@silentbob unfortunately whenever lou enters with undoubtedly the most informed opinion he gets shouted down by the usual suspect for becoming an apple fanboy, somehow.
Pissy pants.
And now - Google vs Apple • Page 4
-
Page
of 5 First / Last -
mowgli 31,928 posts
Seen 1 minute ago
Registered 7 years ago -
ElNino9 12,436 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 6 years agorevan8 wrote:
Wait, you're bringing patients into this?DFawkes wrote:
This.
I just wish they could all just get along. Leave all this nonsense behind and concentrate on selling phones. This type of thing is rarely good for consumers.
Happening in most markets now, patients should be tighter and not given out for things like sliding unlocking.
You sick cunt!Hated, adored, never ignored.
-
nickthegun 44,589 posts
Seen 53 minutes ago
Registered 7 years agorevan8 wrote:
Now that someone has already invented it.
I slide unlock is hardly something that should be exclusive. It is an obvious method of unlocking on a touch screen device.---------------------------------------------------------
AGP.SRPT -
Dirtbox 73,724 posts
Seen 60 minutes ago
Registered 11 years agosilentbob wrote:
Hmm. Except that infographic doesn't show google as the one throwing lawsuits around.
They're all as bad as each other.+1 / Like / Tweet this post
-
mowgli 31,928 posts
Seen 1 minute ago
Registered 7 years ago -
Dirtbox 73,724 posts
Seen 60 minutes ago
Registered 11 years agoThey've got more ammunition than any other company in the webspace. Bing using google's search results for example.+1 / Like / Tweet this post
-
silentbob 28,764 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 10 years agorevan8 wrote:
I'm sorry, but that doesn't explain why it shouldn't be patentable. Stating "well it's obvious innit" isn't really a robust defence. How many things have been invented which can, in retrospect, seem obvious.
Tighter in the way that they are harder to get, if they looser they would be too easy for the owner to sue on.
I slide unlock is hardly something that should be exclusive. It is an obvious method of unlocking on a touch screen device.
These sorts of UI mechanisms are now so important in differentiating company products from one another and this one in particular so tied to IOS and it's associated devices, arguing that it's not defend-able seems to miss why we choose one consumer electronics product or another these days.
Incidentally, I'm not sure myself if it's healthy for the above to be so tightly controller, merely trying to highlight that when looking at these sorts of disputes, perhaps we look at them from the wrong perspective.VR Guff: www.roadtovr.com (NEW site now live!)
-
disusedgenius 4,848 posts
Seen 32 seconds ago
Registered 6 years agoIt somewhat depends what part of it is the invention: the concept, the code, the artwork etc. Sure, if someone copied and pasted the actual implementation of the idea that'd be one thing, But creating your own version of something from scratch doesn't seem like something which should be stopped. -
silentbob 28,764 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 10 years agoDirtbox wrote:
Seems you intentionally limited the scope of the term 'ammunition' there. The infographic I posted is somewhat broader.
They've got more ammunition than any other company in the webspace. Bing using google's search results for example.
Incidentally, I posted it to offset the usual harping on Apple being the root of all evil when it comes to tying up the courts in litigation, when it's clear they're all 'at it' to some degree of another.
Phrases such as "dose of their own medicine" ring enormously naive and hollow in my ears and smacks far too strongly of merely using yet another lawsuit story to cheer for or against your chosen 'team'.
The fact is, the entire system is mired in a legal quagmire that hardly seems healthy for any company. If Google has or has not chosen to sue as much, I doubt very much that it has anything to do with the company being altruistic to it's core. The more it's profits are rooted in consumer products, the more they'll probably have to litigate to survive. Just like the rest of them.VR Guff: www.roadtovr.com (NEW site now live!)
-
dominalien 5,421 posts
Seen 4 hours ago
Registered 7 years ago -
Aargh. 11,183 posts
Seen 4 hours ago
Registered 2 years agoKhanivor wrote:
Your graph doesn't show it's declining, it shows that it's fluctuating whilst the android operating system (which is incredibly fragmented both in versions and across hundreds of different phones shouldn't really be classed as one system) has increased.Aargh. wrote:
Unless you count the whole world.Khanivor wrote:
No because it isn't declining.
