Judge Who Junked Apple vs. Motorola Makes Headlines Himself

[dsg]

i sure do not want this guy defending me in any legal cases.

he won't defend you but he will pass judgment

I agree with this guy the patent system is just used as a way to attack competitors, it's pathetic

[fourplay]

+1

I've said this many times before though. Apple shouldn't even have some patents in the first place. Patents were made to foster innovation, not stifle it. The patents they have are so ridiculous. For one, they get patents for things that have been around for years, that they didn't invent, such as their slide to unlock patent. Others are just so completely general someone was bound to use it in the future, or it can already apply to existing products.

[steve-z17]

Just being a business doesn't excuse you from any moral obligation. If a business is exploiting an obviously broken system the business is too at fault. You say "they should just innovate and come out with something better than the slide to unlock gesture". Why shouldn't Apple have something better than the slide to unlock gesture? They didn't even invent it, Microsoft did.

Where in my post did I say Apple shouldn't have something better than slide to unlock?? I think that would be awesome! More innovation is always a plus for the consumers. If Apple's doing something wrong then that's on them. I'm not even going to touch the topic of moral obligation in a "broken system" it's a pointless argument. All companies do this just like you said, so it's not just Apple. The fact of the matter is that they do have patents that were awarded to them and they can fight for them. We can go around in circles all day about who came up with the idea or how general you think they are, it's not going anywhere. Apple's got 'em they're going to protect them.

I don't know why everyone brings this point up. Yes I know other companies also abuse the system, but this forum and post is about Apple. No reason to go talking about how others abuse it too.

Lol! Really? So we can only talk about Apple on this forum? The title of this post has Motorola in it, I guess he'll have to change it since we're not aloud to talk about other companies..! The reason people bring it up is because it's true, Google and Microsoft would definitely protect their patents if someone was using them and making money off them. You can't just narrow that down to Apple....If you can blame Apple for, "moral obligation" then I can definitely bring Google and Microsoft into this.

No it completely matters. They shouldn't have those patents, so the shouldn't be able to protect them.

That's completely your opinion which your entitled too, but that doesn't mean your right. We'll soon find out from the court system if Apple's in the right or wrong. No matter what the outcome, Apple had a right to protect them. Personally I think that patents should be specific, it makes something like this go away quickly or not even happen. Unfortunately that's not the case here, but I strongly believe that once a patent has been awarded to someone it belongs to them and they have every right to protect it. No hard feeling mate!

[Gamemaster77]

Lol! Really? So we can only talk about Apple on this forum? The title of this post has Motorola in it, I guess he'll have to change it since we're not aloud to talk about other companies..! The reason people bring it up is because it's true, Google and Microsoft would definitely protect their patents if someone was using them and making money off them. You can't just narrow that down to Apple....If you can blame Apple for, "moral obligation" then I can definitely bring Google and Microsoft into this.

No the point is that people always try to divert from the discussion at hand. People bring up other companies out of nowhere. They seem to try to imply that by saying Apple's in the wrong we are also saying all the other companies are perfect. We're not, we're just talking about the current company at hand.

I'm not even going to touch the topic of moral obligation in a "broken system" it's a pointless argument. All companies do this just like you said, so it's not just Apple.

I'm not sure why some people find this topic so ridiculous. They act like every company is perfectly fine for exploiting every possible loophole out there to gain the most. There are many for-profit companies that actually care about their customers and fair business practices. I'm not sure if it is still going on, because all the pages I found on it are in another language. But, did you know that Apple was suing a small coffee shop for having a logo that as an Apple in it, even when it doesn't look remotely similar? Just a small one shop coffee shop their suing. How is that not wrong? Its not like they were thinking "How can I copy Apple's logo for my coffee shop".

[Kioes]

i sure do not want this guy defending me in any legal cases.

Ummm.... he's a judge... not a lawyer....


learn to read.

[scottjl]

So what he is saying is, it is fine to rip off other companies and their intellectual property for the sake of "competition."

yes.. those patent trolls are really afraid of someone competing with their products..

[tekwiz]

thats not what he's saying, he is saying that you should not be able to patent an idea, therefor if u make a wifi adapter someone else should be able to make one to even if u have a patent on your idea, because technically the patent is for your exact model on a variation of the product

I agree with him its annoying how much these 2 companies bicker like little kids

He doesn't even believe the tech industry should have patents while he says big pharma should because of the huge cost of brining a drug to market. He totally ignored the amount of money tech companies spend in R&D and imo is just a big pharma judge.

Yes, but damages/harm still need to be proven.

This isn't solely about Apple at all, but has to do with any entity who misuses the system.

This would be true if it weren't for the fact that so many of those patents weren't absurdly ambiguous. Patents are supposed to be for unique ideas, not existing ones that could be applies to nearly any prior computer system. What entities like Apple, Google, Microsoft, Samsung, and many others have done here is outright commit fraud in getting these sort of patents in the system in the first place. When patents like "Universal interface for retrieval of information in a computer system", which is so vague it could actually apply to abacus, as it too is a type of computer and it has a "universal interface" for retrieving information, are even given consideration, let alone given a pass, then you can't tell me something isn't seriously wrong with the system. I don't care who is doing it, it's simply wrong.

This Judge is nuts and needs to be taken off the bench. He believes Big Pharma should have patent protection but not tech companies. He thinks it costs tech companies nothing to bring a device to market, totally ignores the R&D costs they spend as well...but big pharma is fine with him. He then specifically TAKES a case just so he can tank it based on his PERSONAL feelings...he is not a good Judge at all regardless if you side with his thoughts.

[alanjf]

He doesn't even believe the tech industry should have patents while he says big pharma should because of the huge cost of brining a drug to market. He totally ignored the amount of money tech companies spend in R&D and imo is just a big pharma judge.

No, what he said was, "It's not clear that we really need patents in most industries," I don't see anywhere where he specifically singles out the tech industry. You seem to be way off on this one.

[steve-z17]

No the point is that people always try to divert from the discussion at hand. People bring up other companies out of nowhere. They seem to try to imply that by saying Apple's in the wrong we are also saying all the other companies are perfect. We're not, we're just talking about the current company at hand.



I'm not sure why some people find this topic so ridiculous. They act like every company is perfectly fine for exploiting every possible loophole out there to gain the most. There are many for-profit companies that actually care about their customers and fair business practices. I'm not sure if it is still going on, because all the pages I found on it are in another language. But, did you know that Apple was suing a small coffee shop for having a logo that as an Apple in it, even when it doesn't look remotely similar? Just a small one shop coffee shop their suing. How is that not wrong? Its not like they were thinking "How can I copy Apple's logo for my coffee shop".

I can see your point and I agree with you to a certain level. I think if there are loopholes that companies are getting through and the Government knows about them, they should do something to change it. It's not right to take advantage of someone, unfortunately that's how these big businesses work. It's a very tough biz, and people will do anything they can to make more money no matter what the cost. It should be about the product, not the money. A lot of these companies lose sight of that.

[Darkflame]

Maybe we can petition him to call Lucy Koh and tell her stop drinking the apple juice cause it's poisonous.