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 Loses Bid For Emergency Ban On HTC Phone Imports

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the itc-being-sane-you-don't-say dept.

Patents 305

New submitter tukang writes "The US International Trade Commission has rejected an emergency request by Apple to detain some HTC phones (including the One X and EVO 4G) at the border while the agency investigates Apple's claims of patent infringement. In May, HTC's phone shipment was held up at the border and was only allowed to pass after U.S. Customs and Border Protection received assurances that HTC worked around Apple patents, a claim which Apple disputes."

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

Only a little evil (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525235)

Apple isn't behaving well but they still have a long way to go to reach Microsoft levels of evil.

I mean, MS included a BROWSER in their OS. ...and they didn't even give you a way to uninstall it! Now THAT is pure evil.

Re:Only a little evil (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525277)

Isn't that what Apple is doing ?

Re:Only a little evil (1, Flamebait)

GeekInComa (2675279) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525321)

No, it's what Google is trying to do. And not only include a browser, but make their browser the whole OS including, but not limited to, putting away all your files and settings behind their gates (cloud hosting).

Re:Only a little evil (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525417)

You'd have to be in a coma to be that dumb, shillboy.

Re:Only a little evil (2)

TheoGB (786170) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525289)

Yeah, a browser. I mean, that's really beyond that pale. Who on earth needs a browser these days? (Now if you'd said a shoddy, substandard, open-to-attacks browser, that might have read a bit better.)

Re:Only a little evil (4, Insightful)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525375)

Yeah, well, Microsoft lets you do things with your computer that are UNSAFE, like install software NOT APPROVED by them. Can you believe how evil Microsoft is? And Google actually helps these "open source" pirates to steal our great ideas! Obviously, Apple is the good guy here. They're not anti-competitive - just innovative, trendy, and easy to use! None of that "freedom" nonsense. You'll use Apple and you'll like it. Trust us!

Fully prepared to be accused of being an "Apple hater" for not buying the Apple agenda, and being modded down by some people who probably are making use of not-so-above-board mod points. But hey, karma to burn.

Re:Only a little evil (4, Funny)

TheoGB (786170) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525429)

On Slashdot I always thought that slamming Apple was fine so long as you made it clear that you were a dyed-in-the-wool *nix fanboy. I'm not sure you managed to put that across, though. Damn...

Re:Only a little evil (5, Interesting)

Dynetrekk (1607735) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525733)

Yeah, well, Microsoft lets you do things with your computer that are UNSAFE, like install software NOT APPROVED by them.

I've got mod points, but I'll rather point out that on my mac I often compile and install software that has never been approved by anyone. Mac OS X is unix, so ./configure; make works rather often. I'm not a "fanboi" but I'm not too impressed by claims not supported by facts, either.

Re:Only a little evil (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525815)

Yes, but if you buy one of Apple's pocket-sized computers you need to constantly fight with the manufacturer to install any Unapproved Software on it.

Re:Only a little evil (5, Informative)

walshy007 (906710) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525967)

Give it time, while apple's future is hard to predict the general trend seems to be going to more lock down the better, hell with the next os x having developer signing they are paving the way for the future lock down. All they'd have to do is change a setting to refuse to run things not signed by them and the transformation would be complete.

Re:Only a little evil (0, Troll)

Dynetrekk (1607735) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525993)

I don't disagree as such; however, I don't see the point in speculating over all sorts of conceivable future scenarios. In my book, the App Store, which requires signing and sandboxing, is a good idea in the same way that signed packages in your average linux package manager is a good idea - as long as there's an option to overriding that by manually downloading a program. If apple kill that option, it's going to hit them hard in the dev community, so I'm not betting on that happening anytime soon. These possible scenarios are certainly not proof of apple's evilness NOW.

