Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Chief Patent Lawyer Leaves After Android Loss

Unknown Lamer posted more than 3 years ago | from the we're-all-friends-here dept.

Patents 101

Hugh Pickens writes "PC Magazine reports that Richard Lutton, Apple's current chief patent lawyer, is reportedly leaving the company after failing to block Android manufacturers from using iPhone-like features. 'It's possible that Apple's leadership wants the patent department to become more effective, especially in terms of litigation,' says intellectual property analyst Florian Mueller. 'They are probably disappointed that the first ITC complaint against HTC didn't go too well.' ... In addition Apple is aggressively seeking an injunction on Samsung's flagship Galaxy lineup." Samsung also happens to be displeased with Apple using their former legal counsel.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Or maybe... (3)

chispito (1870390) | more than 3 years ago | (#36737890)

'It's possible that Apple's leadership wants the patent department to become more effective, especially in terms of litigation,' says intellectual property analyst Florian Mueller.

Hopefully they canned him because he counseled them to go after bogus patent infringement suits.

Re:Or maybe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36737924)

"Hopefully they canned him because he counseled them to go after bogus patent infringement suits."

No, if that was the case, they would have dropped the bogus lawsuits against HTC, et al.

Re:Or maybe... (2)

Kenja (541830) | more than 3 years ago | (#36737936)

This is Apple we're talking about. Unless he traveled back in time to tell them to go after bogus patent infringements they where doing it long before he was involved.

Re:Or maybe... (1)

Moryath (553296) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738346)

Apple has quite a history of filing frivolous lawsuits. Then again, so do half the companies on the planet.

Remember the great visual aid roadmap [cnn.com] to help people make sense out of the last round of cell-phone-related patent lawsuits? I think it needs updating.

Re:Or maybe... (2)

kakyoin01 (2040114) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739418)

This is Apple we're talking about. Unless he traveled back in time...

This is Apple we're talking about. They have Time Machine.

Re:Or maybe... (1, Funny)

EraserMouseMan (847479) | more than 3 years ago | (#36737942)

They probably didn't "can" the guy. He probably left of his own accord. Everybody knows Apple treats everyone well. It's part of their holistic approach to deliver pleasant experiences across the board.

Re:Or maybe... (2)

JamesP (688957) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738442)

Above a certain level, no one is fired or resigns, everybody leaves "in mutual agreement"

Of course, the juicy details are left to the reader to imagine.

Re:Or maybe... (3)

Blindman (36862) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738892)

He probably wants to spend more time with his family.

Re:Or maybe... (0)

geekoid (135745) | more than 3 years ago | (#36742024)

haha, nice.

Re:Or maybe... (1, Insightful)

Virtucon (127420) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738058)

What makes them bogus? If you have a patent it is perfectly fine for you to go after an infringing entity. It's up to the courts to decide based on the evidence provided if there was indeed an infringement. If there has been infringement the court has a latitude of remedies available under law. What's usually missing is the remedies for patent trolls who produce nothing and just own intellectual property. That will require congress to grow a pair and finally act.

   

Re:Or maybe... (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738236)

That would be the opinion of a judge and/or jury on a case in which the validity or applicability of a patent is called into question as part of a defense while being sued.

Re:Or maybe... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36739550)

If you have a patent it is perfectly fine for you to go after an infringing entity. It's up to the courts to decide based on the evidence provided if there was indeed an infringement.

If I have a crowbar, it is perfectly fine for me to use it on people who abuse the patent system. It's up to the courts to decide based on the evidence provided if my actions are a crime or justifiable homicide.

Re:Or maybe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36742298)

That would be just fine IF (and this a big if) none could abuse the patent system for, lets say, smash the competition even if their claim is unreasonable (like the ITC seems to think it was in the case that seems to have lead to this). But we all know that it doesn't work that way and that most of the times the patents are only use to stall or cast doubt on the competitors reliability and market name (even if afterwards they do lose the claim it doesn't matter, damage done.... well, not in this case, Apple got what it deserves).

Or may be because they are giant APPHOLES? (0)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738668)

Or may be because they are giant APPHOLES?

