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

#BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 374 posts

Re: #BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

#221

Post by msabalau »

sbuk wrote: post #196
msabalau wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the early adopters already have their Xboxes. The iPhone is lame and tired, and there was nothing at Apple's WWDC that had any wow. For the moment, the fun stuff is coming from the Android ecosystem, and Apple is getting in the way of people getting it. Hence the wrath of the crowd who adore new things, the ones that Apple used to care about, before they crossed the chasm and jumped the shark.

That is entirely subjective, and bordering on a troll.

"Cool" and "appealing" and "innovative" are inherently subjective.

Nevertheless, "Apple is getting in the way of us getting neat things" seems a more plausible source of the anger expressed than, than to believe that people have deeply held views about IP laws as they apply to this particular case, or that they have strong opinions about Apple's business practices generally (the spark point is a ban preventing consumers from buying a product, not, say labor practices in China)

If Apple were to announce a bright shiny new iPhone that was seen as innovative, and people were still angry and wanted to #BoycottApple, then this subjective hypothesis will be proven incorrect.

Re: #BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

#222

Post by runjake »

dhughes wrote: post #216
sjwright wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple isn't doing anything Motorola or Samsung haven't done. The only difference is the judge's decision. #BoycottJudges!

AFAIK Apple is the only mobile phone corporation who refuses to pay Motorola a royalty for the fundamental patent of a "portable hand-held telephone device".

Good? Because that seems absurd.

Re: #BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

#223

Post by pm90 »

calinet6 wrote: post #172
saalweachter wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I'd prefer to just leave the post at that, but to make a bit more of a contribution to discussion, fiduciary duty is a myth invented sometime in the 70s or 80s. No one has ever been sued for not maximizing the profits of the company the run. A corporation doesn't have to be evil, even if being evil were more profitable than being good. They can just choose to be less profitable and no one cares. Given the choice…

I absolutely agree with you, given the choice and the ideal world, I'd much rather live in a fair system where companies compete on the things that actually matter. Absolutely. I just think we're fooling ourselves if we think that we can simply expect people to adhere to this with no tangible incentive, rather than build a system which has the desired result. In other words, it's still the system that's broken. There…

I see what you are getting at, but you have got to remember that a company is a not a programmed, autonomous and unmanned robot which is doomed to follow the rules set by the market and the system, it is managed by real people who (I sincerely hope) have the ability to reason and to see the difference between right and wrong. Anyways, the decision to use the patent law this way was wrong on many levels. I'm sure Apple knew exactly what it was doing, so there's no need to blame the system, or the market.

Re: #BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

#224

Post by cooldeal »

sjwright wrote: post #213
shawnee_ wrote: post #169

Something about Koh's overwhelming bias for Apple seems really suspicious. It's one thing to preeminently ban sales of product A for reason X, but to also ban sales of product B for reason Y where products A and B have the same parent, and where reasons X and Y are completely unrelated? Something is wrong with this picture. What else could be going on? Maybe I have a cynical view of humanity, but I spent a few minute…

Apple isn't doing anything Motorola or Samsung haven't done. The only difference is the judge's decision. #BoycottJudges!

Didn't Apple start suing Android OEMs first? If I remember correctly, there was a mutual destruction pact before then.

Re: #BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

#225

Post by koide »

its_so_on wrote: post #210
shawnee_ wrote: post #169

Something about Koh's overwhelming bias for Apple seems really suspicious. It's one thing to preeminently ban sales of product A for reason X, but to also ban sales of product B for reason Y where products A and B have the same parent, and where reasons X and Y are completely unrelated? Something is wrong with this picture. What else could be going on? Maybe I have a cynical view of humanity, but I spent a few minute…

This isn't a corrupt country (there is a specific list of corrupt countries, this is a pretty objective statement.) It makes 0 sense for you to post "how far you got" as you didn't get anywhere.

The fact that a country as a whole is relatively non corrupt doesn't say anything about specific people and their corruptibility.

Also, the U.S.A. is number 24 of around 180 countries on the Corruption Perceptions Index and appears below countries such as Bahamas, Chile or Qatar.