Re:Only a little evil (3, Interesting)

samoanbiscuit (1273176) | more than 2 years ago | (#40526013)

I wrote a long screed about "teh Apple is evulz!". Then I took a breath, deleted it, and decided to say only this: If you are a user that prefers to compile and install your own software in a manner not explicitly approved by Apple (like a developer's licence), you should just keep your options open. At this point in the game, the OS X is more likely to change to resemble iOS than the other way around. Might not happen, but options are always good.

Re:Only a little evil (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525821)

Care to point out what the "Apple agenda" is, which you are not buying. And care to point out which freedoms you don't jaÂve on a Mac?

Re:Only a little evil (1)

rodrigoandrade (713371) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525833)

Yeah, well, Microsoft lets you do things with your computer that are UNSAFE

Porsche vehicles have all kinds of features to prevent unsafe driving (ABS, traction control, stability control, etc.) yet we don't hate Porsche like we hate Apple. What's the deal??

Re:Only a little evil (1)

RaceProUK (1137575) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525905)

Apple's products don't weight over a ton, and aren't capable of speeds up to 200mph.

Re:Only a little evil (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525957)

"Apple's products don't weight over a ton, and aren't capable of speeds up to 200mph...."

I have had several apple products up to 200 mph and far higher than that. They are certainly capable of speeds of over 200mph.

Now doing that under their own power? that's another story.

Re:Only a little evil (3, Informative)

Entrope (68843) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525963)

I'm not an auto fanatic, so inform me if I have missed something: Has Porsche been using software and look-and-feel patents of questionable validity and worth to take their competitors' products off the market?

Re:Only a little evil (0)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525999)

Porsche is a German company and so has not signed up to the collective madness of the USA Patents system, instead it is based in a country where software patents are invalid ...

Re:Only a little evil (3, Interesting)

Flipao (903929) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525463)

MS including a browser with the OS that had no regard for existing standards set the web back some 5-6 years. If it hadn't been for Opera, Firefox and later Chrome and Safari (on mobile) web developers all over the world might have hanged themselves by now. Yeah, they were evil then, they are evil now.

Re:Only a little evil (4, Insightful)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525797)

If you think that pushing a piece of software that doesn't follow some arbitrary standard is evil, you have a perspective warped beyond imagining.

Re:Only a little evil (2)

RaceProUK (1137575) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525911)

Pushing software isn't evil. Abusing a monopoly position to eradicate the competition is.

Re:Only a little evil (1)

Flipao (903929) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525931)

The HTML4 standard was not some arbitrary standard, it was the foundation on which the modern web was built. Microsoft chose to ignore a good chunk of it pushing its own agenda instead with the objective of both protecting its monopoly and expanding it to the web.

Also, by pushing IE into every new computer or Windows Installation, Microsoft drove Netscape out of business, this is something for which they were criminally convicted.

They're not just evil, Apple can be considered evil and Microsoft are the fucking devil compared to them.

Re:Only a little evil (5, Interesting)

pnot (96038) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525597)

I mean, MS included a BROWSER in their OS. ...and they didn't even give you a way to uninstall it! Now THAT is pure evil.

Absolutely! Good thing I can uninstall Safari from my Mac, easy as -- wait, what's this?

”Safari.app” can’t be modified or deleted because it’s required by Mac OS X. [osxdaily.com]

The article does mention that you can rm -rf it from the command line, but cautions that this "could result in abnormal system behavior or improper functionality".

Re:Only a little evil (1)

kinarduk (734762) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525737)

Also, when installing most Safari updates through the software update tool, a system restart is required. WTF?

Re:Only a little evil (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525819)

OS X is a consumer/desktop OS. Safari updates include updates to components (e.g. WebKit) used by other apps. It's easier and simpler for a user to reboot the machine than to be told to log off every user and log back in.

Re:Only a little evil (1, Insightful)

Entrope (68843) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525975)

That's a load of bollocks. If the computer can automatically reboot itself, it can automatically log everyone out and restart background services as needed.

Re:Only a little evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525771)

Whoosh?

Re:Only a little evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525987)

I am currently running with Safari uninstalled. The WebKit frameworks are separate, but they're generally updated with Safari updates, so if you want to keep them up to date, you may have to remove it again.

