Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents

dailytech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 137 posts

Re: Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents

#101

Post by GHFigs »

kelnos wrote: post #82
GHFigs wrote: post #31

It's amusing that when there is a ruling in HTC's favor the headline is: "Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents"...but when there was a ruling in Apple's favor it was: "Apple's Plot to Kill Top Android Maker HTC Nears Fruition With Win" The latter being illustrated with a picture of Steve Jobs as the Emperor from Star Wars. Classy.

Whoever claimed tech journalism was unbiased?

Certainly not I. But there is a line somewhere between "biased reporting" and "juvenile pandering" that I keep seeing sites prance back and forth over, perennially indecisive about whether they want to be real grown-up news or not, to the detriment of the whole enterprise.

Re: Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents

#103

Post by VMG »

burgerbrain wrote: post #41
VMG wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't the tech giants cooperate and introduce a system that benefits the top 10% and exclude the long tail of smaller companies? That could be even worse.

Worse? That is exactly what we have right now!

They are still suing each other. There could be a system where there is a cartel that only sues the small ones.

Re: Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents

#104

Post by Steko »

dantheman wrote: post #77
Steko wrote: post #69

The level of IP related discourse on HN is reminiscent of talking politics with people who spend all their time listening to talk radio. I mean of course Ronald Reagan singlehandedly killed communism and minorities caused the housing crisis but did you know that the entire patent and copyright system could be removed tomorrow and everything would be just hunky dory? Fact: way too many obvious or stupid patents are gr…

The solution is that intellectual property and government granted monopolies are bad and should not be the law. They exist on shaky ground in that we assume that they produce more good than harm -- not a well grounded assumption imho. A case can be made that in most cases they are used by entrenched players against the small upstart. Fact: We can't assume we'll ever get an ideal system and must choose among flawed on…

"The solution is that intellectual property and government granted monopolies are bad and should not be the law."

How do movies and tv work without IP? The answer is obvious -- 90% of tv is gone, hope you like community access shows. Movies would be shown in locked down theaters only -- no dvds, no streaming services. Games in locked down arcades only.

Re: Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents

#105

Post by kelnos »

GHFigs wrote: post #101
kelnos wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoever claimed tech journalism was unbiased?

Certainly not I. But there is a line somewhere between "biased reporting" and "juvenile pandering" that I keep seeing sites prance back and forth over, perennially indecisive about whether they want to be real grown-up news or not, to the detriment of the whole enterprise.

Agreed, to a certain extent, though I'm not sure that I'd go so far as to call it juvenile. All news outlets have an agenda. Some try harder than others to keep that agenda out of their headlines. Others... don't. I'm not saying it's great, but it's to be expected, I think. While I wouldn't really call HTC an "underdog" in the normal sense of the term, painting them as such in a fight against Apple isn't totally off-base.

Re: Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents

#106

Post by fleitz »

kenjackson wrote: post #97
jxcole wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would agree except that a bunch of companies just bought some patents for $4.5 billion. If patents become ineffective, the value of that purchase is $0. Very few companies are going to look on this as a positive thing.

Make the reform law not apply to old patents, only new patents. So when the existing patents expire we only use the new rules. This is a win-win.

That is unilateral disarmament and a huge barrier to entry for every new startup.

Re: Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents

#107

Post by Steko »

chc wrote: post #88
dpatru wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not saying that small inventors couldn't profit. Just that their profits as a result of monopoly rights should be capped at a dollar amount. Patent rights are already capped in time: 20 years from the time of filing. After that, inventors no longer have the monopoly. The problem is that in high-tech fields, 20 years is too long. We don't want individual inventors to hold back progress for 20 years. Capping retur…

He isn't saying that, but it would be the result of his suggestion. It would be hugely lopsided in favor entities with lots of money, since the value of your invention to you (but not to potential infringers) is bounded by your cash on hand. The cost of getting a patent is already a hardship on non-corporate inventors. They won't be able to afford a lot on top of that — the ROI would just not be there. If Joe Invento…

"It would be hugely lopsided in favor entities with lots of money"

Much less so then the current system. Much of the uncertainty and potential liability for small businesses would disappear. Unless your small business is a patent troll but then that's a feature not a bug.