Or... (2)

geoffrobinson (109879) | more than 3 years ago | (#36737926)

He wanted to leave but wanted to see the case through. Or who knows?

So instead of speculating on future Apple product we are now speculating on HR moves?

After Armageddon (2)

Virtucon (127420) | more than 3 years ago | (#36737986)

There will only be cockroaches and lawyers left. Of the lawyers that will be left, about 50% will be ambulance chasers, 30% patent trolls and 20% lobbyists.

Re:After Armageddon (3, Funny)

cyberchondriac (456626) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738046)

There will only be cockroaches and lawyers left.

There's a difference?

Re:After Armageddon (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738194)

Stop insulting the cockroaches.

Re:After Armageddon (1)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738240)

Well, when someone sues your arse off, will you run to a cockroach or to a lawyer? And which one would you suddenly find useful?

Re:After Armageddon (1)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738792)

I'll do the same thing I've done in the past when encountering legal problems: use my almost human ability to read and research so that I may present and win a case.

The average lawyer and the average computer programmer share an otherwise unmatched skill at overrating their abilities.

Re:After Armageddon (1)

Chirs (87576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738906)

Sorry, I have a family with small children, a full time job, friends, and a house to take care of. I don't have time to essentially go to law school as well.

Re:After Armageddon (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739196)

The fact that people have to go to law school to understand what the law says a lot about how things (dont) work with any government, and have never actually worked (civilization invented writing and, instantly, there were the lawyers).

Re:After Armageddon (1)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739424)

You can generally understand what the laws say without attending law school. Education in the law is needed to understand how to work within a framework of legal processes.

Re:After Armageddon (1)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739946)

No, it says a lot about the fact that things usually never are simple or straightforward, and that the law reflects the fact.

Re:After Armageddon (1)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36742052)

Yeah, that's a problem with filling your life up completely with various things all of which you consider impossible to postpone: your life is already so full up with mundane tasks done for others that the moment some unexpected problem comes along which requires more than a modicum of extra effort, you're fucked. It's the way the modern Western world was built.

Re:After Armageddon (1)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739602)

I take it you are a programmer then, egregiously overrating your ability to represent yourself?

Re:After Armageddon (1)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36742162)

I don't put any rating on myself. Where I stand a chance of applying my own intellect and/or dexterity to something, I'll do it. Where I know that mere effort won't get me anywhere (I have neither the manual skill nor the operating table to perform even the simplest surgery), I'm happy to delegate.

But in no case would I assert myself competent enough to take another's place, i.e. represent another person. That's where the overrating takes place. When you base your country's comfort on slave labour (in the Far East), you have to make up an economy by creating a variety of entirely unnecessary service industries.

For routine applications of the appropriate discipline, any moderately competent man is able to program for himself or represent himelf in law. But where would your programmer salary go if you admitted this? Sure, the market's dealing with overpaid underachieving (ex-)programmers quite well, but it's yet to do the same for lawyers because of the regulatory framework and the immense fear of the law instilled in the average citizen.

Re:After Armageddon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36741856)

I find assassins are more reputable than lawyers.

Cheaper, too.

Re:After Armageddon (1)

Virtucon (127420) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738254)

A single cockroach has six legs, you can use that to distinguish one cockroach vs. one lawyer. However three lawyers will have six legs so you'll
need to distinguish them individually unless they're in a human centipede configuration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Human_Centipede_(First_Sequence) [wikipedia.org]

Re:After Armageddon (1)

MarkvW (1037596) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739400)

What you have just written looks very much like legalese.

Re:After Armageddon (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738352)

There's a difference?

One has more morality than a politician, the other has *slightly* more morality than a politician.

Re:After Armageddon (2)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 3 years ago | (#36740518)

Yep. The one is a hated pest, the other is an insect.

Re:After Armageddon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36743368)

Cockroaches have souls.

Re:After Armageddon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36742316)

Without the rest of us, those parasites actually would die out. It is a common misunderstanding, but surviving nuclear fallout isn't their biggest obstacle.

Hey Apple... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738002)

Suck it.

Love,

Android

P.S.