There is no impact, you just can't do it from the Finder, which itself is a completely optional component of the OS. As is the Desktop Manager itself.

Re:Only a little evil (4, Insightful)

ajo_arctus (1215290) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525667)

It wasn't the way they 'included a browser', it was they way they attempted (and succeeded) to entirely destroy a competitive market by using the thermo-nuclear option of abusing their Windows monopoly.

And it wasn't the way they did it with the web browser, it was the way they did it time and time again (Dr-Dos, OS/2, DiskStacker, WordPerfect, Netware, Netscape, DirectX) and certainly more than that. They even tried to create a proprietary internet (and thankfully failed).

They don't seem so evil these days, but I'm sure they would if they could. Or maybe Ballmer's just a big softy compared to Gates? I don't know, I suspect that the competition in mobile and from Google has really dented their ability to be really evil.

the govt didn't sue them for any of that stuff (2)

decora (1710862) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525715)

the US government had dozens and dozens of things they could have sued Microsoft for doing, which you mentioned, but what did they actually choose as charges?

"Browser bundling". Not only can you not explain this to the ordinary person on the street ( or on a jury ) , it is actually kind of offensive to people with some experience in the technology industry. Honestly, why in the @#$ should they be banned from putting a browser on their machine - does that mean Ubuntu cant, or Apple cant?

it was a royal foul up by the Clinton administration especially Janet Reno.

sudden outbreak of common sense (4, Insightful)

mjwx (966435) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525237)

An emergency claim of patent infringement, surely calling it an "emergency" is taking the piss. Was someone's life or health in danger or just someone's bottom line.

There should be some punishment for misusing patent law and the ITC/courts like this. Perhaps the court should ban the plaintiffs competing product for 6-12 months when an allegation is found to be false...

But if that happened, Apple would just find another legal loophole to exploit I suppose.

Re:sudden outbreak of common sense (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525287)

An Emergency doesn;t mean that it is to do with someone's life... but i agree with your comment that this is taking the piss... Everyone that has been sued by Apple with their patents should just get a class action against them...

Re:sudden outbreak of common sense (2)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525413)

It's an emergency as these phones make the 4S look quite out of date. The features these phones 'infringe' on are also on most other Android phones, but I don't see them blocking the cheap ones.

Re:sudden outbreak of common sense (4, Insightful)

realityimpaired (1668397) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525659)

Even when the cheap ones are functionally identical to the high end ones [gsmarena.com] .

Seriously... that phone right there, and the fact that Apple has never sued over it, makes it quite obvious that this has nothing to do with them trying to protect their intellectual property. It is functionally identical to the Galaxy SII that they threw a shitfit over and it came out a month before the SII... the front face and UI have the same basic design: the only real differences are that it's slightly thicker, it has a slightly slower processor, and the screen is a lower resolution and slightly smaller. The software at launch time was nearly identical (and *was* identical on the points Apple sued over).

If this was *really* about their software patents, they would have sued over that one, too, but since you can get an Ace for $100 new without a contract ($225 at launch time), they didn't sue.

btw -- if you don't do any gaming on your phone, that phone is quite adequate. The UI is zippy enough, has the same hardware-accelerated bling from a higher end phone, and you can buy it without a contract and not break the bank. I have one, and I am happy with it. There's no ICS update for it, but Gingerbread supports all the features I want out of a phone. :)

Re:sudden outbreak of common sense (1)

Grudge2012 (2662391) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525923)

I'm not quite sure what your point is here. Is it that Samsung sells the same phone for vastly different prices? Or that G4 and G3 as well as Android 4.0 and 2.3 are basically the same thing really?

Re:sudden outbreak of common sense (3, Informative)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525697)

"It's an emergency as these phones make the 4S look quite out of date."

The apple fanbois wouldn't care - they'd buy a week old turd if it had an apple logo stamped on it.

