31–40 of 46 posts
On the one hand, I'm pretty sick of this nonsense. On the other hand, it might be in everyone's best interest if HTC succeeds here. If millions of fanboys are denied their shiny new iPhones and Apple, which is rather well connected in Washington, finally winds up losing money due to the patent system, maybe we'll finally seem some progress towards reform.
Quite condescending.
Hopefully this will be the case that gives Cook the ability to "gracefully withdraw" from Jobs' legal intifada against Android, and we can end this silliness for good.
Apple are more likely to buy HTC outright for the patents in question than not sell the iPhone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but Apple being sued over patents is OK, it's only when they sue somebody else that there's a problem. It's just like with Chinese labour. Everyone else uses them, but Apple using them is wrong, even if they pay more than everyone else and the workers prefer to work in the Apple device factories. Didn't you get the memo?
The problem is that Apple was the one who started using patents offensively, as far as I know.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no Android vs iPhone here. At worst for Apple, they let HTC off the hook and continue against others, for as long as they can.
It doesn't sound like there could be any "let HTC off the hook". The whole point of this is that HTC is seeking an injunction against Apple. Even if Apple withdrew all complaints, HTC could still seek that injunction.
Remember: HTC's loyalties are with their shareholders, not to fight a war against Apple on behalf of Google or Android fans. If their board determined that selling bottled water was better than making phones, they have a duty to pivot. Google (Motorola) is different, they have a much larger stake in Android.
On the one hand, I'm pretty sick of this nonsense. On the other hand, it might be in everyone's best interest if HTC succeeds here. If millions of fanboys are denied their shiny new iPhones and Apple, which is rather well connected in Washington, finally winds up losing money due to the patent system, maybe we'll finally seem some progress towards reform.
Regarding Washington, last time I check Apple was not even close to be the company that invest more money in lobbying. I don't know what is your base for "rather well connected" but if you have any evidence on this, it will be great to know.
“I don’t care if they bought these patents to sue you or not,” Pender told McKeon. “They are a property right.” Surely he should care if people are purchasing patents purely for litigation. There are not many other items that you can legally purchase for the sole purpose of using the courts to stop someone from doing something that would otherwise be perfectly legal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me, it's been fascinating to see what huge companies that are flush with more cash than ever before [1] will do with that cash during a prolonged recession. The most common argument for continuing to lower taxes on businesses is that it will stimulate the economy because the businesses will spend the money on their employees. It looks like what actually happens is that they spend the money waging legal wars again…
Legal wars tend to be expensive because they involve spending a lot of money on employees, though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me, it's been fascinating to see what huge companies that are flush with more cash than ever before [1] will do with that cash during a prolonged recession. The most common argument for continuing to lower taxes on businesses is that it will stimulate the economy because the businesses will spend the money on their employees. It looks like what actually happens is that they spend the money waging legal wars again…
Legal wars tend to be expensive because they involve spending a lot of money on employees, though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that Apple was the one who started using patents offensively, as far as I know.
Sorry, but that'd be Nokia and Motorola.