6 ms·

The evil genius

33 points by hjortureh 14y ago

mathattack 14y ago
Are these patents really evil, or just positioning for an endgame where everyone settles financially based on their portfolio?
- bediger4000 14y ago
  I guess I'd have to ask what difference that makes? Everyone settling financially is akin to making a patent clearinghouse cartel type of thing, where only really big companies get to play. The end result? A less than free market in practice, but not in name, mercantilist policies about who gets to innovate, and controlled innovation. Do we look back on the 75 years of Bell System with anything other than mild contempt? No? Well, that's the sort of thing a "financial settlement" will lead us to.
aviswanathan 14y ago
I think that software patents have worsened to the point that there's really only two ways to solve the problem: eliminate software patents altogether (thus introducing enormous competition and innovation in the marketplace) or be damn explicit about what is protectable and what isn't. Open source has thrived these past few years because of the reuse and improvement of the technology, whereas software patents often bar off any competitors or innovators from improving on the technology. And in Apple's case here, I think it's just plain crazy to try to patent some of these "aesthetic" elements of common design (rounded corners, etc.)
mefistofele 14y ago
Apple is just strapping up for the mobile patent wars which have already begun. It's an arms race, and it's irrational to place the blame on just one of the actors. To stop the arms race will take mutual action on the part of three or four different companies, or outside intervention. The former is likely to happen eventually, and let's hope that the latter happens sooner rather than later in the form of patent reform.
- akiselev 14y ago
  Thankfully these patent wars are being settled in a court of law. The system is over complicated and has a lot of loop holes (i.e. look at Oracles often unfactual descriptions of common programming terms in Oracle vs Google) but I think in the end it will eventually balance out where no one has won much more than others, even with Apples big wins over Samsung. The USPTO is starting to address the problem (albeit slowly) and there should be many more decisive rulings in the next decade.
bpatrianakos 14y ago
I'm not convinced. Apple's patents haven't stopped me from being creative. No one has asked me not to design using rounded corners. How about you? I bet not. When you buy Apple you're not just buying hardware or software. You're buying into a ecosystem and that ecosystem works really well! Now if Apple's ecosystem doesn't suit your needs then you're still free to not use it or jailbreak your iStuff. I keep hearing this stuff and I just don't see where we lost freedom. You don't have to buy music and videos on iTunes to put it into your iStuff. Jailbreaking, though frowned upon, is completely legal now and no one will hassle you for it. Cell phome contracts? Well that's not new or specific to Apple and though it's a bummer I'm happy for it because I don't have $500 for a phone and this "freedom" everyone keeps yammering about isn't worth the extra $300 to me. There's no loss of freedom going on here. Everything is the same as it ever was in a new form and context. Everyone loves to root for the underdog and tear down the establishment. I doubt most of us have ever really been truly stifled by patents and if we have I'm willing to bet that while you're the little guy you'll rail against them and if/when you "make it" you'll be hoarding and defending them like it's going out of style. I'm sure most people won't like what I've said. I'm a pragmatist. Idealism is great and I get the sentiment but in the end we're just not living in the world as it "should be", we live in the world as it is.
- Eduard 14y ago
  ↑ Apple fanboy logic
  - bpatrianakos 14y ago
    Great argument. This whole "fanboy" retort is total BS. That's my logic and my preference for or against Apple has nothing to do with it. Calling someone a fanboy is not an argument and no one can take you seriously once you say it. That's a conversation stopper. You can't prove or disprove it and all intelligent discourse goes out the window once it's been said. You could have used any number of arguments to try to persuade me the other way or prove me wrong but instead you used the conversional equivalent of "oh yeah, well you're a homo".
  - marblar 14y ago
bediger4000 14y ago
systematically taking this freedom away, by taking ownership of common design patterns - The "ownership" part is what's important, as Western Civilizations have put private property before just about any other consideration. I'm coming to believe that "intellectual property" is about unringing the Internet bell, stuffing the genie of everybody publishing, and everybody reading back into the bottle of gatekeeper-enabled censorship.
skrebbel 14y ago
> They lock us into buying music and videos from iTunes when using iPods, iPhones and iPads. Um. You do have a choice here, you know. Ranging from choosing products from slightly-less-evil vendors to pulling a Stallman and refusing to even run Firefox or touch a computer whose chip designs aren't open source. I don't disagree with the gist of your post, but I feel that by making it seem like people are almost forced to buy Apple products, you're undermining your own argument. As a simple anecdotal example, I don't own a single Apple product, without even trying all too hard, and I'm perfectly happy.
- kisielk 14y ago
  It's also simply not true. I have an iPhone and listen to music on it all the time. I haven't purchased any music from iTunes, ever. I refuse to buy music with DRM so I don't. I'd rather subscribe to a service like Rdio instead or get music from the artist via some other means and import it in to my collection.
  - M4v3R 14y ago
    It's worth to note though, that music bought on iTunes Music store doesn't contain DRM anymore. It used to, but now it's all DRM-free.
javajosh 14y ago
This is an important problem. It's fundamentally a problem with the way patents are granted, and the way they are used, and the way they are understood. let's address these in turn: First, you shouldn't be able to patent round corners. That's silly. Second, you should be able to patent things and then sue people for using your patent if you are not using your patent in any way shape or form. An unused idea should be free for the taking. Third, there's a great deal of ignorance about what patents are, how to get them, and how to use them. Behind this veil of ignorance, bad things happen. Unfortunately, this state of affairs means that companies like Apple can and indeed must violate the spirit of the law symmetrically with it's competitors, to protect themselves until the system is fixed. There is no doubt it's a bad scene, but it's not entirely Apple's fault. If they exercise restraint with these patents, using them purely defensively and then with great perspicuity, then I don't see how they could do any different. Let us all direct our feelings toward reforming the patent system perhaps by joining an organization like "Defend Innovation"[1], the EFF's group pushing for patent reform. [1] https://defendinnovation.org/ https://defendinnovation.org/
- wissler 14y ago
  Useful idiots call for reform. The patent system is intrinsically evil and must be abolished.
  - javajosh 14y ago
    I see. And what do you call a person who calls names and makes absolute statements without any support or reasoning?
    - wissler 14y ago
      Is it your view that one may not express one's view without substantiating it? Because that is the premise implied by your remark, and -- guess what? -- it's an absolute statement you've failed to provide any support or reasoning for, which would make you a hypocrite. So perhaps you should clarify.