Re:sudden outbreak of common sense (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525507)

They tried something similar against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 [theregister.co.uk] , as I recall.
"You ban unlicensed drugs, so why won't you ban this tablet that competes with our product?"
Though of course, they did eventually get an injunction for the Tab.
Fuck you, Apple. Fuck you to hell.

Re:sudden outbreak of common sense (4, Insightful)

c (8461) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525645)

> Perhaps the court should ban the plaintiffs competing product for 6-12
> months when an allegation is found to be false...

I take these kinds of shenanigans as an admission that they don't have a product that they think can compete.

Re:sudden outbreak of common sense (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525671)

Bingo, the "punishment" for shouting fire in a crowded marketplace should simply be "recompense the State (i.e. the public) for trying to trick it into acting as your enforcer, and then we'll let the market decide."

When will it end? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525275)

"The patent covers a system to detect telephone numbers in e-mails so, when the number on the screen is tapped, they can be stored in directories or called without dialing."

Re:When will it end? (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525489)

Other patents Apple has used in litigation include the use of a slide gesture to unlock a phone and a patent on curved corners.

Re:When will it end? (1)

mirix (1649853) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525631)

Ignoring the obviousness of this... Nokia phones have done that before 'iPhone' was a word. ughh.

Re:When will it end? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525897)

And Apple had the patent for more than a decade before iPhone was a word. What's your point?

Re:When will it end? (1)

Grudge2012 (2662391) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525937)

Ignoring the obviousness of this... Nokia phones have done that before 'iPhone' was a word. ughh.

And the Apple Newton did it long before Nokia - that's where the patent comes from.

Re:When will it end? (2)

Robert Zenz (1680268) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525677)

Cool, you can now patent Regular Expressions? I need to get that one to detect words in E-Mails to that Patent Office ASAP.

Re:When will it end? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525839)

I've patented the use of "ASAP" in /. postings

And this is why Apple sucks... (5, Insightful)

Xenx (2211586) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525299)

I can understand legitimate complaints about patent infringement. I can even almost understand some of the complaints Apple puts forth against Android devices. While I don't necessarily feel they should be winning the cases, I feel that they're at least operating within the system. My issue is with situations like this, where they're pressing for bans when the situation isn't even decided yet. They're just pressing to hurt the competitors as much as possible without actually having to prove foul play.

Re:And this is why Apple sucks... (5, Insightful)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525457)

I can understand legitimate complaints about patent infringement. I can even almost understand some of the complaints Apple puts forth against Android devices. While I don't necessarily feel they should be winning the cases, I feel that they're at least operating within the system. My issue is with situations like this, where they're pressing for bans when the situation isn't even decided yet. They're just pressing to hurt the competitors as much as possible without actually having to prove foul play.

Pressing for bans is what everybody else does as well. Like Samsung, HTC, Motorola.

I steal your car. Should I be allowed to drive it until I am convicted in a court? That would obviously be unfair towards you. But for example in the Apple vs. Samsung case, Apple got an injunction but if they lost the case in the end, they would have to pay damages. And they had to pay a bond so that it is guaranteed that the money for paying damages is there if needed.

Re:And this is why Apple sucks... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525759)

I say you stole my car. should you be allowed to drive the car I say is mine and you stole it until I prove myself right?
That's closer to what this is about.

Re:And this is why Apple sucks... (3, Interesting)

blackest_k (761565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525845)

Actually been in a situation where a guitar of mine was stolen in a burglary. I spotted my guitar in a second hand shop and was able to prove it was mine.

But then hit a snag, the owner of the shop was able to say he bought the guitar in good faith, thus to get my guitar back i could compensate him by paying him for my own guitar or go to court and eventually get a judge to order him to return it to me. He wasn't allowed to sell it in the mean time so my stubbornness refusing to pay for my own guitar meant we both were out of pocket for a while.

In the end the same people who sold him the guitar tried to sell him something else at which time he called the police and they were arrested some stolen property was recovered and the shop keeper gave me my guitar back with the hope of getting some compensation from the court for catching the thieves.

