Apple wants a monopoly on smartphones

its called one word!!! CAPITALIZM!!

Lo and Behold!
Judging by some comments here, it seems that the brain-washed Apple fanbois have finally found this site.

Historically, the whole world is known for copying Apple time and time again. And yet they've never had an original idea of their own? Show me where any open source has had an original idea. It only copies what is out there, to give people a free version - which is nice and dandy, but not at all a breeding ground for innovation.

"'Treble' damages... no, I don't think so."

Yes so. Look up the definition. "Treble" is correct. Or in lay terms, triple damages. The law allows for this in many infringement cases.

'Treble' damages... no, I don't think so.

Monopolies are not illegal in and of themselves, but only if their power is misused/abused.
A patent is a legalized monopoly (exclusive rights) to the commercial use of the ideas described in the patent application. Governments (not just the U.S.) issue patents in exchange for the benefit to society of public dissemination of knowledge (the patent applications) and providing a suitable market environment for the patent holder to develop their ideas into products.

Apple already has such a monopoly many times over on iPhone technology, after investing heavily in its development with the promise of rewards for its innovation. Apple has a responsibility to its shareholders, employees and customers to protect the value of its innovation by suing infringers. Motorola does as well, as concerns its own intellectual property.

If we look at the big picture for a moment, Android and in effect, Google, is under attack on multiple fronts. If any of those suits are won and the vendor is forced to stop selling Android powered devices,does this help consumers? No. It reduces competition, which helps Apple. What's good for Apple in this case, isn't what's good for any of us. Think it can't happen? The Caldera/IBM/Novel case slowed adoption of Linux. All Apple needs do is slow the adoption of Android devices in order to pull ahead. After all, Android devices run Flash, while Apple's devices do not, and while some of you may not think it matters, it definitely matters to the growing number of Smart phone users who dont' have an iPhone.

Any piece that riles humourless North Americans is fine by me.

All this hands-on-hips posturing from fanboys about "bad journalism": the classic retort from people who have nothing to say.

And now for the idiot comment of the day:

clos writes on "patent law and corporation"

"Patent law is there to protect ideas and reward innovation."

Hilarious! Clue up on the history of patents and how they held up progress in various fields for years, especially in the early Industrial Revolution.

"I'm not sure, but supposedly Edison didn't invent much, but he purchased patents and was entrepreneurial in a way the original patent holders weren't."

He was also pretty good at sharking off other people, so any claim that patents rewarded "the right people" clearly doesn't apply to his competitors who also had them. And had Edison been able to enforce his iron patent-grip on various industries, you wouldn't have had a movie industry in Hollywood. So much for patents creating new industries and generating wealth.

"You jumped to too many conclusions. Try ratinality for a change. We also have antitrust laws here in the US that break up monopolies."

You had to end on a joke, didn't you?

How can you expect anyone to believe in this type of editorial junk, when all they are doing is writting some complete trash about something which is not even worth the space on the internet, let alone the time to read it?

All they want you to do is believe that they are good at techno stuff, and you then buy into the garbage being advertised on their site so they make a comission.

Hoe dare Google allow this into the "NEWS" category - it's nothing but over hyped rhubarb!

I don't think Apple has ever claimed to have invented the GUI, they merely popularized it and innovated the hell out of it. Apple in fact paid Xerox Parc the right to use the concept of a mouse and a graphical interface. Then Apple did a heck of a lot more with it. That's the difference Apple paid for that right.

Motorola, HTC, Google, and Palm have not done the same with multitouch—a concept by the way, much derided by most of them when the first iPhone was launched (remember when everyone was panicked about no having a physical keyboard?). Instead they let Apple figure out what the market really wanted and then took wide liberty with their own implementations.

It's more than a little disingenuous to say otherwise.

"Apple didn't invent the GUI
Jwd wrote in the comment titled "sensationalist drivel" the following:
-"Of course it is doubtful that Apple ever had an original idea"- ironically they came up with the GUI that we all use today, and that you used to write this article.
Actually, Xerox came up with GUI that Apple later, in effect, copied.
The only irony is Apple's hypocrisy."

I don't think Apple has ever claimed to have invented the GUI, they merely popularized it and innovated the hell out of it. Apple in fact paid Xerox Parc the right to use the concept of a mouse and a graphical interface. Then Apple did a heck of a lot more with it. That's the difference Apple paid for that right.

Motorola, HTC, Google, and Palm have not done the same with multitouch—a concept by the way, much derided by most of them when the first iPhone was launched (remember when everyone was panicked about no having a physical keyboard?). Instead they let Apple figure out what the market really wanted and then took wide liberty with their own implementations.

