Software developer Ameranth says Apple has been aware of the patents allegedly violated.
Apple Sued Over iOS 6's Passbook Feature : Read more
Apple Sued Over iOS 6's Passbook Feature : Read more
-
AMD dishes out more Zen 5 details — compact core is 25% smaller than the normal core, new SoC and chip architecture with dual CCXs
Apple Sued Over iOS 6's Passbook Feature
- Thread starter zakislam
- Start date
- Status
dont need to use an iphone 5 to violate Ameranth patents.. but its against Apple, so that makes it ok i guess
[citation][nom]bllue[/nom]We need more companies suing Apple[/citation]
Apple juice companies should join in the mix...
Apple juice companies should join in the mix...
[citation][nom]pyoverdin[/nom]Sooner or later Apple will just sue the patent office for infringing upon Apple's patented patenting process. Copy and sue who copies you.[/citation]
That would be IBM actually:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ibm-patents-the-patent,11868.html
That would be IBM actually:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ibm-patents-the-patent,11868.html
techslave3
Honorable
- Aug 21, 2012
- 13
- 0
- 10,510
cRACKmONKEY421
Distinguished
- Dec 27, 2010
- 78
- 0
- 18,630
ricardok
Distinguished
- Jan 14, 2009
- 323
- 0
- 18,780
[citation][nom]pyoverdin[/nom]Sooner or later Apple will just sue the patent office for infringing upon Apple's patented patenting process. Copy and sue who copies you.[/citation]Google already patented the process of patenting something. 
Toms did a news piece on this. Can't find it tho.
Toms did a news piece on this. Can't find it tho.
LordConrad
Distinguished
- Jun 15, 2007
- 864
- 17
- 19,215
Not that I'm defending Apple here or trying to state the obvious, but...
The current patenting system is a total mess at the moment. Every year it is becoming harder and harder to innovate and it is not because of lack of skill or imagination. It is because of artificial legal problems people created for themselves. The patenting was originally created to protect intellectual property of people who invent something truly marvelous. But now you can't include even the simplest features or functions without violating someone's rights, all because of the abundance of dull and obvious "daahhhh" patents. Individual inventors that work out of their garage really stand no chance at ever bringing their work to the market. In the end, this results in the public being deprived of newer and better stuff. Who knows what great idea never made it because of the patenting mess?
Solution to this? How about if anyone who uses the patents that don't belong or licensed to them will only be liable for a fixed amount of revenue generated by the sales of the product in question. Let's say we set it to 25%, which would be for all the patents used, 1 patent or 100, it doesn't matter. Then the patent holders either settle it among themselves who gets how much of this 25% or go to court. All of this would be instead of suing the company that sells the product, which again would only give up a set percentage of revenue thus buying itself an immunity from being sued.
Does this sound reasonable?
The current patenting system is a total mess at the moment. Every year it is becoming harder and harder to innovate and it is not because of lack of skill or imagination. It is because of artificial legal problems people created for themselves. The patenting was originally created to protect intellectual property of people who invent something truly marvelous. But now you can't include even the simplest features or functions without violating someone's rights, all because of the abundance of dull and obvious "daahhhh" patents. Individual inventors that work out of their garage really stand no chance at ever bringing their work to the market. In the end, this results in the public being deprived of newer and better stuff. Who knows what great idea never made it because of the patenting mess?
Solution to this? How about if anyone who uses the patents that don't belong or licensed to them will only be liable for a fixed amount of revenue generated by the sales of the product in question. Let's say we set it to 25%, which would be for all the patents used, 1 patent or 100, it doesn't matter. Then the patent holders either settle it among themselves who gets how much of this 25% or go to court. All of this would be instead of suing the company that sells the product, which again would only give up a set percentage of revenue thus buying itself an immunity from being sued.
Does this sound reasonable?
Your all Apple hating idiots. Don't hate on Apple b/c you are upset that everytime you update your "Droid," you have to factory reset it to get rid of the constant freezes and battery pulls.
scottiemedic
Distinguished
- Feb 10, 2010
- 1,758
- 0
- 20,160
I'm really SICK of this and that lawsuit. The only people that pay are us as consumers. Imagine how cheap an iPad would be if we weren't paying for all the damn lawyers Apple has to have to combat patent and trademark crap!!!
I never understood why Apple would not join forces on a pay system and instead created their own. Although a lot of people think Apple is so big the iPhone only has about 35% of the smart phone market.
Not exactly controlling anything. If your going to sell a pay system to businesses you have to control more of a market of devices then that. I am sure Apple will have some nice fee's too for the businesses accepting Passbook too. Another problem I still have with using a smartphone for payment is how many phones are stolen every year or left by accident somewhere? Do you know want to worry about not only losing your phone but losing your wallet? I have left my phone before at a restaurant but never my wallet.
Not exactly controlling anything. If your going to sell a pay system to businesses you have to control more of a market of devices then that. I am sure Apple will have some nice fee's too for the businesses accepting Passbook too. Another problem I still have with using a smartphone for payment is how many phones are stolen every year or left by accident somewhere? Do you know want to worry about not only losing your phone but losing your wallet? I have left my phone before at a restaurant but never my wallet.
bigshootr8
Splendid
- Mar 28, 2011
- 6,708
- 0
- 26,460
serves them right! Someone ought to show apple whose boss btw the gentlemen/lady who made the apple juice reference you sir/miss are win.
[citation][nom]drozd81[/nom]Not that I'm defending Apple here or trying to state the obvious, but...The current patenting system is a total mess at the moment. [/citation]
While I agree in this case it sounds like its actually working the way it was intended. The little guys had an idea that at the time was something new and different. They actually implemented that plan and Apple saw the idea and instead of licensing it the legal way, or working with the company to set terms stole it. Now they are asking for payment. Seems reasonable to me! You are protecting the true innovators and small time developers from the giants that just want to walk over everyone else.
As for your "plan" why should each patent holder be forced into court to fight amongst themselves for their patents being stolen? and at that only be able to fight for a limited amount. This basically gives large companies a free pass to take and use any patents they want as long as they set aside a min payment. So I could outright copy any device on the market, make billions of dollars and as long as I'm willing to pay a small fee it wouldn't matter?? How on earth would that makes sense to you? Oh wait I just explained what Apple does, sorry
While I agree in this case it sounds like its actually working the way it was intended. The little guys had an idea that at the time was something new and different. They actually implemented that plan and Apple saw the idea and instead of licensing it the legal way, or working with the company to set terms stole it. Now they are asking for payment. Seems reasonable to me! You are protecting the true innovators and small time developers from the giants that just want to walk over everyone else.
As for your "plan" why should each patent holder be forced into court to fight amongst themselves for their patents being stolen? and at that only be able to fight for a limited amount. This basically gives large companies a free pass to take and use any patents they want as long as they set aside a min payment. So I could outright copy any device on the market, make billions of dollars and as long as I'm willing to pay a small fee it wouldn't matter?? How on earth would that makes sense to you? Oh wait I just explained what Apple does, sorry
- Status
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram