Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403
I'm not really sure how to explain something when the example used was so absurd. It's like saying you can't make cars? Really? Hyperbole at its finest. The base level of understanding is either not there, or the 'I hate Apple' goggles are far too strong for any reasonable attempt to understand the issues.
The patent field is highly complex, each and every little tweak can turn something from a unique and protectable device to a generic device open to the entire world. None of us can say for certain that Apple can reach that standard here, but the mere fact that the case has gotten to this point demonstrates that it is very possible if not likely. You don't get an injunction like this without being able to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits.
|
Apple has attacked every other touchscreen tablet platform that has similar features like icons, multitouch, gestures, swiping, etc. with litigation. Many other tablets and phones are already subject to a $20-$40 increase in costs in terms of royalties other companies have paid to Apple to avoid situations like what is happening to Samsung right now. That cost is passed onto consumers. I'm not saying that Apple is wrong for doing what is obviously in their own best interests, but I don't like how the system works either.
His analogy was overly simplified but at the core, I don't see why it isn't applicable to compare Apple patenting the core operations that have emerged as the basic general commonalities and methods to use tablets and smartphones (like auto rotate when you rotate the device) with a hypothetical situation where a car company patents the idea of having the steering wheel being round.