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

Google's Top Lawyer: Some Apple Inventions are Commercially Essential, Should Be Made Into Standards

Dr. Ian Malcolm: I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power you're using here: it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done, and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you even knew what you had, you, you've patented it, and packaged it, you've slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now, you're selling it!
[pounds table with fists]

translates well with Google and Apple huh

----------
nostaws said:
The problem here is the government/patent office. They granted patents for every little thing without looking at the bigger picture.

I don't think slide to unlock, one click check out, multitouch, etc should be patentable.
Click to expand...

yeh, I have a deadlock on my door and i have to slide the chain to the left to unlock it. I have had that on the door since the 80s hahaha. Common knowledge should not be patentable.
 
If a court forces Apple to damn near give away its IP, what is Apple's incentive to invent the next big product, if someone like Google can force FRAND via the courts 5 years from now.
 
My opinion of Google just went down to an all new low, which I didn't think was possible after some of the other cr@p they have pulled.
 
If Google can convince the various standards bodies to adopt these Apple technologies, the best they can hope for is simply FRAND licensing options...

They still won't get this tech for free...
 
Technarchy said:
If a court forces Apple to damn near give away its IP, what is Apple's incentive to invent the next big product, if someone like Google can force FRAND via the courts 5 years from now.
Click to expand...

yep the very thing Google is blaming Apple of is going to stop Apple doing. End of the day we lose.
 
Apple is not going to be able to beat Android by going through the courts. I'm absolutely certain that even the judges will decide that the consumer comes first and they'll somehow reason that consumers want Android and Android is essential to consumers. Android is open and will be the most popular mobile OS on the planet. No judge is going to vote against Android because it's already too big to go up against. Any future Apple patents are going to be a waste of time because they won't stand up. Apple is going to need to find some other way to beat Google and all the Android device vendors at the game of intellectual property. Google basically came into the smartphone business and took it right away from Apple by using Apple's IP against them.
 
I've always thought that a lot of Apple's "innovations" are just common sense ideas that many people with half a brain have already thought of. It's just that Apple slams down mega bucks to get every detail patented.
 
turtlez said:
yep the very thing Google is blaming Apple of is going to stop Apple doing. End of the day we lose.
Click to expand...


Haha! iPad. Don't have to worry about it getting struck by lightning!

Anyway, no. Assuming everyone would start wontonly copying like you think they would, Apple would still be compensated for others using their IP. Plus copyright and trademark would keep other companies from copying Apple completely, so they would still enjoy the same advantages they do now.

They just wouldn't be able to stop people from using disappearing scroll bars in their own products.
 
Constable Odo said:
Apple is not going to be able to beat Android by going through the courts. I'm absolutely certain that even the judges will decide that the consumer comes first and they'll somehow reason that consumers want whatever OS happened to be on all those thousands of devices, webOS, Blackberry OS, iOS, Winmo 7 or 8 etc... .
Click to expand...

fixed that, Android will never impress me on its #'s. It's an asterisk, look how many devices its on, it wins by default. It is a fact if webOS was on the same amount if would have the same #'s. Consumers buy whats always smacking them in the face. It almost seems as if Android has been shoved on more stuff than Windows already. I know it hasn't but it's like rabbit humping rates.

Nothing against the OS on a personal level, I think some features are very cool, just saying what Apple does with 1 phone a year, and what MS can do (hopefully) and what BB did impresses me more.
 
dukebound85 said:
I guess I view multitouch and grid layout to a touch screen device as one views a steering wheel and side opening doors for a car
Click to expand...

It’s easy to see it that way when all this is presented to you in a finished product. Seems like an obvious thing to do. It’s not.
 
KnightWRX said:
Neither did Apple, or Fingerworks.

Anyway, 3 pages and barely 2 or 3 people understood what the Google lawyer is saying : Apple should cooperate better by licensing their patents out for the good of the consumers. That way, everyone wins. Apple gets paid for the use of its IP if it holds any, Google and Microsoft get to use it, and heck, open up their own patents for Apple to use and everyone can make better and better products, building on the shoulders of giants.

The way it is now, Apple holds quite a few patents, many of which for things that are obvious or not even novel or innovative and they are suing tons of others over it. This results in costly court fights and Apple is getting their patents invalidated over prior art one by one while the non-infringement rulings are raining down on them.