Has anyone made a graph showing Apple's declining share of the market versus their rising number of patent cases? Be curious to see if there's any alignment.
http://www.bgr.com/2012/07/02/iphone-market-share-june-2012-android-blackberry/After chasing sunsets one of life's simple joy is playing with the boys
-
Armoured_Bear 4,102 posts
Seen 9 hours ago
Registered 1 year agoWow, what a clusterfuck of fanboy shit. -
Triggerhappytel 2,438 posts
Seen 53 minutes ago
Registered 8 years agoThis topic is making my head hurt.
As someone said on the previous page, the only winners here are lawyers.
Now, who wants to hold my hands and sit on the grass while we listen to Imagine?
Edited by Triggerhappytel at 23:05:30 19-08-2012 -
mal 20,522 posts
Seen 8 hours ago
Registered 11 years agoNot me. I really really hate Imagine
As for google vs. apple, I half assumed Google bought Motorola so it could play patent pokemon, but I then changed my mind when they didn't do anything about it for months. Why jump now? Surely a company in Motorola's position knows exactly what patents it has? Although to be fair I wouldn't put it past Google to completely ignore the work Motorola has been doing and have set its own lawyers to read all the patents back from scratch.Cubby didn't know how to turn off sigs!
-
DodgyPast 7,863 posts
Seen 3 days ago
Registered 8 years agonickthegun wrote:
Yeah because I've never come across slide to unlock in the physical world? It's not innovative because it's something humans have been doing for hundreds of years.revan8 wrote:
Now that someone has already invented it.
I slide unlock is hardly something that should be exclusive. It is an obvious method of unlocking on a touch screen device. -
Dirtbox 73,724 posts
Seen 60 minutes ago
Registered 11 years ago@silentbob If you looks at the infographic you posted, there's more litigation from Apple than any of the companies listed.+1 / Like / Tweet this post
-
He never said there wasn't - merely that they're all "at it" to some degree. And they are. Have been for years. It's a vicious cycle that will require something monumental to break. -
Dirtbox 73,724 posts
Seen 60 minutes ago
Registered 11 years agoYeah, but he said they're all as bad as each other. Clearly they aren't. Of course there's patent litigation from time to time, that's the nature of the tech business, but no one can hold a candle to Apple on that count.+1 / Like / Tweet this post
-
And this assertion takes into account _all_ patent issues, or are you just choosing the mobile subset? Because I can promise you it's a lot worse, and definitely murkier, in other industries.
Not that I disagree that Apple are douches when it comes to aggressively protecting their patent portfolio as they see it - but it's the nature of the business. They're not doing anything that others aren't, and their right to do this is enshrined in law. It's just a matter of degree. They're all fucking douchebags. -
Khanivor 38,681 posts
Seen 12 hours ago
Registered 11 years agoShame you can't patent the process of patent litigation. Epic troll. -
pauleyc 4,286 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 11 years agoKhanivor wrote:
Or can you?
Shame you can't patent the process of patent litigation. Epic troll.
http://www.conceivablytech.com/4823/business/the-ultimate-patent-troll-patent-get-sued-when-you-file-a-patent -
Tonka 18,170 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 9 years ago@Aargh. Im sure you quoting him and commenting on the post will ad to that feeling.If you can read this you really need to fiddle with your forum settings.
-
Tonka 18,170 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 9 years agoDodgyPast wrote:
Apple weren't even the first with it. Some small swedish MP3 player company no one cared about did it before them. So yeah. Retarded.nickthegun wrote:
Yeah because I've never come across slide to unlock in the physical world? It's not innovative because it's something humans have been doing for hundreds of years.revan8 wrote:
Now that someone has already invented it.
I slide unlock is hardly something that should be exclusive. It is an obvious method of unlocking on a touch screen device.
Most software patents are retarded. The best thing ever is how Adobe patented their fucked up GUI so that everyone else can't copy that annoying piece of semi sticking snapping toolboxes taht collapse in three steps. Makes me laugh every time I curse it.If you can read this you really need to fiddle with your forum settings.
-
silentbob 28,764 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 10 years agoDirtbox wrote:
From what I remember, Apple had as many companies suing it and has as many outbound cases as Microsoft.
