

  (Source: LucasFilm Ltd.)




I. Data Tapping Ban Comes to Fruition








II. HTC Already Removed the Feature, ITC Bans Imports Anyways 


Data tapping in action [Image Source: imgur]








III. Surprise Ban Could Spell Doom for the Troubled Android Phonemaker





Game over




Sources: HTC [via The Verge], Reuters

Comments     Threshold


By Tony Swash on 5/16/2012 1:37:12 PM , Rating: -1
Apple knows it's been ursurped technologically and more people are finally realizing it. So instead of actually creating something competitive, they resort to questionable legal tactics of preventing competitors from delivering phones.

Careful with the delusional triumphalism because in the real world Apple's iOS business is crushing the Android business.

Check this article

which is a follow up to this article

Executive summary: Comparing revenue “run rates”, on a yearly basis Android revenue is only 2.5% of the iPhone revenue or 1.6% of iOS revenue.

Android is a tiny business compared to iOS.

What proportion of potential Android sales have actually been blocked by Apple's global legal actions? My guesstimate based on the evidence is less than 1%

Apple's iOS business is beating the Android business irrespective of the outcome of the various legal cases.

Tony, I missed you.


By nolisi on 5/16/2012 2:05:16 PM , Rating: 1

Keep hiding your head in ground (or whatever other hole you're obviously sticking it in).

Common sense: Apple wouldn't waste money suing companies that aren't a threat to its business. If Apple is truly better than the competition- the free market will choose it over Android.

Common sense: by suing Android companies, Apple is acknowledging the threat. You don't sue companies that don't impact your sales.

Using your logic: being forced to settle with Samsung shows that Apple must have copied Samsung IP, otherwise they wouldn't be settling.

Care to discuss this reasonably?

By elleehswon on 5/16/2012 4:50:25 PM , Rating: 2
Apple's innovations, like the notification bar?

By sprockkets on 5/16/2012 6:02:42 PM , Rating: 3
The patent on it was filed years ago but has not been granted yet.

Doesn't matter to you anyhow - you'll spin it somehow in apple's favor.

By Cerin218 on 5/16/2012 3:18:04 PM , Rating: 2
"(bigger, much bigger, than PCs) is mobile devices"

Yep Because every business in the world is going to magically switch to "mobile devices" for it's users replacing all desktop PC's.

By nolisi on 5/16/2012 6:16:19 PM , Rating: 2
Apple's legal strategy has nothing to do with whether their iOS device business is a success

Are you serious? The legal strategy ensures iOS is a success, which makes them money. It has everything to do with iOS's success. Are you seriously suggesting that businesses don't do things (including legal actions) that ensure their business model and products are a success?

Legal wars are expensive and companies are about making money. Apples board wouldn't allow this to happen if it weren't about guaranteeing iOS business. Please, prove otherwise.

because if companies just copy Apple then innovation slows.

There has never been any proof of this. Architecture and fashion are just two industries both prove that it innovation is possible without IP protection for designs.

As long as people have goals, they will always find ways to innovate. Nothing about IP laws encourages innovation. People innovated before these existed, and they will continue to. Fire wasn't invented because someone patented the blanket. Fire was invented because people wanted to be warm, eat grilled meat, and put to death those who believe in other Gods and have dumb ideas like "Apple innovates."

Samsung have clearly shown they have the organisation and will and management skills to compete and survive in the mobile space, Good for them. And even better if they can do it by not copying Apple.

Too bad Apple couldn't do it without copying Samsung. Why else would Apple settle?

By nolisi on 5/17/2012 12:59:01 PM , Rating: 1
I think you may be responding to a point I did not make.

Do you just ignore facts that aren't convenient to your argument? You made this (invalid) point in the previous post:


Now you say:

Of course Apple's legal strategy relates to their business strategy

You don't see the contradiction in first stating one has "nothing" to do with the other, and then softening that same position by using the word "relates"?

Other points that I substantiated that you ignored: the fact that patents do not help innovation, Apples settling showing that they copied Samsung.

I know it may be comforting to explain Apple's business victories as somehow the illegitimate result of dubious legal manoeuvres

I never said that their success is solely due to legal wars. I think they make good products. I use a few of them. YOU are now responding to a point I never made.

My point: they are not an innovator.

but if Apple dropped every one of it's legal actions tomorrow the legal IP wars around mobile would continue.

You do realize that it's about why they're suing, not the fact that they're suing.

