3 ms·

The backlash toward Apple seems silly to me, they're playing the game within the rules that exist. If you're mad that patents consisting of obvious combination

by slyn 14y ago

The backlash toward Apple seems silly to me, they're playing the game within the rules that exist. If you're mad that patents consisting of obvious combinations, evolution's, and (ux) optimizations of prior or existing technologies are a thing: rail against that, not against Apple. In the end who really cares if Apple wins or loses their patent dispute, almost undoubtedly eventually a settlement will be reached and there will be some sort of patent licensing agreement reached and someone will be out a few billion in fines. If this case started a movement that was more like: "I don't like how Apple is able to abuse the patent law, lets change how patents work", and then real patent law got changed, that would be huge not only in regards to this particular case but to the whole industry. That would make sense. The media/community drama now? I don't get it.

saiko-chriskun 14y ago
You don't get it? So just because something is within the law that makes it ok? Was slavery ok back in the day just because it was legal? What I don't get is how people can justify using this argument.
- slyn 14y ago
  Slavery was fucked up, so we got rid of slavery. Patent law is fucked up, so we get mad at Apple. These two things are not alike, and the latter reaction doesn't really make sense. I never said anything remotely close to the idea that I think what Apple is doing is OK, rather quite the opposite. But I'm not going to be mad at Apple about it because being mad at Apple accomplishes pretty much literally nothing. Instead I'll direct my frustration at the true cause of the insanity: the inane patent law itself.
  - zumda 14y ago
    There were people rallying against slave masters. Yes, back when it was still legal to own slaves. Do you say these activists had nothing to do with abolishing slavery? Do you say they were wrong to be mad at slave masters because it was the law back hen?

by slyn 14y ago

saiko-chriskun 14y ago

You don't get it? So just because something is within the law that makes it ok? Was slavery ok back in the day just because it was legal? What I don't get is how people can justify using this argument.

slyn 14y ago
Slavery was fucked up, so we got rid of slavery. Patent law is fucked up, so we get mad at Apple. These two things are not alike, and the latter reaction doesn't really make sense. I never said anything remotely close to the idea that I think what Apple is doing is OK, rather quite the opposite. But I'm not going to be mad at Apple about it because being mad at Apple accomplishes pretty much literally nothing. Instead I'll direct my frustration at the true cause of the insanity: the inane patent law itself.
- zumda 14y ago
  There were people rallying against slave masters. Yes, back when it was still legal to own slaves. Do you say these activists had nothing to do with abolishing slavery? Do you say they were wrong to be mad at slave masters because it was the law back hen?