It's more than a little disingenuous to say otherwise.

"Apple didn't invent the GUI
Jwd wrote in the comment titled "sensationalist drivel" the following:
-"Of course it is doubtful that Apple ever had an original idea"- ironically they came up with the GUI that we all use today, and that you used to write this article.
Actually, Xerox came up with GUI that Apple later, in effect, copied.
The only irony is Apple's hypocrisy."

I tend to go to comments to see for additional information after i read the article which is both mildly amusing and same time packs significant information. What i find in comments filled with cries of neglected whiners. So you dont like the site? Piss off do everyone a favor. You dont like the article? Move along

This isn't Eastenders for crying out loud!

"Fruit themed peddler..." Dude, you really need to update your sense of humor. Did you came up with this by your own? Why don't you try to think something smart instead of posting ridiculous jokes?? As for the rest of your article... complete failure and insult to the human common sense and intellect.

-"Of course it is doubtful that Apple ever had an original idea"- ironically they came up with the GUI that we all use today"

If you knew history of computers you would realize Apple took the GUI from Xerox Corporation who already had code wrote. PARC (Xerox) released the first gui based computer called the ALTO in 1973. In June 1981 Xerox released and marketed the Xerox Star which included clicking and dragging of icons with a mouse. It was later after stealing Xerox ideas and hiring Xerox employees Apple released their version of the GUI

The U.S. patent system is only "stupid" to those who failed to innovate in a timely manner and who are thus barred from using the latest ideas for a few years. The world can thank the U.S. patent system for providing Apple with the inspiration and means to fully develop the iPhone UI technology into some of the greatest products ever.

If Android wasn't inspired i post facto /i by the iPhone innovations, Apple would take no issue with Motorola or any other Android handset manufacturer.

Nick, you, sir, are a complete idiot. I don't even know where to start. I'm not a fanboi of anything, but I do know crap when I see it, and this thing stinks of crap from the first line.

First of all: These patent suits rarely come to anything. It will likely be determined that Apple created a new class of mobile phone and the basic structure of that phone is public domain.

Second: What exactly is wrong with the patent system? Should companies and individuals not be able to protect and profit from their ideas without having the very structure of their core business endlessly duplicated by others?

A poorly thought out argument and a poorly written blog. You sound like a 14-year-old who hates Apple for no reason.

"Of course it is doubtful that Apple ever had an original idea."? Like 'em or not you've got to, at the very least, give credit where it's due.

it is a shame that smart challenged is a prerequisite it seems at inquirer to be a writer...

Apple didn't invent the smartphone, Apple just invented the best smartphone, Apple is trying to maintain their monopoly on the "best" smartphone... without them, you wouldn't even know what a smartphone could have become, what did you think the patent system was designed for anyway? for rube goldberg machines only?

Please. The only one that thinks Apple will rule the world is Steve Jobs. He is an arrogant prick and Apple is lawsuit-happy. All of the bad press and control issues will bring the end of Apple altogether. THAT is a more likely scenario.

http://TechReview.LIEconomy.com

Seriously - "If they lose, it will have been a waste of time and money which would have been better spent on coming up with new ideas."

I'm pretty sure the lawyers have nothing to do with iPhone development, nor do they know objective-c.

Your article was beyond biased. I agree, it would be a shame if the android went away, but write with some damn integrity.

I believe this is the most stupid article i have ever read in my whole life. How do you expect to be listened if you only complain about the iphone, iphone this iphone that, why is that? oh i know you want porn in your smartphone that's all. The rest i pure nonsense. Everyone can do what they want, if i want an iphone and an android device i can have it. I'm not thinking about monopoly. They are suing for a reason moron...

I think this is ridiculous,Apple needs to pull there big girl panties up and quit trying to dictate to the world what we can do and not do!! Microsoft tried the same thing but the government did not let that happen. Quit crying Steve and quit being greedy. There is plenty enough for everybody to go around . This is what happens people get greedy and wants to control and dictate just look at this administration right now they are doing the same ting. Hopefully people will not let this happen..Quit crying Steve and figure out how to keep a competitive edge instead of trying to take over!!!!

The courts just held that "genes" cannot be patented, reversing earlier paptmet claims.

"Reversing a longstanding policy, the federal government said on Friday that human and other genes should not be eligible for patents because they are part of nature. The new position could have a huge impact on medicine and on the biotechnology industry.
The new position was declared in a friend-of-the-court brief filed by the Department of Justice late Friday in a case involving two human genes linked to breast and ovarian cancer."

