4 ms·

Google is, in fact, stealing Apple's patented inventions and repackaging it as their own. Hence the sudden flare up in "patents are all bogus and a bad idea" pr

by nirvana 15y ago

Google is, in fact, stealing Apple's patented inventions and repackaging it as their own. Hence the sudden flare up in "patents are all bogus and a bad idea" propaganda. Before the announcement of the iPhone the Android phones looked a whole lot like blackberries. Google didn't spend 7 years coming up with a multi-touch operating system, and the underlying technology. They spent one year copying what Apple did, right down to the icon placement, and then started licensing it to manufacturers who sell it to consumers who genuinely think they are getting iPhones. I know google fans don't like to admit this, and so they claim that because in the past there was a touch screen somewhere, therefore, Apple didn't invent anything, but the standards of law are much higher and disprove this claim.

MostAwesomeDude 15y ago
Hi, welcome to the 90s, when patents were already "bogus and a bad idea." Remember GIF? JPEG? LZW? RAR? S3TC? MP3? MPEG-2? AAC? MPEG-4? h.264? I'll understand if you've forgotten all of these. After all, when a software patent only inconveniences people making Free Software, it doesn't really count as "bogus and a bad idea," right?
- nirvana 15y ago
  I'm always at a loss as to whether I should try to parse thru these snide comments to try and figure out what the argument you're trying to make is, or if I should just ignore them. At the very least, your putting words in my mouth so I don't have to defend them.
  - vacri 15y ago
    Please don't make snide comments and then complain when others reply in kind.
  - MostAwesomeDude 15y ago
    You have implied that patents have only recently been something seen as problematic, and that patent warfare is something invented by Google and Android vendors to attack Apple. The reality, however, is that there have been several highly litigious patents in computing which have been used to threaten people. Let me expound on some of the more infamous ones. The modern GIF format, GIF89a, used a compression algorithm called LZW. This algorithm was patented by a company named Unisys. Unisys threatened ISPs and large websites with legal action if they didn't agree to license the patent. This directly led to the creation of the PNG format as a free and open alternative. S3TC, the S3 Texture Compression algorithm, is patented by a group of graphics vendors known as S3, and licensed to Microsoft under terms which let MS sublicense it under the name DXTC, (DirectX Texture Compression). The patent holders have been very mean about enforcement, and the patent is broadly written, so it applies to nearly every possible S3TC implementation, software or hardware. To this day, MS still makes money off of every graphics card sold, from licensing fees, and free 3D libraries, like Mesa, cannot safely ship S3TC decoders for fear of legal repercussions. h.264 is covered by a big portfolio of patents, held by MPEG-LA (Motion Picture Experts Group Licensing Authority). They have been very proactive about getting licensing fees any time they can, and using fear tactics to suppress free codec libraries like x264. One member of MPEG-LA is Apple, by the way. That's right, Apple has been conducting patent warfare since before the conception of Android. (Since I'm expecting a [citation needed]: x264 development started in 2004 at the latest; Android was acquired by Google in 2005.)
- commandar 15y ago
  Patents were reviled by geeks even in a pre-9/11 world. ;) http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=site%3Aslashdot.org+software+patents#sclient=psy&hl=en&tbs=cdr:1%2Ccd_min%3A8%2F1%2F1997%2Ccd_max%3A9%2F10%2F2001&source=hp&q=site:slashdot.org+patents&pbx=1&oq=site:slashdot.org+patents&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=90360l90556l0l90820l2l2l0l0l0l0l231l397l0.1.1l2l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.&fp=2b79ce39e1e85726&biw=1110&bih=759 http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&#3...
commandar 15y ago
>consumers who genuinely think they are getting iPhones. Are you delusional or just trolling? If the latter, I'd suggest a more subtle approach in the future.
- nirvana 15y ago
  Remember when ReadWriteWeb was the first hit on Google for the term "Facebook" for a few days and they got thousands of people hitting their page posting comments about how they couldn't log into google? Because they were goggling for Facebook in order to get on Facebook, and the first result was no longer Facebook for that period. That's something you'd probably never do, but for millions of people, that's how they know how to get to Facebook. I'm neither delusional, nor am I trolling. I'm just making an argument you don't like. I don't think its appropriate that you would characterize me in a derogatory way like that, because you're engaging in attacks to the person, rather than to the point, and I think that Hacker News should have a higher level of debate than that.
  - lotharbot 15y ago
    > "I don't think its appropriate that you would characterize me in a derogatory way like that" I'm not sure how you can say that with a straight face immediately after characterizing me in such a derogatory way in http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2934973 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2934973
beedogs 15y ago
You really need to quit while you're far, far behind.
fpgeek 15y ago
"They spent one year" This, in and of itself, is a sign of how innovative Android is, under-the-hood. Google and everyone else saw the iPhone at the same time. Google took one year to have a baseline-credible iPhone competitor ready. Palm took two (and they had the advantage of starting over from scratch). Microsoft took three. Nokia took four (so long they eventually killed the platform and have embraced Microsoft). RIM still hasn't gotten there. Even though most people don't realize it, being a fast follower isn't easy. The Android team planned for their OS to be flexible and retargetable from the start. You can see it in their architecture, some of their lower-level features (e.g. Intents, input frameworks) and you can see it in the speed of their "iPhone pivot".