I am banging Windows Phone 7 on the side.

Re:Hey Apple... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738038)

Suck it.

  Love,

  Android

  P.S.

  I am banging Windows Phone 7 on the side.

Wait!! I didn't post that! Blast, I must have downloaded a malicious app again...

Re:Hey Apple... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36739440)

No, Anonymous Coward... I'm afraid you have multiple personality disorder.

NO I DON'T!

Yes, yes, I'm afraid it's true. Just check out your posting history, and I'm sure you'll find plenty of things you didn't post, well before you got your new phone...

Spare me!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738012)

intellectual property analyst Florian Mueller.

Really??? I thought he was a spokesperson for SCO??

Re:Spare me!! (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738362)

You see how close IP and patents are?

Re:Spare me!! (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738898)

Adding his name was flamebait. Mueller is a self-proclaimed analyst, rather than one that cogent individuals seeking referential integrity would choose, IMHO.

Pickins knew that it would up the pageview count by inserting his name is my guess.

Recourse (1)

microbee (682094) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738018)

Samsung also happens to be displeased with Apple using their former legal counsel.

Samsung should hire Richard Lutton then.

Re:Recourse (1)

gubers33 (1302099) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738082)

Apple will sue them for Patent Infringement- They developed Richard Lutton first.

Apple playing dirty (3, Interesting)

gubers33 (1302099) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738056)

Using Samsung's former counsel is just plain dirty. Apple has an internal legal department and is purposely hiring lawyers who have inside information on Samsung. I mean come on, Apple is starting to act like Microsoft. Jobs wants anything that uses the same technologies as the iPad or iPhone to not exist because he sees as a threat for good reason. Apples only makes one model of each and there is little room for innovation. Android on the other hand has multiple manufacturers making the phones and tablets and because of they they are creating phones that can display HD and shoot video in 3D. I mean this getting shady in using former representation and then citing the Tariff Act of 1930 against HTC. I think Steve Jobs might react the same way as Eric in Billy Madison if he had to define "Business ethics".

Re:Apple playing dirty (1)

Normal Dan (1053064) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738104)

It's a dog-eat-dog world out there.

Re:Apple playing dirty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738188)

I mean come on, Apple is starting to act like Microsoft.

Starting to?

Re:Apple playing dirty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738298)

What's "dirty" about that? Hiring someone who used to work for a competitor is not against law, and in fact it's a pretty good move for Apple to make. Because you know, they're a business that wants to succeed.

Re:Apple playing dirty (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738492)

When the basis of your business is founded on these kind of manoeuvres you are in trouble

I mean, only trolls can call this a business case.

Re:Apple playing dirty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738934)

Okay? Says you. Apple seems to be doing just fine, and it also doesn't seem like the "basis of their business" is founded on this sort of thing anyway.

Re:Apple playing dirty (1)

KlomDark (6370) | more than 3 years ago | (#36742478)

Give em a couple years, they're starting to tick off even the smarmy Apple fans. They are already leaving in droves for Android. The cool factor only lasts so long, and they outstayed their welcome.

Re:Apple playing dirty (1)

That Guy From Mrktng (2274712) | more than 3 years ago | (#36743918)

Apple seems to be doing just fine

Sure, Microsoft did just as fine or even better when it started to use those shady tactics, in fact they are the innovators in IT shady stuff, they still doing fine because they rammed the competition in the ass to OS domination and undeservingly MS Windows become something indispensable, but iPads just don't fill any definition of indispensable. So, whats your point?

Re:Apple playing dirty (2)

gubers33 (1302099) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738516)

I never said it was against the law to hire a competitor's former employee, however in court with legal counsel it can be against the law if the judge rules in favor of Samsung for conflict of interest. And yes this does fit the mold for counsel dismissal for conflict of interest.

Re:Apple playing dirty (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36740288)

Depends on the details on the employment but it happens all the time. Firms that specialize in patent ligation are not as common as other firms. Remember when SCO hired Boies and his current firm to represent them and IBM hired his previous law firm? There wasn't a lot of furor over that. I would suspect that if Apple does not use the same lawyers as Samsung used and Samsung got back all their files it wouldn't present as big a conflict of interest.