Yeah, but he said they're all as bad as each other. Clearly they aren't. Of course there's patent litigation from time to time, that's the nature of the tech business, but no one can hold a candle to Apple on that count.
Besides, it gets pretty nebulous here. How do you designate a company as 'good and true', 1-3 lawsuits? My point was that in the corporate world of cutting edge consumer electronics, this is now a way of life.VR Guff: www.roadtovr.com (NEW site now live!)
-
Salaman 16,599 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 9 years agonickthegun wrote:
Well strictly speaking google don't want your money. They just want your info, to be used for charging money to companies who want to target you with ads.silentbob wrote:
Absolutely this. There is no winner here except the lawyers. If google are successful people will no longer be able to buy a good product. Woop de doo.
They're all as bad as each other.
Fwiw, I love apple products (2nd gen onwards, obviously) but I absolutely *hate* apple as a company. They are the sharpest, most precious bunch of pirates on the tech high seas but its not as if google are some robin hood, riding in to protect our consumer virtues. Neither of them give a shit about you until you give them money and even then, they would charge for a pint of piss if you were on fire. -
Ginger 6,748 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 11 years agosilentbob wrote:
A patent by definition must not be obvious "to a person skilled in the art". So if something can be deemed to be obvious when a patent is challenged the patent is revoked.
I'm sorry, but that doesn't explain why it shouldn't be patentable. Stating "well it's obvious innit" isn't really a robust defence. How many things have been invented which can, in retrospect, seem obvious.
However, the thing patented (i.e. slide to unlock in this case) can't have been obvious at the time the patent was filed. It's totally subjective however, and why the lawyers are getting so rich.
Edited by Ginger at 09:55:56 20-08-2012London open taekwondo champion
-
DodgyPast 7,863 posts
Seen 3 days ago
Registered 8 years agoGinger wrote:
/fails to open balcony doors because the slide lock isn't obvious.
A patent by definition must not be obvious "to a person skilled in the art". So if something can be deemed to be obvious when a patent is challenged the patent is revoked.
However, the thing patented (i.e. slide to unlock in this case) can't have been obvious at the time the patent was filed. It's totally subjective however, and why the lawyers are getting so rich.
The other thing that bugs the shit out of me is all the patents where they've taken standard computer stuff and tacked on 'on a mobile device'. -
Ginger 6,748 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 11 years agoDodgyPast wrote:
Yeah, sorry - my last sentence wasn't clear. In order for the patent to be valid, the patent office agent assessing the case can't have thought the slide to unlock was obvious at the time the patent was assessed and granted.Ginger wrote:
/fails to open balcony doors because the slide lock isn't obvious.
A patent by definition must not be obvious "to a person skilled in the art". So if something can be deemed to be obvious when a patent is challenged the patent is revoked.
However, the thing patented (i.e. slide to unlock in this case) can't have been obvious at the time the patent was filed. It's totally subjective however, and why the lawyers are getting so rich.
The other thing that bugs the shit out of me is all the patents where they've taken standard computer stuff and tacked on 'on a mobile device'.
Patenting is not a one way process by the way. A lot of a patent attorneys job is finding reasons why a patent should be granted and arguing with the relevant patent office. A cynical person might suggest that the reason so many duff patents get granted is that there are more attorneys in industry than patent agents in the patent office, and attrition just means that a patent agent will give up if a company pushes back.
A cyncial person might suggest that. Not me, no siree.
I also thought that combination patents (i.e. a teasmaid with a mobile attached) tended to fall under the "obvious" category, but maybe it's different in the US.London open taekwondo champion
-
delbert 2,868 posts
Seen 10 minutes ago
Registered 10 years agoSomeone mentioned the timing.. Are Google not going to see a drop in licensing revenue when iOS drops their Maps in favour of the Apple "equivalent".. Could that be a driver?
/sorry for resurrecting a train wreck but I'm a slow reader
-
Google: we're the nice guys. We want to ditch SW patents
A bit weird innit? Is this an olive branch?
"Look Apple, we can be right cnuts too. But if you say Uncle we'll drop the charges."If you can read this you really need to fiddle with your forum settings.
-
Page
of 5 First / Last