by nirvana 15y ago

MostAwesomeDude 15y ago

Hi, welcome to the 90s, when patents were already "bogus and a bad idea." Remember GIF? JPEG? LZW? RAR? S3TC? MP3? MPEG-2? AAC? MPEG-4? h.264? I'll understand if you've forgotten all of these. After all, when a software patent only inconveniences people making Free Software, it doesn't really count as "bogus and a bad idea," right?

nirvana 15y ago
I'm always at a loss as to whether I should try to parse thru these snide comments to try and figure out what the argument you're trying to make is, or if I should just ignore them. At the very least, your putting words in my mouth so I don't have to defend them.
- vacri 15y ago
  Please don't make snide comments and then complain when others reply in kind.
- MostAwesomeDude 15y ago
  You have implied that patents have only recently been something seen as problematic, and that patent warfare is something invented by Google and Android vendors to attack Apple. The reality, however, is that there have been several highly litigious patents in computing which have been used to threaten people. Let me expound on some of the more infamous ones. The modern GIF format, GIF89a, used a compression algorithm called LZW. This algorithm was patented by a company named Unisys. Unisys threatened ISPs and large websites with legal action if they didn't agree to license the patent. This directly led to the creation of the PNG format as a free and open alternative. S3TC, the S3 Texture Compression algorithm, is patented by a group of graphics vendors known as S3, and licensed to Microsoft under terms which let MS sublicense it under the name DXTC, (DirectX Texture Compression). The patent holders have been very mean about enforcement, and the patent is broadly written, so it applies to nearly every possible S3TC implementation, software or hardware. To this day, MS still makes money off of every graphics card sold, from licensing fees, and free 3D libraries, like Mesa, cannot safely ship S3TC decoders for fear of legal repercussions. h.264 is covered by a big portfolio of patents, held by MPEG-LA (Motion Picture Experts Group Licensing Authority). They have been very proactive about getting licensing fees any time they can, and using fear tactics to suppress free codec libraries like x264. One member of MPEG-LA is Apple, by the way. That's right, Apple has been conducting patent warfare since before the conception of Android. (Since I'm expecting a [citation needed]: x264 development started in 2004 at the latest; Android was acquired by Google in 2005.)
commandar 15y ago
Patents were reviled by geeks even in a pre-9/11 world. ;) http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=site%3Aslashdot.org+software+patents#sclient=psy&hl=en&tbs=cdr:1%2Ccd_min%3A8%2F1%2F1997%2Ccd_max%3A9%2F10%2F2001&source=hp&q=site:slashdot.org+patents&pbx=1&oq=site:slashdot.org+patents&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=90360l90556l0l90820l2l2l0l0l0l0l231l397l0.1.1l2l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.&fp=2b79ce39e1e85726&biw=1110&bih=759 http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&#3...

commandar 15y ago

>consumers who genuinely think they are getting iPhones. Are you delusional or just trolling? If the latter, I'd suggest a more subtle approach in the future.

nirvana 15y ago
Remember when ReadWriteWeb was the first hit on Google for the term "Facebook" for a few days and they got thousands of people hitting their page posting comments about how they couldn't log into google? Because they were goggling for Facebook in order to get on Facebook, and the first result was no longer Facebook for that period. That's something you'd probably never do, but for millions of people, that's how they know how to get to Facebook. I'm neither delusional, nor am I trolling. I'm just making an argument you don't like. I don't think its appropriate that you would characterize me in a derogatory way like that, because you're engaging in attacks to the person, rather than to the point, and I think that Hacker News should have a higher level of debate than that.
- lotharbot 15y ago
  > "I don't think its appropriate that you would characterize me in a derogatory way like that" I'm not sure how you can say that with a straight face immediately after characterizing me in such a derogatory way in http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2934973 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2934973

beedogs 15y ago

You really need to quit while you're far, far behind.

fpgeek 15y ago

"They spent one year" This, in and of itself, is a sign of how innovative Android is, under-the-hood. Google and everyone else saw the iPhone at the same time. Google took one year to have a baseline-credible iPhone competitor ready. Palm took two (and they had the advantage of starting over from scratch). Microsoft took three. Nokia took four (so long they eventually killed the platform and have embraced Microsoft). RIM still hasn't gotten there. Even though most people don't realize it, being a fast follower isn't easy. The Android team planned for their OS to be flexible and retargetable from the start. You can see it in their architecture, some of their lower-level features (e.g. Intents, input frameworks) and you can see it in the speed of their "iPhone pivot".