Re:Apple playing dirty (4, Informative)

LynnwoodRooster (966895) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739002)

Apples only makes one model of each and there is little room for innovation.

Even worse, Apple makes 50% of their revenue - and over 50% of their profits - from a SINGLE product in a SINGLE market (iPhone in smartphones). ANY loss in growth or actual loss in marketshare in that market or with that product means a direct, corresponding 2:1 loss in their revenue and profit (lose 2% in iPhone sales, lose 1% of your revenue).

Apple pretty much has a single product - the iPhone. Everything else totaled is the minority revenue and profit generator for Apple. If they take ANY hits to the iPhone, they're in a very bad position. This is why Apple is getting so aggressive about cell phones - they are so dependent on that single product in a single market that they cannot afford any loss in growth of that product in that market.

Any bets on iPad taking the iPhone's revenue spot? (1)

alispguru (72689) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739666)

What you say is true today. Given the iPad's growth and its dominance of the niche it essentially created, I doubt it will be true a year from now.

Re:Apple playing dirty (1)

maccodemonkey (1438585) | more than 3 years ago | (#36743012)

iPhone is two products (3GS and 4), and the category also counts the iPod Touch, which sells more units than the iPhone.

Certainly a large category for Apple, but most of it is driven by classic iPod users migrating to the iPod Touch, which is a pretty safe market from Android. It's not really the situation you imply.

Re:Apple playing dirty (1)

That Guy From Mrktng (2274712) | more than 3 years ago | (#36743970)

The iPod touch it's a pretty good "palm". For those like me that don't like smartphones and have been using Android tablets for some time (w/out complains) the iPod touch it's an interesting option nonetheless.

Re:Apple playing dirty (1)

gubers33 (1302099) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751838)

That is not two products. It is one product and it's new release. It is like saying IE7 and IE8 are different products, it is the same product different version.

Re:Apple playing dirty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36756086)

Except, unlike IE7 and IE8, they continue to market them at the same time. They just launched the 3GS in India, in fact.

I'd consider the relationship more "iPhone" and "iPhone Pro."

Re:Apple playing dirty (1)

Anubis IV (1279820) | more than 3 years ago | (#36744218)

So, it sounds like you're saying Apple would crumble if the iPhone business fell apart. You do realize that the iPhone didn't even exist until 2007, right, and that Apple's entry into the market was derided by pretty much all of the big players? The iPhone has seen some explosive growth, to be sure, but Apple has shown that it has an ability to reinvent itself quickly in the last decade and a half.

15 years ago, they were on the verge of bankruptcy. Then they came out with some colorful computers and a 21st century OS that got them back in the game. Just 10 years ago, they were still only making computers and didn't have another leg to stand on. Then the iPod came along, and pretty soon they started selling music too. Eventually they became the biggest seller of music, and around that time the iPhone came out. And now there's the iPad, video rentals, iCloud, and who knows what else? Apple has a higher market capitalization than any other technology company.

Even if the iPhone were to disappear tomorrow, Apple is sitting on tens of billions of dollars in cash and has several other very successful product lines to sustain them until they come up with the next big thing. They've also shown that they're content to play a niche role in markets, and have done so in a variety of different areas for extended periods of time.

Re:Apple playing dirty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36746002)

"So, it sounds like you're saying Apple would crumble if the iPhone business fell apart."

No, he's saying it would just shrink drastically.

I don't think anyone would think the loss of the iPhone would make Apple dissapear, far from it, like you said, it has too big a cash pile, and it has a strong base in other products- Macs and iPods, but in the last few years it has seen a massive growth spurt just about overtaking Microsoft in quarterly profit and it's market cap has gone through the roof, and it's those things that would suffer. It is by many metrics (market cap, quarterly profits) the biggest player in the IT world right now and that's largely off the back of the iPhone. It wont dissapear if the iPhone suffers, but it's market cap and profits will drop down quite notably putting it back behind companies like Microsoft, HP, and possibly Google in terms of market cap, revenue and profits. It'll be a giant nonetheless, just far from being the biggest fish in the pond anymore.