“We acknowledge that this conclusion is contrary to the longstanding practice of the Patent and Trademark Office, as well as the practice of the National Institutes of Health and other government agencies that have in the past sought and obtained patents for isolated genomic DNA,” the brief said."

So why should so-called smartphones be patented?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/30/business/30drug.html?src=busln

This article (as many others I see written on this website) is not only ludicrous sensationalism but also hilariously inaccurate. Yes the patents system has some serious flaws (most of which you failed to highlight in this poor piece of journalism) but it is designed to promote innovation and protect ideas. Do you really think multi-touch technology would be anywhere near where it is today without Apple? And do you really think Apple (or anybody else for that matter) would bother to spend the dozens of millions of dollars it takes to develop technology like that only to be supplying it to people like Motorola who can copy it for a fraction of the cost? When technology is seen as vital to any particular industry standard patent holders are required to licence the patent. Not recommended, required. If there were no other way to have a smartphone that multi-touch then Apple would have to, however as all RIM customers would know, some of the best smartphones on the market do not infringe that particular patent. Indeed Apple does hold some broad patents on smartphone technology that would never hold up in a law suit and thats ok, because they know it, and everybody else knows it. On the other hand, they should fight to protect their intellectual property as should every other phone company. It wasn't that long ago that Motorola issued a slew of suits against other producers for infringing their mobile technology. Innovation needs to be encouraged by protecting ideas, otherwise people just wait for somebody else to come up with the cool new thing. Nobody actually goes ahead and does it, so everybody is worse off. Funny how you completely fail to talk about anything actually relevant to the issue at hand instead of gibbering on about the end of the world. Moronic article.

You are right Nick, the patent system in the U.S. is broken when it comes to computer software.

As a software engineer who actually writes code I can't believe some of the stuff the patent office grants patents for.

Patent law is there to protect ideas and reward innovation. I'm not sure, but supposedly Edison didn't invent much, but he purchased patents and was entrepreneurial in a way the original patent holders weren't.

Back to your rant about apple and US patent law, we'll just have to wait and see what comes out of this case. If apple wins, Motorolla prolly isn't going away.

You jumped to too many conclusions. Try ratinality for a change. We also have antitrust laws here in the US that break up monopolies.

Patents are not the problem -- its the legal system here in the US that needs reformed. If someone has deep pockets, they can sue anyone they like for false reasons, drag it through the courts for years and years, and still walk away with a handsome out-of-court settlement, or even worse with a verdict in their favor even though the original suit was bunk. That's the outrage.

Why the complaints? I've been reading this site for years, because they tell it like it is. This is why I come to this site.

If you want pro-Apple opinion, go to TechCrunch. If you want straight news, go to Engadget. Why read the INQ then complain when they do their thing.

I have a droid. I never EVER use multi-touch. They can drop it and I wouldn't care. Second, if Apple did manage to bully out every smartphone on the market, I'd NEVER own a smartphone. I'd go back to a dumb phone or no phone at all before ever owning an Apple device.

The patent system sucks. It really does need to be overhauled. By overhauled, I mean burned to the ground and started over from scratch. Give me a patent system that is line with the speed that technology moves today, where patents are approved by people who actually know something about the field the patent relates to and where software patents are not allowed. Then I'll be happy. And yes I am in the software field. Apple sued HTC. That's still going on. HTC hasn't slowed down one bit. They are still growing and putting out amazing phones. Honestly, I am not worried at this point. I'll worry after a decision is made. These things seem to drag on forever. Just be very patient like me. Eventually Jobs will retire one way or another.

So let me get this straight. Apple (The Fruit) is imposing there will on other companies such as Motorola because Motorola infringes on patents that Apple created? Are you telling me it's ok to steal others ideas and put a stamp on it claiming it's yours? By the way, using it to compete against the inventor? You're kidding when you wrote this article right?

First of all, you should get sue for making a blog. You should get sue for using the title "the Inquirer." I should then use the image if a frog leaping with the words Incisive Media. I think that's a great idea. Moron....

I really do. There is so much to read out there that is so serious and this site provides just the humor I need from time to time. The hyperbole! The feigned (I assume and hope) ignorance! The schoolboy indignation and self righteousness!

If you could just raise the bar slightly to wit and/or satire I would come here every day. Thanks for the chuckles.

