Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
The most fascinating thing about all this is how people's particular phone choice plants them firmly on one side or the other on this legal quagmire. A case that has probably paid lawyers 10 of millions of dollars, careers worth of time invested in the details. But we have it all figured out by reading a few articles and just happen to fall on the side of the phone we own. Its neat.
Oh ya Azure has always hated apple forgot about that.
Oh and there's fanin80, we know what side he will be on.
Chemgear, he cheers every time apple stock goes up another 10 bucks, curious
Slava, IIRC a blackberry relic guy.
|
This is true for the time being. A new phone is on the horizon or maybe closer though, and the odds of it being a blackberry are pretty slim!
I don't have a horse in this race though. I just think that any company being granted patents for things like a grid layout of icons is ridiculous. Like I said earlier though, if I was Apple I would be going after Samsung and anyone else who potentially violates patents. I also think that its quite likely they did violate the patents because they made some components of the phones and were probably privy to proprietary information as a result. My issue isn't with the entire lawsuit or even with it being successful in general. My issue is that the system has allowed patents for things that require no innovation at all, and really shouldn't be patentable in the first place. The courts upholding that kind of stupidity is more what I care about.