The problem is there seem to be signs they're running out of ideas too- no new iPhone this June means it's the first year they've failed to release on around June, the latest iOS update is lacklustre, only adding things Android already had for years like the notification bar, and the iPad update was pretty weak. The question is where do they go from here? Are there really any new markets they can create? could they compete in say the games console market? They've already failed to make any real headway in the TV market with the AppleTV.

If they're genuinely at a point where they're no longer leading, and just following Android then that inevitably means that they're now going to struggle to grow in their existing markets, and if there are no other new markets for them to enter then, well, what's the plan? Music players to phones was a no brainer, and tablets were clearly a market in need of some real work to which the jump was trivial with iOS, but now what? maybe wristwatch computing or something? I don't know, but right now the signs aren't terribly positive.

Re:Apple playing dirty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36746916)

15 years ago, they were on the verge of bankruptcy.

True

Just 10 years ago they a 21st century OS and that got them back in the game.

Now true.

Re:Apple playing dirty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36739036)

Not really. There are a limited number of firms that can effectively handle big litigation like this. It's very common for companies to give a little work to all of the top 20 (or so) firms in an attempt to get those firms conflicted out of litigation. I'm not sure about Samsung, but I know Apple and Microsoft do this.

Re:Apple playing dirty (1)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 3 years ago | (#36744704)

It seems to me that having the same exact attorneys on the case is a clear violation of legal standards. The whole point of having a lawyer is that you can confide in them. To have that lawyer turn around and file suit against you in a matter similar to one they represented you in completely violates the attorney-client privilege. Obviously I don't know the details here, but this sounds like the sort of thing that could even get somebody disbarred.

I'm sure the judge will investigate and bar anybody with insider knowledge about Samsung from being involved in the litigation. I don't know that this would extend to the entire firm.

On the other hand, if Samsung loses they might actually have a malpractice tort against the opposing counsel. After all, if they did a proper job advising Samsung regarding patents then they wouldn't have prevailed against Samsung in court. How's that for a no-win situation?

Losing the innovation battle (1)

acid06 (917409) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738088)

While Apple has done a lot of innovation in the previous years, it seems now they started to lose the innovation battle.

Since they can't innovate in tech anymore they're probably thinking they should try to innovate in the legal area... let's see how will the Apple fans digest that thought...

Re:Losing the innovation battle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738148)

When did Apple EVER innovate? All I have ever done is see them take 2 ideas that other companies have developed, combined them, and called it their amazing idea.

Re:Losing the innovation battle (1)

vijayiyer (728590) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738530)

By your rationale, no company develops anything. Combining ideas from disparate companies into a single product practically defines innovation.

Re:Losing the innovation battle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738884)

No, innovation implies something new and different, not combining two already made ideas into one. El Camino wasn't an innovation, but an SUV was.

Re:Losing the innovation battle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36739558)

What about sporks?

Re:Losing the innovation battle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36740042)

To innovate is not to reform!

Re:Losing the innovation battle (1, Insightful)

tyrione (134248) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738348)

While Apple has done a lot of innovation in the previous years, it seems now they started to lose the innovation battle. Since they can't innovate in tech anymore they're probably thinking they should try to innovate in the legal area... let's see how will the Apple fans digest that thought...

Thanks for the laugh. Apple has the most lawsuits filed against it in the entire Industry. It's not because it's running around filing frivolous lawsuits. It's because it's innovating and people see it making massive inroads into areas once controlled by other players. With the heavy investment in R&D being so efficient at Apple resulting in a massive increase in Apple Patents they are required to defend them or lose them.

Re:Losing the innovation battle (2)

X.25 (255792) | more than 3 years ago | (#36741340)

It's because it's innovating and people see it making massive inroads into areas once controlled by other players

No, really, please tell me what is it that Apple innovated? What R&D are you talking about?

Re:Losing the innovation battle (2)

Actually, I do RTFA (1058596) | more than 3 years ago | (#36741782)

No, really, please tell me what is it that Apple innovated?