I have to wonder if things would have played the way they did if I had caved and paid to get my guitar back.

Re:And this is why Apple sucks... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525783)

Your comparison is flawed. Copying an idea is not stealing => https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4

Re:And this is why Apple sucks... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525805)

I steal your car. Should I be allowed to drive it until I am convicted in a court? That would obviously be unfair towards you.

Of course you won't be allowed to, because cars have serial numbers that are registered with the state. It's trivial to prove who the car belongs to. Steal something much more difficult to prove (like a TV, since most people don't register theirs or keep records of their serial numbers) and I think you will find that you will be able to continue using it up until your date in court. Unless it's a clear cut case (ie: they can find other provably stolen items in your posession), cops are just going to leave it up to the courts to deal with.

Re:And this is why Apple sucks... (1)

residents_parking (1026556) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525889)

Bad car analogy - "I steal your car" is a fact that doesn't need proving in court, because you have my car while I don't. You go to court because we sure don't trust the police all the way.

Re:And this is why Apple sucks... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525933)

I steal your car. Should I be allowed to drive it until I am convicted in a court?

What did HTC steal? Heck, their property hasn't even got out of customs yet, so nobody can even claim they "stole" a sale.

"Hey, officer, that guy walking across the road is wearing the same shirt as I am. You must go and arrest him because he might steal the one off my back".

Re:And this is why Apple sucks... (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525493)

A lot of the patents are also so trivial or obvious as to be ridiculous now, too. As the article states, "The patent covers a system to detect telephone numbers in e-mails so, when the number on the screen is tapped, they can be stored in directories or called without dialing."

Re:And this is why Apple sucks... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40526045)

I can understand legitimate complaints about patent infringement. I can even almost understand some of the complaints Apple puts forth against Android devices. While I don't necessarily feel they should be winning the cases, I feel that they're at least operating within the system. My issue is with situations like this, where they're pressing for bans when the situation isn't even decided yet. They're just pressing to hurt the competitors as much as possible without actually having to prove foul play.

What are you a homphobe

New Business Opportunity for Mexican Drung Gangs (5, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525301)

Smuggling phones!

It will be like Prohibition, revisited. Rich folks will have the best phones at parties, like they used to have the best booze during Prohibition.

Will Elliot Ness triumph over Al Capone this time . . . ?

Re:New Business Opportunity for Mexican Drung Gang (1)

alex67500 (1609333) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525551)

Well, with Jimmy Darmody gone, maybe Nucky Thompson will make it!

These are *software* patents? (0)

TheoGB (786170) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525311)

Reading the list sounds pretty incredible. Given Android is based on Linux...and OSX is based on Linux so presumably iOS must have a huge slab of similar stuff inside it, isn't this all utterly ludicrous? Surely there must be a massive crossover in ideas here by pure chance in any case?

Re:These are *software* patents? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525339)

Unix
OSX is based on Unix,

Re:These are *software* patents? (2)

TheoGB (786170) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525365)

Ah! Totally different then. As you were...

Re:These are *software* patents? (3)

weetabeex (1065032) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525363)

Hating to state the obvious, OSX is not based on Linux but on *BSD. They just happen to inherit the POSIX interface, which makes it simpler to have native Linux applications running on OSX than it would be otherwise.

Re:These are *software* patents? (1)

collet (2632725) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525367)

OSX is not based on Linux, however they both more-or-less started from Unix.

Re:These are *software* patents? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525371)

I appreciate your sentiment, but there isn't a lick of Linux in OSX or iOS. They are both based on Darwin, an entirely different POSIX compliant UNIX-like OS that uses a hybrid FOSS model like Android. It's the Hatfields and McCoys of the OS landscape.

Re:These are *software* patents? (1)

reub2000 (705806) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525785)

So then why do you get bash if you open up a terminal on OSX?

