac was released -- Xerox saw the success of the Mac, got greedy, and decided they wanted a bigger piece of the pie than the mere $1MM they had traded originally (since they were too dumb to realize GUI was the future).

this is old history.

further, Apple added a ton of stuff resulting in Mac OS being a much better OS. read from the guys in the room:

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=On_Xerox,_Apple_and_Progress.txt

 

[dmunz]

Maybe it took time to prepare the case. At least it still hasn't been a year since the release of the watch. Some other patent lawsuits seem to happen after a few years.

Just playing devil's advocate here, don't bite my head off...

Playing the Devil's advocate means you are either representing the Devil or pretending to. Neither ends well...

FWIW
DLM

 

[Iconoclysm]

I said that Apple paid XEROX for Jobs' visit and that a modern post by PARC employees backs that up.

That really sounds nothing like what you just said.

Not sure where any of that came from.

I must have misread what you did say but also, I thought it was a reply from this character above, not you. I apologize, sorry
[doublepost=1451957696,1451957606][/doublepost]

I am talking about the profits booked at their Irish subsidiary (which are a big chunk of the profits derived from the sales made through that subsidiary, essentially all sales made in Europe, don't remember whether the sales in the Middle East are also booked there). Yes, Apple would have to pay the standard U.S. corporate tax rate if and when it repatriates those profits but they of course are hoping for a tax holiday on repatriating foreign earnings or least a lowering of the general tax rate.

I got the info from among other places by watching the Senate hearing where Tim Cook and, I think, two other Apple executives were probed on this matter and where Apple confirmed as much.

As far as corporate tax rates in the US, Apple pays the highest, what I thought you were saying was that they have it down to single digits here in the US. Which is not true, and that hearing revealed that Apple is one of the most responsible corporate citizens as far as paying taxes goes.

 

[manu chao]

CLEARLY!!!??? Even if they did steal from Xerox PARC in your imaginary world, how would that apply right now?

Because it fits right in with his imaginary world. Which is HIS burden of proof.
[doublepost=1451957972,1451957697][/doublepost]

I must have misread what you did say but also, I thought it was a reply from this character above, not you.
[doublepost=1451957696,1451957606][/doublepost]

As far as corporate tax rates in the US, Apple pays the highest, what I thought you were saying was that they have it down to single digits here in the US. Which is not true, and that hearing revealed that Apple is one of the most responsible corporate citizens as far as paying taxes goes.

My original post was referring to the Irish Double and thus meant the profits affected by Irish tax law. But of course single sentences can be misunderstood.

 

[apolloa]

Sounds about right for Apple, they obviously thought it was cheaper to steal the technology as opposed to buying Valencell, has anyone shouted patent troll yet? Completely missing the statements that Apple had several meetings to look at Valencells invented and patented technology.

Take them to the cleaners Valencell as you would need to have proof of those meetings and those meeting contents with Apple to take this to court.

 

[lederermc]

I own the patent on my hear rate. A pox on all of their sox.

 

[manu chao]

Sounds about right for Apple, they obviously thought it was cheaper to steal the technology as opposed to buying Valencell, has anyone shouted patent troll yet? Completely missing the statements that Apple had several meetings to look at Valencells invented and patented technology.

Take them to the cleaners Valencell as you would need to have proof of those meetings and those meeting contents with Apple to take this to court.

It is not that Apple hasn't lost in a patent suit (where it was accused of infringing) but they also have won such suits. The mere existence of a suit thus isn't a proof for either outcome. It just proofs that the two legal teams see things differently.