Well, multitouch screens... oh no, that was Microsoft. Maybe tablet PCs? Oh, no wait, the first one of those I saw ran Windows. Well they at least created a whole new OS a few years ba... damn.

Re:Losing the innovation battle (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 3 years ago | (#36742120)

The popular smart phone. Innovation does NOT make something completely new and untouched by anything every thought of before.

As far as tablets? that could be Elisha Gray. Something more modern? the RAND tablet/
The there was GO... which is where MS stole technology to begin their own tablet product.

So yeah, not a lot of innovation from MS either.

MS and Apple just happened to be around when manufacturing techniques are at a place where previous good ideas who failed do to lack in infrastructure can now be made.

Re:Losing the innovation battle (1)

That Guy From Mrktng (2274712) | more than 3 years ago | (#36744000)

My old and trusty, still working and 3 years ago retired Sony Ericsson P910 would like to have a word w/ anyone claiming that Apple invented smartphones. Palm Treos and BBs would like to join the conversation too.

Re:Losing the innovation battle (1)

Actually, I do RTFA (1058596) | more than 3 years ago | (#36750116)

Also, my windows smartphone from 2006 would like to chime in as well.

Re:Losing the innovation battle (1)

CheerfulMacFanboy (1900788) | more than 3 years ago | (#36746048)

No, really, please tell me what is it that Apple innovated?

Well, multitouch screens... oh no, that was Microsoft. Maybe tablet PCs? Oh, no wait, the first one of those I saw ran Windows. Well they at least created a whole new OS a few years ba... damn.

Multitouch screen from Microsoft? Oh, you mean that huge rig with a camera - stick that in your mobile device and drag it around.

As for tablet PCs - yeah, Microsoft had them before, several times in fact. Apple was the one who didn't screw them up - several times.

Re:Losing the innovation battle (1)

Actually, I do RTFA (1058596) | more than 3 years ago | (#36750192)

Multitouch screen from Microsoft? Oh, you mean that huge rig with a camera

No, I meant multitouch capacitance touchscreens. You know, what phones use.

Apple was the one who didn't screw them up

*cough* Newton *cough*

Re:Losing the innovation battle (1)

CheerfulMacFanboy (1900788) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751814)

Multitouch screen from Microsoft? Oh, you mean that huge rig with a camera

No, I meant multitouch capacitance touchscreens. You know, what phones use.

So you "remember" things - have you seen a doctor about that?

Apple was the one who didn't screw them up

*cough* Newton *cough*

Which outsold all tablet PCs attempts combined several times. Mostly because it was far better than all of them combined.

Re:Losing the innovation battle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36742802)

They innovated the concept known as "Smartphones that don't completely suck ass." For this, yes, they're entitled to own a big chunk of the market.

More spam from Florian Mueller (5, Informative)

Trufagus (1803250) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738144)

It's starting to appear that Florian Mueller is spamming /.?

He was long ago discredited, and yet his useless posts are showing up quite regularly as the source of /. articles. Presumably he is using /. to increase his pagerank.

Re:More spam from Florian Mueller (2)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738742)

It would be marginally more correct to say that Florian Mueller is spamming PC Magazine, since the reason he's mentioned in the /. summary is because he was quoted in TFA.

Re:More spam from Florian Mueller (3, Interesting)

Anubis IV (1279820) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739824)

Exactly what I'm thinking. I've read coverage of this on 2-3 other sites today, and none of them indicated there was anything unusual about what was going on or that anything should be read into it. When higher-ups at Apple leave on poor terms, it's much more dramatic than this. You don't even have to look hard to find examples, since the breakups were so explosive. There's Fred Anderson, the former CFO and interim CEO who got embroiled with the SEC and made accusations against Steve Jobs (blasphemy!); Jon Rubenstein, who became the CEO of Palm and publicly made some harsh jabs at Apple while launching webOS; and Mark Papermaster, who was forced out during the antennagate brouhaha with the iPhone 4 last year.