33 points by hjortureh 14y ago

Are these patents really evil, or just positioning for an endgame where everyone settles financially based on their portfolio?

bediger4000 14y ago
I guess I'd have to ask what difference that makes? Everyone settling financially is akin to making a patent clearinghouse cartel type of thing, where only really big companies get to play. The end result? A less than free market in practice, but not in name, mercantilist policies about who gets to innovate, and controlled innovation. Do we look back on the 75 years of Bell System with anything other than mild contempt? No? Well, that's the sort of thing a "financial settlement" will lead us to.

aviswanathan 14y ago

I think that software patents have worsened to the point that there's really only two ways to solve the problem: eliminate software patents altogether (thus introducing enormous competition and innovation in the marketplace) or be damn explicit about what is protectable and what isn't. Open source has thrived these past few years because of the reuse and improvement of the technology, whereas software patents often bar off any competitors or innovators from improving on the technology. And in Apple's case here, I think it's just plain crazy to try to patent some of these "aesthetic" elements of common design (rounded corners, etc.)

mefistofele 14y ago

Apple is just strapping up for the mobile patent wars which have already begun. It's an arms race, and it's irrational to place the blame on just one of the actors. To stop the arms race will take mutual action on the part of three or four different companies, or outside intervention. The former is likely to happen eventually, and let's hope that the latter happens sooner rather than later in the form of patent reform.

akiselev 14y ago
Thankfully these patent wars are being settled in a court of law. The system is over complicated and has a lot of loop holes (i.e. look at Oracles often unfactual descriptions of common programming terms in Oracle vs Google) but I think in the end it will eventually balance out where no one has won much more than others, even with Apples big wins over Samsung. The USPTO is starting to address the problem (albeit slowly) and there should be many more decisive rulings in the next decade.