Re:These are *software* patents? (1)

omglolbah (731566) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525831)

What does BASH have to do with the kernel?

Re:These are *software* patents? (2)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525891)

Because you have your terminal configured to start the bash? You can also configer a different shell, like tcsh or csh or ksh ... so what is your point?

On a Sun (Oracle) Solaris box the default shell is also bash or ksh, that has nothing to do with linux ort what ever.

Re:These are *software* patents? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525951)

bash != linux

Re:These are *software* patents? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525991)

I salute you, sir!

Re:These are *software* patents? (4, Interesting)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525393)

The big players in mobile all have their warchest of patents in place. Now they are stepping up the game; apparently it has become necessary to also have a warchest of ongoing lawsuits. Better sue the competition and have 5 cases running against them, then we have something to trade when they decide to sue us in turn.

But they know this: all of this serves quite nicely to keep new players out of the market. If you can get an injunction against a certain product because it has rounded corners, then there's nothing you can't block... unless the competition similarly threatens to block your own products from the market.

Re:These are *software* patents? (1)

TheoGB (786170) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525423)

Christ, what a mess!

Antitrust Anyone (5, Insightful)

zippo01 (688802) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525313)

Am I the only one that wonders why no one is screaming antitrust? I guess Apple feels safe having the USPO fight their battles. I can see this ending badly for Apple down the road if they keep it up.

Re:Antitrust Anyone (5, Interesting)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525395)

There are quite a few Apple dollars bouncing around Washington DC, even more since they became best of friends with the RIAA and MPAA. I wouldn't hold my breath for the government to save us from Apple any time soon.

Re:Antitrust Anyone (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525523)

Then google should be cleaning up, they spend way more than apple on lobbying

http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/google-gets-erious-washington-139787 [adweek.com]

whereas it appears that apple isn't lobbying enough

http://habledash.com/the-nook/1612-apple-targeted-by-washington-lobbying [habledash.com]

Re:Antitrust Anyone (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525579)

Well my dollars sure won't be bouncing around on Apple. Not only don't I buy anything from them, but even if in the future they were the only company selling computer devices left on the world, I'd actually just give up on computers.

Re:Antitrust Anyone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525629)

You win todays 'I shout I hate apple loudest' competition, if only you hadn't posted anonymously we'd know what a wonderful clear thinking troll you are

Re:Antitrust Anyone (1, Interesting)

oztiks (921504) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525787)

I bought a Nokia Lumia 900 today and what a phone! Apple should be scared and I'd love to see them try it on with Nokia because Lumia is so slick and so different than anything Apple. It's easy and it does everything the iPhone did, yes I've had iPhone 3, 3GS and 4S and I own an iPad and iPod nano. As for this retina crap it's just that, after getting used to the new Lumia I believe that any reviewer / tech mag that says otherwise is bogus and has Apple in their pocket because the screen on the Lumia IS BETTER, it's crisp, it's CLEARER and it's better utilized.

I've paid my fair share of Apple tax in my day and I'm happy to say I AM EXCITED ABOUT SURFACE. I will be eBaying the iPad as soon as it hits shelves and getting the first gen model and I'm not worried about the old "never buy MS first gen" saying because Lumia has made it myth. If it's anything like my brand new awesome Lumia they have my money without question.

Those issues with the Windows Marketplace, again myth, if you're a gamer you'll love marketplace as it links right into your xbox live. iCloud? New? Get on board MS has been doing it for years now, Lumia has successfully introduced it into the mobile world, elegantly and easily. Lastly, app range Marketplace everything you need minus the spam shit Apple allows in their AppStore as I DONT want a bigger app range I want a quality app range and Marketplace delivers.

Apple, old school, outdated and interface wise? Cheap and basic, Lumia 10x sexier, better and easier to navigate and more importantly MAKES SENSE!

Re:Antitrust Anyone (3, Insightful)

oztiks (921504) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525807)

On last thing there is no "sent from my iPhone/HTC/Samsung" defaulted in my email sigs like a pompous fuck.

