Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Exactly! He posts the way he does to see how many down votes he gets. He must have inside info to know who votes his posts down. There must be at least a dozen or so users who do it on a regular basis. The whole post voting is entertaining in itself. Anyone who posts facts that don't favor Apple gets down voted. Anyone who is the least bit critical of Apple gets down voted.

The other day I got downvoted into oblivion for saying that if Apple had had the "night mode" in their eBook reader first, they'd be suing everyone else who implemented white-on-black. They get it last, though, and it's obvious and not innovative.
 
Very interesting that no one is commenting on this. Apple basically transfered control of some patents to a Patent troll company. It used a shell company to do so. And now the patent troll is suing every mobile phone player but Apple.

:( It's sad how Apple is becoming such a litigious entity.

I'm actually not too surprised that there haven't been any comments. It makes Apple look bad, and we know how many here don't like facts that don't reflect well on Apple. I posted the story and link in the Apple and Industry forum and it's gotten over 300 views without a comment! I was expecting someone to rush to Apple's side and claim what a brilliant move it was. Not that I was expecting anyone in particular to do that. :D
 
Imagine McDonalds sues Burger King citing that the Whopper is a direct copy of the Big Mac.

McDonalds has sued Burger King multiple times. It would be pretty accurate to classify some of that as "look and feel" type suing.
 
I'm actually not too surprised that there haven't been any comments. It makes Apple look bad, and we know how many here don't like facts that don't reflect well on Apple. I posted the story and link in the Apple and Industry forum and it's gotten over 300 views without a comment! I was expecting someone to rush to Apple's side and claim what a brilliant move it was. Not that I was expecting anyone in particular to do that. :D
Sometimes I feel like going Windows and Android (already did).

I'm disappointed with Apple.

Though these lawsuits do not affect the consumer, but why I should give my money to someone that is hell-bent on curtailing competition?
 
Last edited:
A few years ago i would have felt sorry for Apple with this happening. However judging from their recent actions its hard to give them any sympathy. Schadenfreude :)
 
Last edited:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

slattery69 said:
A what? It sounds like a defibrillator.
.

As opposed to sounding like a supermarket own brand tampon

Love the comment!

The iPad 3 now with "wings".... But I guess they already did that with the smart cover!
 
So, Apple refused to play by the rules and now has to pay. Their motivation does not matter, their actions do. And BTW, TechCrunch reported that Apple officially entered patent trolling business by investing in and "selling" patents to patent troll named Digitude Innovations which is now using these patents to sue RIM, HTC, LG, Motorola, Samsung, Sony, Amazon, and Nokia. Nobody should be surprised that the whole industry hates Apple.

So even if Motorola was attempting to use FRAND patents improperly, Apple should just "play by the rules"? It seems to me that they did want to play by the rules, but that Motorola Mobility might have been trying to bully them and use FRAND patents to try to threaten a potential competitor.

Regarding the "patent trolling" we don't really know all the facts. It sounds like perhaps Apple settled other disputes with them by handing over a few of theirs.

----------

Sometimes I feel like going Windows and Android (already did).

I'm disappointed with Apple.

Though these lawsuits do not affect the consumer, but why I should give my money to someone that is hell-bent on curtailing competition?

Companies generally don't like competition. The whole idea of patents and copyrights are to prevent others from using ideas that you thought of without your permission. In the technology arena, lawsuits happen all the time since just about anything new involves use of someone's existing patents. Apple lawsuits get higher profile simply because of who Apple is. I doubt that they really sue more than any other company in a similar position.

Remember, the main reason Google bought Motorola Mobility was for the patent portfolio. Do you think they plan to just sit on that portfolio? Surely they will use it to try either to seek royalties from others or block competing products.
 
So even if Motorola was attempting to use FRAND patents improperly, Apple should just "play by the rules"?

You're making up a scenario that didn't happen.

Motorola won the injunction in this case because they did everything "by the rules" and Apple did not.

It seems to me that they did want to play by the rules, but that Motorola Mobility might have been trying to bully them and use FRAND patents to try to threaten a potential competitor.

That's exactly backwards, according to the court decision and related info. Here's the gist of what happened:

1) Motorola started talking to Apple in 2007 about paying royalties. Apple kept putting them off.

2) Motorola finally said Apple had to pay up and offered FRAND terms at a current rate, and I think also wanted back royalties of course at the going rate years ago..

3) Apple responded by saying they'd accept the current terms as long as they also could keep the right to try to invalidate the related patents... in other words, to try to get out of paying higher past due amounts.

That brings us up to now, and the court has sided with Motorola, because:

- Apple never made a commitment to accept the current Fair and ND terms that were offered.

- Apple wanted to try to wiggle out of past payments, or at least lower them, which meant they wanted to pay less than anyone else. That wouldn't be fair to either Motorola or the other licensees.

Remember, the main reason Google bought Motorola Mobility was for the patent portfolio. Do you think they plan to just sit on that portfolio? Surely they will use it to try either to seek royalties from others or block competing products.

Most people think that Google got the patents for defense, not offense as Apple is using theirs for.
 
Remember, the main reason Google bought Motorola Mobility was for the patent portfolio. Do you think they plan to just sit on that portfolio? Surely they will use it to try either to seek royalties from others or block competing products.

Wow the blind hate is strong with this one.

Google bought them for defense. Not to attack.
Also Google bought Moto for the set top box market to help push Google TV. Guess who the worlds largest supplier of set top boxes. Give you a hint it is the same company Google bought (Motorola Mobility).

I can also see them using Motorola to help push the other companies to role out updates faster to their phones.
 
The big difference being is, that joke is now old and forgotten, the iPad name now being as iconic as "iPod."

I remember when everyone made fun of the Wii. It was a stupid name then, and it's a stupid name now. But we're all used to it. I think you could say the same thing about the iPad.

Or maybe because it ended up being such a paradigm shifting innovative synergistic life altering machine that changed the way we think forever because it was such a magical experience, we all realized we had a new golden calf to fawn over, and felt foolish for making fun of something so utterly profound over something so trite as a name.

And the iPad is pretty alright, too.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.