Do they really need more patents?
Apple attributed 2.5 billion?
2.5 billion could stop famine and poverty in 3rd world countries....but who cares right?
[citation][nom]monsta[/nom]Do they really need more patents?Apple attributed 2.5 billion?2.5 billion could stop famine and poverty in 3rd world countries....but who cares right?[/citation]
But those 2.5 billion could also be used to shutdown competition, thus boosting profit margins and eventually repaying the expense. Even though they have so much money that it puts the US Treasury in shame.
"For the first time in their history, spending by both Apple and Google on patents exceeded their spending on research and development of new products."
You can't just develop anything in random especially if you don't own a large chunk of patent in a certain domain or if you don't have a cross licensing agreement to someone bigger especially if you are a relatively new player. The more patent you have the less limitation to innovate in that field. If you are extremely lucky to start an entirely brand new product you are rewarded with a patent that will give you lots of chance and momentum to expand on your original idea. Ex. Creative with portable MP3 player back in 2001 and iPod was several months late so Apple paid the price even if their product ended up being more popular during the time the patent was awarded 4 years later. Patent does not guarantee success, innovation still is but having more patent gives you more room to innovate. If Apple did not own lots of GUI related patent and patents acquired from iPod development, iPhone/iOS/iPad might not exist today and so the clones.
[citation][nom]dark_wizzie[/nom]I'm going to start a new company where we make no products, but we get patents on everything on planet earth! I'm going to be RICH![/citation]
You're kind of late, companies have been doing patent fillings as their business for decades.
They either 1. Show around their patents to larger firms, 2. Sit back and wait for a company to violate the patent and sue to sell the rights or get royalty.
All the comments by those who clearly are consumers of tech and likely never started a biz; are laughable. Comments like: Spend the money on famine, no innovation, this sucks, are the type of comments that those who have never created a product or company would make. Start a company, make a product, or shut the hell up. What do you know about this subject? Apparently nothing! All you learned about biz is from kindergarten.
[citation][nom]monsta[/nom]Do they really need more patents?Apple attributed 2.5 billion?2.5 billion could stop famine and poverty in 3rd world countries....but who cares right?[/citation]
Its called a business. You invest money to make more money. And $2.5 billion wouldn't solve famine and poverty in 3rd world countries to begin with. Google bought Motorola for $12.5 Billion and a big chuck of that change was for patents.
Companies always need more patents otherwise they will stagnate and decay. Patents show you have "new" idea (supposedly...). If you stop getting patents you're basically stopping all R&D and that's suicide for a tech company.
[citation][nom]smusmu[/nom]Yea Apple is becoming greedy, see their stock price is taking a beating. Been inflated too long. Needs to drop under $100 a share.[/citation]
And what are you basing this on? Every conceivable metric for stock pricing would completely disagree with your assessment. I do believe a good strategy is to short Apple in Q2 of 2013, that would be a good time to short it, but currently and even then its stock price is valued well above $100.
[citation][nom]monsta[/nom]Do they really need more patents?Apple attributed 2.5 billion?2.5 billion could stop famine and poverty in 3rd world countries....but who cares right?[/citation]
i'm sure it could put a dent in it 1%-5%
steve jobs did not make apple to give money away to people who would never have enough money to buy his future over priced outdates products later on.
and neither do you!
do you fork over every penny you have and work 3 jobs to give every cent to the starving?
if so that is very saintly of you, you are a great socialist/communist, NObama didn't even have to force you to give your money to others who did not earn anything other than for merely being alive.
that's very commendable, IF YOU DO give everything you have.
you also will never be rich or have money to run any company and be successful at it and that company will never be able to do ANYTHING.