bpatrianakos 14y ago

I'm not convinced. Apple's patents haven't stopped me from being creative. No one has asked me not to design using rounded corners. How about you? I bet not. When you buy Apple you're not just buying hardware or software. You're buying into a ecosystem and that ecosystem works really well! Now if Apple's ecosystem doesn't suit your needs then you're still free to not use it or jailbreak your iStuff. I keep hearing this stuff and I just don't see where we lost freedom. You don't have to buy music and videos on iTunes to put it into your iStuff. Jailbreaking, though frowned upon, is completely legal now and no one will hassle you for it. Cell phome contracts? Well that's not new or specific to Apple and though it's a bummer I'm happy for it because I don't have $500 for a phone and this "freedom" everyone keeps yammering about isn't worth the extra $300 to me. There's no loss of freedom going on here. Everything is the same as it ever was in a new form and context. Everyone loves to root for the underdog and tear down the establishment. I doubt most of us have ever really been truly stifled by patents and if we have I'm willing to bet that while you're the little guy you'll rail against them and if/when you "make it" you'll be hoarding and defending them like it's going out of style. I'm sure most people won't like what I've said. I'm a pragmatist. Idealism is great and I get the sentiment but in the end we're just not living in the world as it "should be", we live in the world as it is.

Eduard 14y ago
↑ Apple fanboy logic
- bpatrianakos 14y ago
  Great argument. This whole "fanboy" retort is total BS. That's my logic and my preference for or against Apple has nothing to do with it. Calling someone a fanboy is not an argument and no one can take you seriously once you say it. That's a conversation stopper. You can't prove or disprove it and all intelligent discourse goes out the window once it's been said. You could have used any number of arguments to try to persuade me the other way or prove me wrong but instead you used the conversional equivalent of "oh yeah, well you're a homo".
- marblar 14y ago

bediger4000 14y ago

systematically taking this freedom away, by taking ownership of common design patterns - The "ownership" part is what's important, as Western Civilizations have put private property before just about any other consideration. I'm coming to believe that "intellectual property" is about unringing the Internet bell, stuffing the genie of everybody publishing, and everybody reading back into the bottle of gatekeeper-enabled censorship.

skrebbel 14y ago

> They lock us into buying music and videos from iTunes when using iPods, iPhones and iPads. Um. You do have a choice here, you know. Ranging from choosing products from slightly-less-evil vendors to pulling a Stallman and refusing to even run Firefox or touch a computer whose chip designs aren't open source. I don't disagree with the gist of your post, but I feel that by making it seem like people are almost forced to buy Apple products, you're undermining your own argument. As a simple anecdotal example, I don't own a single Apple product, without even trying all too hard, and I'm perfectly happy.

kisielk 14y ago
It's also simply not true. I have an iPhone and listen to music on it all the time. I haven't purchased any music from iTunes, ever. I refuse to buy music with DRM so I don't. I'd rather subscribe to a service like Rdio instead or get music from the artist via some other means and import it in to my collection.
- M4v3R 14y ago
  It's worth to note though, that music bought on iTunes Music store doesn't contain DRM anymore. It used to, but now it's all DRM-free.

javajosh 14y ago

This is an important problem. It's fundamentally a problem with the way patents are granted, and the way they are used, and the way they are understood. let's address these in turn: First, you shouldn't be able to patent round corners. That's silly. Second, you should be able to patent things and then sue people for using your patent if you are not using your patent in any way shape or form. An unused idea should be free for the taking. Third, there's a great deal of ignorance about what patents are, how to get them, and how to use them. Behind this veil of ignorance, bad things happen. Unfortunately, this state of affairs means that companies like Apple can and indeed must violate the spirit of the law symmetrically with it's competitors, to protect themselves until the system is fixed. There is no doubt it's a bad scene, but it's not entirely Apple's fault. If they exercise restraint with these patents, using them purely defensively and then with great perspicuity, then I don't see how they could do any different. Let us all direct our feelings toward reforming the patent system perhaps by joining an organization like "Defend Innovation"[1], the EFF's group pushing for patent reform. [1] https://defendinnovation.org/ https://defendinnovation.org/

wissler 14y ago
Useful idiots call for reform. The patent system is intrinsically evil and must be abolished.
- javajosh 14y ago
  I see. And what do you call a person who calls names and makes absolute statements without any support or reasoning?
  - wissler 14y ago
    Is it your view that one may not express one's view without substantiating it? Because that is the premise implied by your remark, and -- guess what? -- it's an absolute statement you've failed to provide any support or reasoning for, which would make you a hypocrite. So perhaps you should clarify.