"the value of your invention to you (but not to potential infringers) is bounded by your cash on hand."

This is both false (you are bounded by the cash on hand and the value of things you can use as collateral for loans or equity) and no different then the current case where you are bounded in the number of lawyer hours you can afford.

If I find an enormous diamond that is worth $20 million dollars but it costs more to have it properly appraised and marketed then I have cash on hand, trust me I will raise that money and sell it near full market price. I may not get 100% of the proceeds but you'll have a hard time convincing me that the apprisal system is incredibly biased against people that find diamonds.

Re: Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents

#108

Post by kelnos »

Steko wrote: post #57
Pewpewarrows wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think that Android devices are just clones of the iPhone, and that it gives Apple just cause to strike first, I'm not even going to bother writing a real response.

Trust me, you didn't. Android is not "just a clone" but it's clear that they decided to aggressively clone the iphone's features. If you don't think that's obvious, you missed what Android looked like 6 months before the iphone debut and 6 months after. Now whether those features are protectable as IP or not is another matter but if they are it's no surprise that Apple would want to enforce such protections.

So... what's your point, really? What's wrong with taking a successful product, and making a similar product to compete with it? Android may have quickly morphed into something more iPhone-like in the wake of the initial iPhone launch, but why is that seen as "cheating"? Why is "clone" a bad word? I think it's a great word. You don't like Apple's walled-garden approach? Fine, now you have competition, alternatives, and choice.

And hell, it's not like Android has been playing catch-up to iOS in the years since. There are some pretty awesome things in the base Android system that you still can't do on iOS (accounts manager, overriding the default app for just about any stock Android app, removable storage, etc.), or things that Android had first (multitasking), or things that aren't even in a stable iOS release yet (proper notifications) that Android has had for quite a while.

Now whether those features are protectable as IP or not is another matter but if they are it's no surprise that Apple would want to enforce such protections.

I just don't buy that world view. Yes, Apple is required to do whatever it takes to legally increase shareholder value. But in this case, it just amounts to an attempt at stifling competition. It's bad for the other companies, and it's bad for the end customers. Hell, it could be bad for Apple, too, if there's an import ban.

Re: Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents

#109

Post by jonknee »

willyt wrote: post #98
jonknee wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Billboard ads have nothing to do with patents. Neither does the look and feel.

Sorry. My original argument wasn't very clear, I didn't mean to argue that the look and feel is patentable. It's not, obvioisly. I suppose what I meant that I could imagine Steve Jobs seeing an advert like that, picking up the phone to the lawyers and saying 'what can we do about this' and these various patent suits are the result. I am not arguing for this use as a justification for software patents, just making an…

What adverts are you speaking of? I don't recall seeing an HTC phone that blatantly ripped off the iPhone's design (and actually HTC had been doing touch based phones since before Apple, see the HTC’s Touch P3450 for an example).

Re: Judge Finds Apple in Violation of HTC's Newly Acquired Patents

#110

Post by erydo »

wheels wrote: post #67
erydo wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already purchased those patents, though. It's kind of a sunk cost. They wouldn't be losing $4.5 billion cash if patents became worthless, they'd be losing ammunition for a type of fight that they wouldn't have to deal with anymore. That's like saying, "We can't stop fighting this war, then all our guns would be worthless."

Bad analogy. The war isn't over patents, it's general competition. It's more like the UN pushing you to sign a treaty pledging not to use nukes just after you spent a pile acquiring them. Now if patents were only used defensively (which they're obviously not in this case, since Apple went on the attack) the analogy would then be banning ballistic missiles right after acquiring a ballistic missile defense system, whic…

You're inferring something that wasn't intended. Your peace-treaty example was exactly the type of situation my analogy was referring to.

Patents are being used aggressively because that's the nature of competition—if anyone is going to use them that way, everyone has to. But it could be in everyone's interest if that option were removed from the table, regardless how much each had previously spent amassing an arsenal simply to remain competitive.

Post reply on HN