Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America
1–10 of 128 posts
Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America
#2Patents. The classical government-granted monopoly. Incidentally the only type of undefeatable monopoly. Created with the best intentions, of course: to “encourage innovation”.
Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America
#3Absolutely no sympathy. Those who live by the patent shall die by the patent.
Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America
#4I trust Apple's commitment to privacy as much as I do Google's, but when they both remove a product over a stupid patent rather than pay the patent holder (Sonos' sued Google with their multiroom audio patent), we can see that it's possible for corporations to hold principled views about things.
Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America
#5I trust Apple's commitment to privacy as much as I do Google's, but when they both remove a product over a stupid patent rather than pay the patent holder (Sonos' sued Google with their multiroom audio patent), we can see that it's possible for corporations to hold principled views about things.
Google doesn't do business in China because they won't agree to the privacy violating terms of doing so, that is at least a $1T principle if you compare it to the amount of hardware and services that Apple sells there.
Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America
#6Patents. The classical government-granted monopoly. Incidentally the only type of undefeatable monopoly. Created with the best intentions, of course: to “encourage innovation”.
And they often do.
Apple of all companies certainly could've afforded to pay.
Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America
#7Absolutely no sympathy. Those who live by the patent shall die by the patent.
I’m holding judgement until the case is investigated further. It’s my understanding that so far everyone has basically said, “there’s enough evidence to proceed in court.”
Patent reform is something that is sorely needed (and more funding for the USPTO).
Take for example this patent on an anti gravity device: https://www.nature.com/articles/438139a#:~:text=The%20US%20p....
And then there’s the patent troll problem. As a small shop, I am particularly afraid of trolls shutting us down overnight with basically no recourse.
Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America
#8I trust Apple's commitment to privacy as much as I do Google's, but when they both remove a product over a stupid patent rather than pay the patent holder (Sonos' sued Google with their multiroom audio patent), we can see that it's possible for corporations to hold principled views about things.
> principled views about things.
Selfishly* principled. There's no exclusively abstract benefit here the way there is with e.g privacy rights; there's both the benefit of not having to pay royalties if they prevail as well as the second order benefit of deterring others from submitting patent litigation because other plaintiffs will know that Apple would rather burn cash reserves on litigation than on paying.
It's precisely for that reason that Apple should lose.
Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America
#9BS patents are bad, and patents lasting 20+ years are bad, but if someone's gonna get maimed by them… I can hardly think of a more deserving victim than Apple.
Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America
#10Patents. The classical government-granted monopoly. Incidentally the only type of undefeatable monopoly. Created with the best intentions, of course: to “encourage innovation”.
There are many problems with software patents and patents that are "_____ but on a phone/watch" but I'm curious of what your solution is? What is a better system?