Re: #BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

#226

Post by admiralpumpkin »

dhughes wrote: post #216
sjwright wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple isn't doing anything Motorola or Samsung haven't done. The only difference is the judge's decision. #BoycottJudges!

AFAIK Apple is the only mobile phone corporation who refuses to pay Motorola a royalty for the fundamental patent of a "portable hand-held telephone device".

Reason: Motorola refused to offer them Fair Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms; unlike the terms given to the rest of the licensees.

Re: #BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

#227

Post by raganesh »

dhughes wrote: post #216
sjwright wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple isn't doing anything Motorola or Samsung haven't done. The only difference is the judge's decision. #BoycottJudges!

AFAIK Apple is the only mobile phone corporation who refuses to pay Motorola a royalty for the fundamental patent of a "portable hand-held telephone device".

Let's talk about that in context.

Motorola contributed some patents to a mobile telecom standard; they made a commitment to license these standard essential patents in Fair, Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory terms to everyone who wants to build a "portable hand-held telephone device".

Motorola wants 2.25% of the sale price of each Apple device in which the standard is used.

Now, if each patent contributor to the standard demands the same rate as Motorola, the outgo will be above 100%.

Essentially, only those who have contributed to the patent pool can build a mobile phone. No one else can enter the market. How is that Fair, Reasonable or Non-Discriminatory?

That is why there is talk about EU & FTC in US investigating Google/Motorola for anti-competitive behavior.

Also, there is another interesting point here - all these patents are implemented in the baseband chip built by Qualcomm and used by Apple in its devices. Qualcomm has already paid the royalty for using Google/Motorola's patents. Now Motorola wants royalty from Apple also, for the same patents. Double-dipping anyone?

Re: #BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

#228

Post by pavanky »

siglesias wrote: post #190
itp wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what that has to do with the most recent injunction against the Samsung Galaxy Nexus. The judge issued the injunction on the strength of U.S. Patent 8,086,604, which "provides convenient access to items of information that are related to various descriptors input by a user, by means of a unitary interface which is capable of accessing information in a variety of locations, through a number of different t…

I don't feel that this lawsuit is specifically over the four patents in question and only the four patents in question. It's punishment (in the game theoretical sense) for Samsung's institutional attitude. Obviously the discourse here has taken on import beyond the purely legal realities and into a more moral conversation about right and wrong. Morally speaking, I feel that many of Samsung's design decisions are wron…

> It's punishment (in the game theoretical sense) for Samsung's institutional attitude.

That is not how the law works. That shouldn't be the way any law works!

Re: #BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

#229

Post by mkr-hn »

chmars wrote: post #84

Why is such a trend on Google+ relevant? As much as I would like to embrace Google+ as a Facebook alternative, Google+ has still a very limited audience – and, of course, a very Android-focus audience … EDIT: Downvoting my comment just because it isn't enthusiastic on Google+? Comm'on!

I downvoted because you presented opinion as fact with nothing to support the claims.

Re: #BoycottApple trending on Google plus due to Galaxy Nexus ban

#230

Post by raganesh »

cooldeal wrote: post #220
raganesh wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same blog, earlier article: http://www.fosspatents.com/2010/12/apple-vs-motorola-now-42-... Motorola filed the first suit. Even in the article you have linked, the author says "...why my position is that Apple attacked Motorola even though Motorola technically won the race to the courthouse". Irrespective of what the author thinks went in the background, he admits Motorola filed the suit first.

Do you honestly believe that Apple wouldn't have sued Motorola if it didn't sue Apple first? Do you think they found infringing patents among thousands and assembled a full lawsuit and filed it in in about 15 working days? Your own link states several times that Motorola was trying to pre-empt the attack and that Apple's attack was 'long awaited'. Do you really think Apple was not the patent aggressor in this case?

What I believe is besides the point. And the attempt by Motorola to pre-empt is the Author's point of view, not mine.

Why could it not be the other way around? Maybe Apple was preparing in secret, fearing a law suit by Motorola. That is equally plausible.

Post reply on HN