4 ms·

So basically, Apple fully supports software patents so long as it benefits them. When another company wants money for a BS patent, it's a travesty. You gotta lo

So basically, Apple fully supports software patents so long as it benefits them. When another company wants money for a BS patent, it's a travesty. You gotta love the way business works.

daeken 15y ago
Apple already licenses the tech, this is not a fundamental patent issue at all.
- morphoyle 15y ago
  I think you are all missing the irony here...
  - bradleyland 15y ago
    What irony? Apple licenses thousands of patents in both directions. As does Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and anyone other major player in the tech industry.
  - bmm6o 15y ago
    If you have something to add to the conversation, could you please just say it?
EGreg 15y ago
patents are mostly for big boys to throw their weight around that is what is happening did you see how many people on HN (who are coders) want to abolish software patents?
VengefulCynic 15y ago
Hardly. Apple isn't claiming the patents are invalid or that software patents in general are invalid - they're simply claiming that Lodsys is trying to get iOS app developers to pay for something that Apple has already bought (and been given rights to license to the iOS developers).
- rbanffy 15y ago
  > something that Apple has already bought Implying they support software patents.
  - ugh 15y ago
    That’s ridiculous. I can be opposed to the current income tax rate while still paying all my taxes. Observing the law should not be confused with endorsing the law.
    - rbanffy 15y ago
      You seem to believe Lodsys patents are as unavoidable as the taxes you pay. That's a funny idea. They are not. Apple could have taken Lodsys to court for their patents were, in fact, quite feeble. Now, thanks in part to Apple, Lodsys has enough money to litigate. The only way to crush a troll is if everyone refuses to pay extortion for worthless patents. Without a source of easy money, the troll dies.
      - ugh 15y ago
        Apple’s lawyers seem to believe that licensing those patents is unavoidable or at the very least that not licensing would cost more than licensing them. You might disagree with that interpretation of the law but you should never claim that it’s an endorsement of software patents. I do not know Apple’s stance on software patents but I simply cannot see how Apple’s actions in this case can be interpreted as revealing Apple’s stance on software patents in any way.
        rbanffy 15y ago
        I do not disagree that crushing Lodsys forever would have cost more than enabling it by paying their racket. OTOH, it will cost more to the market as whole not having crushed Lodsys when it was easy and, by helping it grow, Apple has done a disservice to us all. And yes. They failed to take a stand because it was cheaper not to. Does that look anything but revealing?
kenjackson 15y ago
Apple has a long history of supporting patents. In fact in a keynote that Jobs gave a few years back one of his lines was something like, "And we've patented this up and down" which was followed by loud cheers. Apple is a very strong believer of HW and SW patents.
- guptaneil 15y ago
  He said that when announcing the iPhone because Apple failed to properly patent the iPod when it was first released, and subsequently got tied up in a lot of litigation and licensing fees when other companies started trolling them. If anything, Apple hates the patent system, but is forced to play the game.
  - kenjackson 15y ago
    I'm not sure if this is historically accurate. See: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070117/191446.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070117/191446.shtml A lot of people believe Apple used its patents, for example, to block Android from getting certain features. There's also speculation that MS spent a lot of time dealing with legal issues before WP7 -- which is why WP7 has different design decisions in so many places Apple has patents -- and one reason it was so late after WM6.1. It's speculation, but it sounds like Apple may have used its patents as a way to stop competition on other carriers. Is that good or bad? I don't know, but it's legal. And note that having patents doesn't protect you against trolls. Trolls don't care as they usually don't have product. Patents are only defensive against other actual product companies.
    - guptaneil 15y ago
      I haven't read anything about Apple proactively blocking other companies, but it's believable that post-iPhone Apple is less shy about pushing the competition around a little. I know they did protect their multitouch gesture patents, which is why Android couldn't have pinch to zoom for a while. Regarding the accuracy of my comment, see http://www.macworld.com/article/46460/2005/08/ipodpatent.html http://www.macworld.com/article/46460/2005/08/ipodpatent.htm... for a quick summary of how Microsoft patented a key aspect of the iPod's navigation UI 5 months after Apple released the iPod and then demanded licensing fees. Apple ended up settling for $100 million. This is an actual product company. The article that you linked to, while interesting, is purely opinion. Its argument hinges on the assumption that exclusivity with AT&T was a bad business deal for Apple, which I would strongly disagree with. I didn't like the lock-in as a consumer, but the deal was excellent for Apple because it gave them control over the carrier in a way other phone manufacturers had only dreamed of until that point.
sipefree 15y ago
I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but really anyone who wants to get into this game has to play by the rules. Even a tiny startup company full of web 2.0 rockstars who hate software patents will be advised to patent as much as they can, because if they don't, some other count will come along and patent their stuff from under them and force THEM to pay. Pretty much nobody likes the software patent system except for software patent trolls, and as such we have to deal with it. Software patents won't go away until bad people go away.