Re:Antitrust Anyone (4, Interesting)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525535)

..but ms+apple have covered their bases this time, can't accuse them of antitrust. MS,Apple and Nokia have thrown their dealings together, but the arrangements on licensing - and who sues who - are closed from the public(even if they're all publicly owned corporations, funny that).

you see, this way MS doesn't sue their licensees for their other phones(that would be bordering on a no-no).
this way Apple doesn't sue MS licensed products.
this way Nokia+MS don't sue Apple. so effectively they're acting as one party, "by purely consequence".

It's not a trust, it's just "licensing arrangements"(and backroom deals and handshakes, which again are not made public).

Re:Antitrust Anyone (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525543)

forgot to add that while they're not suing each other they're also suing everyone else, but avoiding suing companies they can't sue directly due to politics.

Re:Antitrust Anyone (1)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525827)

Am I the only one that wonders why no one is screaming antitrust?

I would imagine you're not alone but you're mistaken. Antitrust would be largely inappropriate. Apple is neither a cartel nor a member of a cartel nor are they in a (near) monopoly position and thus are not in danger of an antitrust investigation.

Apple is simply enforcing their right to defend their patents. Now, you may hate them for doing that; you may hate them for how they're doing it (going "thermonuclear"); you may hate that the patent system allows this; you may hate that they earned patents on things you feel are obvious or frivolous; you may even hate that the patent system exists at all, but none of that is grounds for an antitrust investigation.

They would need to be in a (near) monopoly situation, such as Microsoft in the desktop market, but they aren't. The closest market to which they could be claimed to have a monopoly is the music player market but, even there, they don't have a monopoly position. In the cell phone market, they are doing very well but they not only don't have a monopoly position, they don't even have a position of majority. Alternatively, they would need to be a cartel, which again they are not. If they, _ALONG WITH_ Samsung, Motorola, HTC, and the other big players jointly worked together to prevent a new manufacturer from entering the cell phone market, that would open them up to antitrust charges. Obviously, that's never going to happen given that the major players can't agree on much of anything lately... :)

So, while you may hate what they're doing or hate that they are allowed to do it, that doesn't mean that they are acting anticompetitively. They are simply enforcing their right to defend their patents as the system allows.

This is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525399)

getting totally stupid! Patents were never meant to be used to try to kill competition. And all of the patents that (Cr)apple is suing over are invalid. There is tons (literally!) of prior art for all of them, not to mention that software patents and business method patents should not exist. (Cr)apple needs to be put out of business permantly for its extreme abuse of patents and court systems!!

Re:This is (4, Interesting)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525411)

"Patents were never meant to be used to try to kill competition."

No, they were meant to prevent any form of competition until the patent expired. Somehow that is supposed to help us as a society by encouraging people to do... exactly what they had been doing since the Enlightenment started. Not sure whoever came up with that thought it through fully, but boy, have they been trying to justify it since!

Re:This is (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525569)

In all fairness, developing a system that actually encourages technological progress requires a deep understanding of economics, psychology, game theory, and a couple of other disciplines, and the Statute of Monopolies predated a remotely modern version of any of those. Even then, the statute changed monopolies from "whatever the king felt like granting monopolies on" to just novel inventions. It was quite a progressive change for the time. The problem is that we've largely regressed in that matter and not realized that they should have kept pecking away at monopolies until they were completely gone.

Re:This is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525587)

You mean, what they have been doing for the last 50 thousand years.

Their definition of "emergency" differs from mine (1)

daboochmeister (914039) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525441)

That's for sure.

Re:Their definition of "emergency" differs from mi (2)

pnot (96038) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525611)

Given the recent "1 million Android devices activated daily" statistic, I assume they're using the bathroom-related definition of "emergency"; that is to say, "we're crapping ourselves".

I THANK YOU FOR YO0R TIME (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525501)

do and doi8"g what

Fuck them all (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525533)

I'll only spend money on a smartphone made by a company that does not litigate frivolously.