They are losing patents and money, but delaying competitors, harming consumers. If they would license the patents, valid or not, most competitors would just pay up to avoid the court fights. They'd make money, keep their patents, and competitors would go on their merry way faster, bringing devices to market sooner.
Click to expand...

I call this thinking BS. Apple isn't innovating and they're holding others hostage by not licensing what "obvious" patents they have? What the He!! are Samsung and Google and others doing if they can't come up with their own novel inventions? Delaying competitors and harming consumers? Why is it that what Apple creates needs to be licensed out to others?

And if their patents are being invalidated, then why does Google et al feel the need to fight to make these patents free - if they're just going to get them for free once the world recognizes that what Apple is doing is just copying others in the first place...
 
thewitt said:
If Google can convince the various standards bodies to adopt these Apple technologies, the best they can hope for is simply FRAND licensing options...

They still won't get this tech for free...
Click to expand...

I don’t know how they could propose to do that - unless you could argue something in an anti-trust case. Unless Apple is found to be breaking some kind of state or federal law with their patents, Apple can tell Google to pound sand on anything not FRAND. If anybody is going to submit Apples IP to a standards body it will be Apple and I don’t see them giving up something unless they have to. Apple gave the farm away with OSX and MS back in the days and they are very selective with their IP.

Legally speaking, patents are property. Thus, any company is obligated to not only acquire patents, but exercise their value if they want to. If the courts find the patents have no value - that’s a gamble that a company needs to take. At least Tim Cook seems to be the guy that is more careful about suing. Jobs was more reckless with his actions.
 
"Do No Evil" my butt.

If it was such a critical and common concept, why wasn't "swipe to unlock" used before? I think Ziploc has a better chance of making that claim.
 
jmgregory1 said:
I call this thinking BS. Apple isn't innovating and they're holding others hostage by not licensing what "obvious" patents they have? What the He!! are Samsung and Google and others doing if they can't come up with their own novel inventions? Delaying competitors and harming consumers? Why is it that what Apple creates needs to be licensed out to others?
Click to expand...

Probably because Google, MS, Samsung, etc, already license out their IPs. Only Apple uses theirs to block competition rather than license it to those who need it.

And if their patents are being invalidated, then why does Google et al feel the need to fight to make these patents free - if they're just going to get them for free once the world recognizes that what Apple is doing is just copying others in the first place...
Click to expand...

Cuz it's a huge pain in the ass, and doesn't benefit anyone in the end. Least of all Apple, who could be making money from their IPs, rather than getting them considered null and void by the courts after spending millions on lawyers.
 
I'd like to see Apple take a leave of absence, or a creative sabbatical, for about a decade or so...not create, invest, or dream up anything new.

Then, once Microsoft, Google, and all of the other leaches of the world die off from lack of a tit to draw from, let Apple rise again.
 
jmgregory1 said:
I call this thinking BS. Apple isn't innovating and they're holding others hostage by not licensing what "obvious" patents they have? What the He!! are Samsung and Google and others doing if they can't come up with their own novel inventions? Delaying competitors and harming consumers? Why is it that what Apple creates needs to be licensed out to others?

And if their patents are being invalidated, then why does Google et al feel the need to fight to make these patents free - if they're just going to get them for free once the world recognizes that what Apple is doing is just copying others in the first place...
Click to expand...

Dude has lost his mind. Don’t bother. If i’m counting right it’s 6th time this week.
 
KnightWRX said:
The Google lawyer is saying exactly that too. The problem is apparently Apple would rather pay lawyers to fight in courts rather than getting money from other OEMs for licensing out their patents.

----------



No one is expecting or asking that Apple should give away their IP for free.

Did you guys read the article at all ?
Click to expand...

What would be a fair licensing fee according to you? Should Google set the price?

If they can get away with having this stuff for free (like they do now) what could make them want to pay license fees?

Oh right! The fear of being sued and losing money and sales...

I guess it's unfortunate, but it seems it's how it works in the I.P. licensing business.

If Apple didn't sue nor threatened to, I don't see how it could've get any amount of money by licensing.

This mess will probably end as a licensing deal, and both sides know it. Apple is trying to raise the value of this potential license fees by suing, while it's in Google's (and others) interest bring the value down as much as they can.
 
If you think this:

ICS-Lockscreen.png


looks like this:

appleios54.jpg


then I suggest you get your eyes checked.
 
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