Hacker News Reader

Comment by cageface | Hacker News Reader

It does seem kind of perverse that the essential, fundamental technologies on which the entire industry depends have to be licensed to all comers at bargain basement rates while at the same time latecomers can use fairly trivial UI and design patents to drive competitors' products out of the market.

Maybe this is the letter of the law but the reason so many of us are disappointed in Apple is that they're exploiting a broken system using tactics that for a long time have been precluded by gentlemen's agreement and common sense.

View on HN

What infuriates me is the lack of outrage by all the hipsters who hold everyone else to such a high standard. The same people who are still trying to drag Bill Gates through the mud for his business tactics in the 90's are dead silent about their favorite company employing methods that are at least as outrageous.

Whether you're an Apple guru or not, everyone loses when there's no competition in the market. It seems like the ultimate irony for the "Think Different" company to be acting like this. Still, I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

It could be argued that Apple is acting within the legal system, whereas Bill Gates and Microsoft were convicted and settled numerous lawsuits.

And while I disagree with the patent suits, I'd have preferred that the competition found ways to make smartphones that _didn't_ infringe of any of those patents, and made an even better product because of it. (For instance, a phone with facial recognition doesn't need slide to unlock).

I think Apple's perspective is that they view these innovations as central to their success. If these innovations are truly trivial, perhaps Samsung would not have copied them nor be so intransigent about removing them from their products. One could argue that Samsung is not ripping off Apple because Apple simply "got there first.". The problem is you can make that argument about any innovation, but all discoveries are obvious in hindsight, even though, in actuality, these patents were the fruits of a fantastically expensive innovation investment by Apple.

The thing that bugs me about Apple's recent lawsuits is that they seem more like cynical, tactical moves and not some kind of honest stance on principle. I think they're deathly afraid of losing their majority in the tablet market and want to try to keep competing devices off shelves long enough to cement their ecosystem in place all the while standing behind the flag of "innovation".

I think these kinds of tactics could backfire on them in the long run though because they're burning up a ton of good will with people like me that love their products and code for their platforms but don't enjoy seeing them beat up a legitimate competitor with things like "slide to unlock" patents.

Agreed, and I think it shows a disrespect for history since Apple would not have been able to thrive if Xerox, IBM, Microsoft and others had taken out patents and enforced them back in the 80s.

While I don't agree with software patents and don't like Apple pursuing companies because of them, nobody is forcing other cell phone companies to violate those patents. It's not like Apple has patented the only way to make a smartphone.

On the other hand, if companies could refuse to license or could name any price for a patent they've gotten into a standard, that would make it impossible for newcomers like Apple to enter the cellphone market.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com