4 ms·

We are not talking about "most" sane, reasonable companies like Google, Samsung, etc. Apple is historically known for being litigatious, in addition to being t

We are not talking about "most" sane, reasonable companies like Google, Samsung, etc. Apple is historically known for being litigatious, in addition to being the most litigated today: https://www.pcworld.com/article/262202/apple_vs_a_pl_tech_company_sues_online_polish_grocer_over_logo.html https://www.pcworld.com/article/262202/apple_vs_a_pl_tech_co...

lostlogin 8y ago
What is a ‘reasonable’ company? The chairman and heir of Samsung went to prison for corruption. https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/25/samsung-heir-lee-jae-yong-found-guilty-of-corruption https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/201...
- tooltalk 8y ago
  two things: First, that's the cost of doing business in less politically developed countries like South Korea. Google withdrew from China for not wanting to stoop to the oppressive, corrupt gov't; Apple on the other hand outsourced all data collection to a domestic Chinese company to continue business there. Samsung unfortunately doesn't have the luxury to leave South Korea. You don't hear Samsung exec's getting convicted of bribery in the US, do you? Second, lookie here, a red herring! We are discussing what to expect from most sane big "reasonable" companies with respect to their IP, not the recent political corruption scandal, or the messy ouster of President Park, in South Korea.
sonnyblarney 8y ago
Being 'most litigious' does not imply they are patent trolls. They could be pursuing legit defence of their IP. FYI in your example - Apple in many ways has no choice but to sue. If a company is not perceived to be defending their trademarks - they lose them. When 'Crackberry.com' was popular, Blackberry had to 'sue' them - but funny enough, the relationship otherwise was great. Blackberry had no intention of damaging 'Crackberry' because of course they were helpful to Blackberry! But - there was always a case 'in progress'. Blackberry had to 'appear to be defending it's IP'.
- tooltalk 8y ago
  >Being 'most litigious' does not imply they are patent trolls. sure, just responding to your claim that big, 'reasonable' companies use their IP defensively or "protective[ly]." > They could be pursuing legit defence of their IP. that's true for most 'reasonable' companies, but not apple. > FYI in your example - Apple in many ways has no choice but to sue. and your logic is akin to saying patent trolls have no choice, but sue to defend their assets. And we are not talking crackberry; we are talking about a small mom-and-pop supermarket in Poland whose domain name, a.pl, doesn't even resemble anything remotely close to Apple.

lostlogin 8y ago

What is a ‘reasonable’ company? The chairman and heir of Samsung went to prison for corruption. https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/25/samsung-heir-lee-jae-yong-found-guilty-of-corruption https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/201...

tooltalk 8y ago
two things: First, that's the cost of doing business in less politically developed countries like South Korea. Google withdrew from China for not wanting to stoop to the oppressive, corrupt gov't; Apple on the other hand outsourced all data collection to a domestic Chinese company to continue business there. Samsung unfortunately doesn't have the luxury to leave South Korea. You don't hear Samsung exec's getting convicted of bribery in the US, do you? Second, lookie here, a red herring! We are discussing what to expect from most sane big "reasonable" companies with respect to their IP, not the recent political corruption scandal, or the messy ouster of President Park, in South Korea.

sonnyblarney 8y ago

Being 'most litigious' does not imply they are patent trolls. They could be pursuing legit defence of their IP. FYI in your example - Apple in many ways has no choice but to sue. If a company is not perceived to be defending their trademarks - they lose them. When 'Crackberry.com' was popular, Blackberry had to 'sue' them - but funny enough, the relationship otherwise was great. Blackberry had no intention of damaging 'Crackberry' because of course they were helpful to Blackberry! But - there was always a case 'in progress'. Blackberry had to 'appear to be defending it's IP'.

tooltalk 8y ago
>Being 'most litigious' does not imply they are patent trolls. sure, just responding to your claim that big, 'reasonable' companies use their IP defensively or "protective[ly]." > They could be pursuing legit defence of their IP. that's true for most 'reasonable' companies, but not apple. > FYI in your example - Apple in many ways has no choice but to sue. and your logic is akin to saying patent trolls have no choice, but sue to defend their assets. And we are not talking crackberry; we are talking about a small mom-and-pop supermarket in Poland whose domain name, a.pl, doesn't even resemble anything remotely close to Apple.