So basically, Apple fully supports software patents so long as it benefits them. When another company wants money for a BS patent, it's a travesty. You gotta love the way business works.

daeken 15y ago

Apple already licenses the tech, this is not a fundamental patent issue at all.

morphoyle 15y ago
I think you are all missing the irony here...
- bradleyland 15y ago
  What irony? Apple licenses thousands of patents in both directions. As does Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and anyone other major player in the tech industry.
- bmm6o 15y ago
  If you have something to add to the conversation, could you please just say it?

EGreg 15y ago

patents are mostly for big boys to throw their weight around that is what is happening did you see how many people on HN (who are coders) want to abolish software patents?

VengefulCynic 15y ago

Hardly. Apple isn't claiming the patents are invalid or that software patents in general are invalid - they're simply claiming that Lodsys is trying to get iOS app developers to pay for something that Apple has already bought (and been given rights to license to the iOS developers).

rbanffy 15y ago
> something that Apple has already bought Implying they support software patents.
- ugh 15y ago
  That’s ridiculous. I can be opposed to the current income tax rate while still paying all my taxes. Observing the law should not be confused with endorsing the law.
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    You seem to believe Lodsys patents are as unavoidable as the taxes you pay. That's a funny idea. They are not. Apple could have taken Lodsys to court for their patents were, in fact, quite feeble. Now, thanks in part to Apple, Lodsys has enough money to litigate. The only way to crush a troll is if everyone refuses to pay extortion for worthless patents. Without a source of easy money, the troll dies.
    - ugh 15y ago
      Apple’s lawyers seem to believe that licensing those patents is unavoidable or at the very least that not licensing would cost more than licensing them. You might disagree with that interpretation of the law but you should never claim that it’s an endorsement of software patents. I do not know Apple’s stance on software patents but I simply cannot see how Apple’s actions in this case can be interpreted as revealing Apple’s stance on software patents in any way.
      - rbanffy 15y ago
        I do not disagree that crushing Lodsys forever would have cost more than enabling it by paying their racket. OTOH, it will cost more to the market as whole not having crushed Lodsys when it was easy and, by helping it grow, Apple has done a disservice to us all. And yes. They failed to take a stand because it was cheaper not to. Does that look anything but revealing?

kenjackson 15y ago

Apple has a long history of supporting patents. In fact in a keynote that Jobs gave a few years back one of his lines was something like, "And we've patented this up and down" which was followed by loud cheers. Apple is a very strong believer of HW and SW patents.

guptaneil 15y ago
He said that when announcing the iPhone because Apple failed to properly patent the iPod when it was first released, and subsequently got tied up in a lot of litigation and licensing fees when other companies started trolling them. If anything, Apple hates the patent system, but is forced to play the game.
- kenjackson 15y ago
  I'm not sure if this is historically accurate. See: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070117/191446.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070117/191446.shtml A lot of people believe Apple used its patents, for example, to block Android from getting certain features. There's also speculation that MS spent a lot of time dealing with legal issues before WP7 -- which is why WP7 has different design decisions in so many places Apple has patents -- and one reason it was so late after WM6.1. It's speculation, but it sounds like Apple may have used its patents as a way to stop competition on other carriers. Is that good or bad? I don't know, but it's legal. And note that having patents doesn't protect you against trolls. Trolls don't care as they usually don't have product. Patents are only defensive against other actual product companies.
  - guptaneil 15y ago
    I haven't read anything about Apple proactively blocking other companies, but it's believable that post-iPhone Apple is less shy about pushing the competition around a little. I know they did protect their multitouch gesture patents, which is why Android couldn't have pinch to zoom for a while. Regarding the accuracy of my comment, see http://www.macworld.com/article/46460/2005/08/ipodpatent.html http://www.macworld.com/article/46460/2005/08/ipodpatent.htm... for a quick summary of how Microsoft patented a key aspect of the iPod's navigation UI 5 months after Apple released the iPod and then demanded licensing fees. Apple ended up settling for $100 million. This is an actual product company. The article that you linked to, while interesting, is purely opinion. Its argument hinges on the assumption that exclusivity with AT&T was a bad business deal for Apple, which I would strongly disagree with. I didn't like the lock-in as a consumer, but the deal was excellent for Apple because it gave them control over the carrier in a way other phone manufacturers had only dreamed of until that point.

sipefree 15y ago

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but really anyone who wants to get into this game has to play by the rules. Even a tiny startup company full of web 2.0 rockstars who hate software patents will be advised to patent as much as they can, because if they don't, some other count will come along and patent their stuff from under them and force THEM to pay. Pretty much nobody likes the software patent system except for software patent trolls, and as such we have to deal with it. Software patents won't go away until bad people go away.