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

Apple takes patent attacks in a new direction

bgr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–38 of 38 posts

Re: Apple takes patent attacks in a new direction

#31

Post by neuroelectronic »

systemizer wrote: post #3

Apple's aggressive patent strategy is really turning me off; as it should for other people as well. I hope this is understand not only by the Tech community, but also average consumers. I don't know their claims, but given the past, this is getting out of hand. Last month, I would have said that I would consider buying an Ipod because it is a great product; but because of the past events, I would not consider buying…

A lot of Apple zealots are siding with them, saying that other tablet makers are directly ripping them off. I imagine a lot of the people who hold this position have never used a computer before their iPhone.

"All cellphone makers enforce their patents - all of them. Further, patent enforcement is critical to technological development. Companies will stop investing in R&D if others can simply wait for the product to come out, copy it and avoid all the costs associated with inventing it."

Re: Apple takes patent attacks in a new direction

#32

Post by Natsu »

admiralpumpkin wrote: post #14
scottmp10 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately this is clearly not the case. There actions are clearly harming both competitors (Samsung, etc) and consumers (through less consumer choice in the tablet market).

So your implied argument is that patents hurt consumers because they don't allow one company's patented innovations to be used without restriction by other companies? Your view is that the limit of one's benefit from an innovation should be the time between when one releases an innovative product and when your competitors release copy-cat products?

Motorola Mobility can get an injunction blocking Apple products in Germany banning the iPad. What good would it do if we could have no tablets at all, because they each violate each others' patents over trivial things?

Seriously, one of the patents is over automatic linking. Okay, it covers something more general, actually, but that's the embodiment that's the most recognizable.

Re: Apple takes patent attacks in a new direction

#33

Post by cbr »

yason wrote: post #27
talmand wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a person asks for boiling water, then yes, McDonald's may sell such a product without culpability. But the debate over how hot coffee should be is a different discussion. I'm curious though, what is the proper temperature of coffee? I for one don't drink it so I have no idea.

If Mr Darwin is at work, nobody should have the right to sue. Their coffee might be very hot or not so very hot, but the real problem is that thinking which allows the customer to lay blame on McDonald's without ever considering any responsibility for himself. That thinking blatantly ignores the fact that everyone is—to a fair extent and by default—responsible for their own mishaps unless they truly had no reasonable…

"when washing your hands you will generally first test the temperature of the running water before you splurge into your watery rejoicings instead of suing the café for reckless overuse of their water boiler"

No. In washing my hands at a café, I just turn on the water and put my fingers in. If it comes out at 210F instead of 130F, burning me badly, that is very much reckless overuse of the boiler by café.

Re: Apple takes patent attacks in a new direction

#34

Post by thebrokencube »

barkingllama wrote: post #5
systemizer wrote: post #3

Apple's aggressive patent strategy is really turning me off; as it should for other people as well. I hope this is understand not only by the Tech community, but also average consumers. I don't know their claims, but given the past, this is getting out of hand. Last month, I would have said that I would consider buying an Ipod because it is a great product; but because of the past events, I would not consider buying…

You can only hope that Apple is being as obnoxious as possible to spark interest in patent reform.

That's a pretty interesting point of view, one I never even considered. One can only hope.

Re: Apple takes patent attacks in a new direction

#35

Post by scottmp10 »

admiralpumpkin wrote: post #14
scottmp10 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately this is clearly not the case. There actions are clearly harming both competitors (Samsung, etc) and consumers (through less consumer choice in the tablet market).

So your implied argument is that patents hurt consumers because they don't allow one company's patented innovations to be used without restriction by other companies? Your view is that the limit of one's benefit from an innovation should be the time between when one releases an innovative product and when your competitors release copy-cat products?

I see what you are saying and I think there are short-term and long-term consequences. Certainly an injunction hurts consumers in the short-term since they have less choice. The patent-advocate would argue that in the long-term this model rewards innovators more and thus more people invest in innovation, helping consumers over the long term.

You are correct that my personal opinion is in favor of no patent protection. However my original point was that Apple's patent actions have had significant short-term impact that hurts consumers. You can certainly make an argument that there is a long-term positive impact, but I do not believe that Apple is in any way harming the patent system itself.

Re: Apple takes patent attacks in a new direction

#36

Post by Mordor »

sukuriant wrote: post #23

Am I the only person that actually thinks that charger cable (assuming its the same size) is a bit suspiciuos? It's like Samsung is either being lazy at this point, or is trying to goad Apple on to attack them. I have to side with Apple on the shape of the charger issue. Especially since there are plenty of shapes they could have used, some of them standardized, like mini/microUSB... By the way, the clenching feature…

Just don't understand why this matters, Apple should take this as a complement and come up with the next cool thing.

Apple's litigation just pushes everyone else to innovate, while killing off their own enthusiasm.

Re: Apple takes patent attacks in a new direction

#37

Post by grannyg00se »

admiralpumpkin wrote: post #17
grannyg00se wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are plenty of frivolous cases. When I looked at the details of thee hot coffee case the claim seemed even more absurd. The physical damage was worse than I expected but that doesn't make her less responsible.

Please explain "the details" which made it "even more absurd" to you. At what temperature would you start to assign responsibility to McDonalds? Can they, in your mind, give out boiling coffee without culpability? [edit: typo]

The details that made it even more absurd are:

1. She put a fresh, hot cup of coffee between her legs. 2. She put this cup right up near her genitals. 3. She messed around with the lid of the cup while it was in this position.

Coffee is supposed to be hot. In fact, customers typically demand coffee to be extremely hot, and complain when it isn't. Whether it is 80deg, 90deg, or 100deg is of little significance when considering blame for the action. The fact is she made the decision to put hot liquid in a flimsy cup near her genitals and begin messing around with the lid.

To me it's like asking for boiling water (for tea, perhaps) then taking the water and dumping it deliberately onto my lap and then trying to sue McDonalds. Her behaviour was so irresponsible and foolish, it might as well have been deliberate.

Extra sympathy for the extend of the pain and suffering. But sympathy should not redirect blame.

Re: Apple takes patent attacks in a new direction

#38

Post by grannyg00se »

Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #16
grannyg00se wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are plenty of frivolous cases. When I looked at the details of thee hot coffee case the claim seemed even more absurd. The physical damage was worse than I expected but that doesn't make her less responsible.

The fact that: (a) MacDonalds had been warned about this repeatedly in the past and (b) that the coffee was being served at temperatures significantly higher than you'd normally get from a kettle at home / work thus rendering the sort of normal expectations you might have moot didn't seem pertinent to you?

a) Warned about what exactly? That people are going to be reckless and possibly injure themselves? What action is McDonalds supposed to take to prevent idiocy? It's not a children's toy. It's for adult consumption.

b) Why would I expect that it would be similar to what I do at home? It's McDonalds. They serve their coffee very hot. People like to drive to work, and still have it hot when they arrive. Also, I have no expectations of those cups other than that they are flimsy. The temperature issue is not relevant anyway because if she wasn't negligent in her use of the cup the contents would have been kept safely contained. A knife in a restaurant can cause significant damage as well if you decide to be an idiot and try to remove an eye lash from someone's eye with it. Would you say that the knife was too sharp? That it is sharper than the knives you use at home?

Post reply on HN