(Not holding my breath on this one.)

good work (0)

yogyogi11 (2675891) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525585)

patents used to kill competition.

Apple is exaggerating (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525589)

Apple is surely looking at its sales figures and is seeing them drop due to better phones than iPhone (HTC One and Samsung Galaxy series). Also the iPad, IMHO, is nothing than a BIG iPhone...
There are a lot of products out there that do the same thing and I think Apple is making claims I think are ridiculous... It would be almost like claiming I cannot a handle to open my apartment's door because someone has already patented it...

Apple is trying to do in court what it cannot do in the market...

Dear manufacturers: (4, Interesting)

pla (258480) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525623)

Try building your crap in the US. It takes a hell of a lot more effort (and actual evidence presented in a real live US court as opposed to a shadowy meeting with a "committee" of one guy) to have a domestically produced product impounded, than to convince the largely unregulated and capricious CBP to impound something ill-defined.

Domestic fireworks: Okay. Foreign candies with toys inside: Banned.
Domestic hardcore humiliation porn: Okay. Foreign Playboys: Banned.
Domestic overpriced mislabeled antidepressants marketed at kids: Okay. Foreign 100% legit heart meds for 1/10th the price: Banned.

I don't consider myself a bit "HuAH, Made in America" fan, but hey, nice to have someone employed capable of buying your crappy phones, eh?

Re:Dear manufacturers: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40526037)

Apple does all the eng work here (unlike all the Android phones). I really really hope that one day they are made domestically. The reality is I'd pay more for a US built phone, but 99.9% of consumers surely wouldn't. Electronics have been a race to the bottom of the third world for too long. Someone give Sony a tissue.

Apple innovation RIP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525725)

Seems to me like the only real innovation at Apple is in their legal department.

They'll be back, and in greater numbers.

Note that neither HTC nor Samsung (2)

wisebabo (638845) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525743)

now claim that Apple's patents are invalid or that they do not infringe them.

In Samsung's appeal against Apple's injunction against the Galaxy tablet: "Apple failed to provide sufficient evidence that the Galaxy Nexus caused "irreparable harm" in the form of market share lost to Samsung. The filing also suggests that such market share losses "must be substantial" and directly caused by the infringing feature, rather than the product as a whole."

So Samsung does not argue that the patents are invalid or that it violated them but rather that it doesn't hurt Apple too much.

"HTC believes that Apple's claims exceed the bounds of the original complaint. The statement by the ITC is seemingly not a denial of Apple for lack of propriety, but more a lack of information."

So HTC believes that Apple is overreaching when it says that HTC has not re-engineered it's products enough to avoid Apple's patent. It does not deny the fact that it violated Apple's patent.

It appears that Apple has a winning case when it comes to patents when they are no longer being challenged.

Re:Note that neither HTC nor Samsung (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525863)

In legal matters it is quite common to separate a complex issue into parts, and argue them separately. E.g. "my client didn't break your window, but even if he did such a window costs only $X to repair, not the $Y you filed for". That is all that is going on here.

Sometimes I feel that this whole thing is wrong (1)

sandytaru (1158959) | more than 2 years ago | (#40525869)

The best product should win by virtue of being the best product, not because it's killed all the other competition. I don't use a Samsung phone because it stole all sorts of technology from Apple, I use a Samsung phone because I like it better than the Apple alternatives. I wasn't all, "Oooh this has Apple's curved corners and it can detect a phone number in my email!" No, I went "Oooh, this has a slide out keyboard and it's on sale for $300!"

minus 4,\ T8oll) (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40525985)

BSD fanatics? I've all ove8 America

I just can't wait... (1)

beaverdownunder (1822050) | more than 2 years ago | (#40526009)

...until Apple tries to sue Google over its upcoming tablets / smartphones. Google will hand Apple it's own ass on a plate, and blast them back to 1995.

The day Google begins to aggressively 'defend' Android will be a very glorious day...

I can't wait!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?