> Just remember Apple is being sued as much as it's suing.
That doesn't make it acceptable. I'm tired of making excuses for Apple, personally. I like their products, but they've worn my goodwill towards their brand down to a nub by being one of the most ruthless and (in my opinion) unethical brandishers of patents worldwide.
What I would really like to see is more information on who the aggressors are in all the cases. While I can find who is suing whom, I can't find who started suits in the cases of counter-suits having been filed.
There is no doubt Apple is in the middle of things and they are being extremely aggressive, and this particular suit seems over the top. However, I can't judge all of Apple's lawsuits with the current information I have. They are too prominent in the press and too little real information is being presented there.
Put another way, if we assume all the patents were valid (which is the lawyerly assumption) and companies really are infringing, is Apple wrong? If we were talking about people stealing the core of Mr. Fusion and putting out Mrs. Fusors, would Mr. Fusion be in the wrong to sue?
I would love nothing more than for all software patents to get dumped, but until that day comes, they are part of the rules of business. Apple could choose not to fight, but I don't think that would be keeping with fiduciary responsibility.
(Re-reading this, I realized it kind of turned into a stream of consciousness thing. Hopefully there is something to follow here).
That is awesome, and better than the other one I found (though slightly out of date), but it still doesn't identify the instigators. I would love to see an interactive graph like this, with the arrows drawing out over time.
Interesting to note at that point, Apple was being sued over twice as much as it was suing. Patents are so screwed up right now.
Yep, while I love and use apple products, I'll drop them like a rock like I dropped Windows for Linux in 1999-2000 if things get too bad with them.
What I find annoying with the patent situation is the fact that people seem to think this is something new with Apple for example. If they would compare the situation with other businesses they would note that patent suits are really common. Just on design patents alone car companies make the computer industry look like a kiddy playbox. The major auto manufacturers seem to love suing for the most basic of similarities. Which might explain why almost all cars are universally ugly in some way. But I digress.
So Apple doing bad things makes you mad at Apple. But the fact that other companies also play the same game, some less successfully and most importantly, with less press, doesn't impact your opinion of those companies?
You should direct your anger at the source of the issue, software patents. Getting angry at companies doing what they need to in the current environment isn't very productive.
> So Apple doing bad things makes you mad at Apple. But the fact that other companies also play the same game, some less successfully and most importantly, with less press, doesn't impact your opinion of those companies?
Since when has "everyone else is doing it" been a good justification? I'm tired of this kind of lowest-common-denominator-thinking in business. I'm tired of this implicit assumption that the only rational purpose for companies is to maximize profit and minimize their competition.
Maybe that's unfair, ridiculous, or childish. I don't really know.
> You should direct your anger at the source of the issue, software patents.
I do. I've also sunk software patents. While working at Microsoft I worked hard to find prior art for every patent proposed from any work I touched.
> Getting angry at companies doing what they need to in the current environment isn't very productive.
What's unproductive is maintaining the status quo. Apple is using patents to tactically bludgeon their strongest competition, and raising the cost of innovation in the process. This translates into less innovation, less competition, and higher prices for consumers in the mobile space.
What they "need to do"? Why did Apple need to sue Samsung? Apple doesn't need the cash, Samsung's tablets aren't hurting iPad sales very much, and Samsung didn't show any inclination to pre-emptively sue Apple.
If you don't enforce your patents there isn't much point to having a patent.
It has less to do with sales. The whole patent suit situation is systemic to the patent system. That and Apple tends to get into the news often it becomes "newsworthy" enough to report.
That doesn't make it acceptable. I'm tired of making excuses for Apple, personally. I like their products, but they've worn my goodwill towards their brand down to a nub by being one of the most ruthless and (in my opinion) unethical brandishers of patents worldwide.