Id rather break my phone or not have one at all than pay apple one penny for their piece of junk products

In Asia they had camera-phones in the 90's.
The technology has moved quicklier than the corporations want to sell it.
Apple, and other similar corporations are actually holding back the technology they have, so they can release one new bit of it each time, so people will have to buy a new product every time. It's actually a bit laughable that people buy it every time something "new" is in the shops, instead of waiting for when more of it comes out.
When Apple are trying to get a monopoly on smartphones, and are also trying to make it possible for themselves to sencor rude language in text messages, and pictures on news sides, there is reason to be worried. Sencoring of peoples text messages and of the news on the web is not the right way to go.

Jwd wrote in the comment titled "sensationalist drivel" the following:
-"Of course it is doubtful that Apple ever had an original idea"- ironically they came up with the GUI that we all use today, and that you used to write this article.

Actually, Xerox came up with GUI that Apple later, in effect, copied.

The only irony is Apple's hypocrisy.

Motorola sued Apple in early October over wireless technologies, antenna design, proximity sensing, application management and synchronization.
http://bit.ly/cq8OOB

It appears Motorola is trying to control competition through use of patent law and not Apple.

Did they not anticipate Apple's counterattack?

The US Constitution grants a right to a monopoly on an invention, so yes, the only thing that Mr. Jobs can go for is a monopoly.

Whether you think the US patent system is fair, whether you think the patents and products have merit, it gives credence to innovation as a business choice. American business has the balance of leadership and ideas shifted way over in the direction of marketing and finance as the only true management method. Steve Jobs and Apple give those of us who turn great ideas into great products a chance at winning back management mindshare.

Steve Jobs doesn't 'invent' anything. Steve pays other people a couple of bucks to invent things for him, then he pays lawyers tne times what he paid the inventors so they'll fight to get him more money.

and this website is lame. I'm not an apple fanboi, but I recognise anti-fanbois. What are you in favour of? The cuddly Microsoft? The noble Motorola?

Lame. You sound like you are stuck in the 80s and early 90s, excited by your first Windows box.

As a Patent Holder, I can tell you if some idiot decides to copy MY invention, I'm coming after them with both barrels blazing. If you bust your hump, spend the $$ etc. to INVENT something, and some bozo (or in this case other mega-corporation) decides to steal that invention, you have every right to shut them down, and make them pay. Just because some fan-boy thinks its o.k. to steal doesn't make it right.

-The droid is not 'highly successful'- but that's irrelevant; your trying to portray Motorolla as a bigger victim than they they really are.
-The first quote you give is simply a broad overview of Apple's claim- the conclusion from that quote that "Apple is saying is that Motorola basically copied the Iphone" is exaggeration. The claim is about very specific methods and technologies- primarily relating to multi touch.
-The droid would not be 'pulled from the shelves', royalties and damages would be awarded.
-"Of course it is doubtful that Apple ever had an original idea"- ironically they came up with the GUI that we all use today, and that you used to write this article.
-You've failed to give any substantial reason why the patent system is 'stupid' and should be 'overhauled'. You haven't even talked about the patents other than the flippant comment about 'BASICALLY copying the iPhone'- yet you say that these and all other tech patents are so wide you could land a 747 on them. 'BASICALLY' you're not a lawyer... you shouldn't be able to call yourself a journalist either.

When Motorola sued Apple?

Large Corporation get sued by another large corporation and subsequently counter sues over patents related to the development similar products.

The end times are at hand....

This is the worst 'blog'/'article' I have ever read. I want my 2mins back.

I hate articles like this that dabble in straw man arguments. Are you kidding me? Apple is going to have a monopoly on smart phones and rule the entire word because of six patents? Even if the company did, it will be just years later when some other company comes up with newer patents for a "smarter" phone. I hate these loaded articles that are clearly propaganda for the other side. Ironically, it's scare tactics like this that put corporations like Apple in power and prevent progress. Just let the market work itself out. I hate Iphones but this is just wrong.I

I prefer my news to contain facts, not dopey diatribes written by Android fan boys. I am certainly smart enough to form my own opinions about these lawsuits, thank you. I would have appreciated reading about actual facts regarding this case, not the ravings of what sounds like a Google/Motorola stock holder.

I had a thought about this. If Apple succeed in their patent case. What if, all of the Android manufacturers/sellers concentrate only on the non-US market it is after all a pretty big market. Assuming the non-Apple coalition becomes successful, wouldn't that leave Apple a bit stranded. Yes, they may have all of the market in the US, but outside of the US they may become nothing. That would be a sad state of affairs for Apple. No World dominance.