That would be patent trolling on the part of Apple. Patent trolling is a serious absurdity in how the patent system is used. If you think about it, why should A

That would be patent trolling on the part of Apple. Patent trolling is a serious absurdity in how the patent system is used. If you think about it, why should Apple have the right to demand money from Google because they predicted that Google is going to rely on advertising in it's OS? Why not Techcrunch, or an analyst off Wall Street, or some guy in Florida with an orange grove? The answer is because Apple hired a lawyer to write a piece of paper saying that they own the idea of including advertisements in an operating system, and all these random other people didn't. Ads in an operating system would be an unimaginable low for Apple. So would patent trolling Google. I don't think either of these will happen. I think it's because patent law fosters habits in companies that most individual people have outgrown. It's where you don't believe that anyone will protect your stuff so you grab everything you can reach, irregardless of whether it is useful to you or not, make a big pile, and sit on it. If someone tries to come up to you and have a reasonable conversation, you scream "MINE! MINE!" and hug your pile closer to yourself. (If you're a patent troll, you also try to yank the guy's wallet out of their jeans.) It's not much of a theory, but it's the only way I can explain how most technology corporations - Apple included - seem to preemptively patent everything, all the time, without actually planning to make use of their inventions.