The timing with the HTC ruling that didn't go their way is likely coincidental, since it's just one minor ruling amongst dozens of cases that they have going on. You don't oust someone that high up over something that small, and Apple wins at least as often as it loses in court, so there's no reason his departure should signal internal legal troubles at Apple. Hell, we even had an article on /. just yesterday about how they fired off another round of attacks at HTC, and it mentioned that they had made similar attacks against Samsung not long before that.

The guy probably just left because he got a better job offer. That does happen, as most of us here should know.

FM != Hugh Pickens (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36740820)

Florian has his own Slashdot account. This was submitted by Hugh Pickens, a prolific contributor in his own right. The only mention of Florian is as a quote from TFA, making it quite difficult to increase his PageRank via backlinks from Slashdot, given that such links do not exist and links in stories get nofollowed.

But please don't let facts ruin your misinformed rant. This is Slashdot, after all.

CFL; DR (1)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#36744854)

Cites Florian Mueller; Didn't Read

CFM; DR (1)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#36744974)

of course i meant CFM; DR

Not just Slashdot (1)

Xest (935314) | more than 3 years ago | (#36746038)

Even the BBC is quoting him now, and The Register regularly quotes him and peddles his shit, although that's less of a suprise as The Register always relies on shills and people long discredited and full of shit to backup it's falsehoods- from music industry puppets, to discredited climate change denialists, to irrelevant military "experts" it's less of a suprise there. The BBC though? I'm dissapointed to say the least.

Florian Mueller (2)

bannable (1605677) | more than 3 years ago | (#36738180)

I stopped reading this trash as soon as I realized he was involved in the article.

Re:Florian Mueller (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36739692)

Congratulations on reading farther than most readers on any given article!

Florian Mueller (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738596)

says intellectual property analyst Florian Mueller

I stopped reading right there. Even if this article is not obviously slanted to push an agenda, I still will assume it that is has one.

Apple's Case for a Preliminary Injunction Was Weak (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738662)

In order to get an injunction barring something, Apple needs to meet five elements of which the most important is:

Immediate and irreparable injury

What would their harm be? Lost sales? Its just monetary damages, which are repairable.

DO.NOT.QUOTE.FLORIAN.MUELLER (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36738674)

For the love of God, ignore the idiot!

" intellectual property analyst Florian Mueller" (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739654)

You are having a laugh, right? "Paid Microsoft mouth piece" is a lot more accurate. Whatever happens at any Microsoft competitor, this guy will put a negative spin on it.

Re:" intellectual property analyst Florian Mueller (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36740542)

Florian Mueller is as much expert on IP as I am an expert on Formula One racing because I played Gran Turismo once.

Correlation!=causality (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36739730)

In the article, Apple has not disclosed why the executive is leaving. It may be for all sorts of reasons including more time with family, better opportunity, he hates Steve Jobs, whatever. The only source cited about the possible Android link is speculation by Florian Mueller and he provides no basis for that supposition. His guess is as good as anyone else's but it is still a guess.

let this be a lesson... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36740290)

upset his jobs-ness and be cast out from eden

A deserved patent? (1)

Jazari (2006634) | more than 3 years ago | (#36741682)

I don't like the Apple mindset, and I use an Android phone. But I have to admit that the original iPhone was revolutionary. Don't they deserve a patent for that?

Re:A deserved patent? (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 3 years ago | (#36742144)

hmmm, yes and no. They probably have a legitimate patent claim on some technology in the phone, and possibly some manufacturing techniques, but a patent on 'smart phone'? no.

How? (1)

Anomalyst (742352) | more than 3 years ago | (#36741708)

How do you patent a Chief? Isnt there decades of prior art?

Samsung i9000 (1)

dave87656 (1179347) | more than 3 years ago | (#36760092)

I just go a Samsung I9000 Smartphone and I'm very impressed. I think the IPhone is good, too, but it costs twice as much. Apples motto seems to be "If you can't beat 'em, sue 'em".

Action patented (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36790082)

I would like to patent the action of wiping my a** with TP. Since I am the first person to market the action; I should be granted the patent. Subsequently I can sue the whole world and make them pay me for wiping their a**. WTF? The US Patent Office should be investigated. How the hell can they grant such patents to begin with? The whole stupid patent system needs to be revamped.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?