Summary: Apple makes frantic litigious moves against yet more Android-based products and the reason seems clear

REPORTS suggest that HTC cannot use Google's patents to protect itself against Apple.

While the idea of patent passage seems unhelpful (invaliding the said necessity of patents), what the ITC in this case fails to assess or consider is that Apple -- together with Microsoft -- is feeding patent trolls via proxies -- an offence which in itself deserves closer scrutiny. To quote a report about the US-biased ITC (it mostly blocks Asian companies, naturally):

The International Trade Commission has rejected HTC's attempts to use five patents on loan from Google against Apple in smartphone-related complaint. ITC Administrative Law Judge Thomas Pender agreed with Apple's arguments that only Google, and not HTC, has the proper legal standing to assert those patents.

How about those judges take a closer look at Apple's own antics? Apple's inexcusable behaviour when it comes to patents led us to a call for boycott.

In this siege from Apple HTC needs to find a response and it is expanding its patent portfolio as part of the defensive strategy:

HTC has faced some serious setbacks in its patent battle with Apple. But that won't stop the company from getting back up and continuing the fight.

Apple's abusive patent moves are further discussed in light of the infamous "647 patent":

In the mobile patent wars, the giant of the ecosystem has one big bludgeon it is using to bully everyone else into subservience. It is a patent known as '647, and it is Apple’s biggest weapon in fighting off the Android hordes, including Motorola, HTC and Samsung. But what exactly is the '647 patent, and how is Apple using it in court?

When Apple reacts in this fashion it's clear that it's losing to Android. According to some of the latest reports, not only has Apple fallen behind Android in the smartphones market; among businesses, Apple fell behind Android in the tablets market too. Here is a news item:

• Android tablets beating out iPad in business and IT: Report

  Apple's iPad may still be considered the king of tablets in many quarters, but new research data casts a shadow of doubt over how long that will continue.

Apple's attempt at a Galaxy S III ban is not quite working out so far; the elephant in the room is Google also because it is fighting against Apple at the same time:

Google Inc.’s bid to block imports of Microsoft Corp. (MSFT)’s Xbox gaming system and Apple Inc. (AAPL)’s iPhone based on patents owned by its Motorola Mobility unit may hurt competition, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission said.

Weighing in on cases before another U.S. agency, the International Trade Commission, the FTC said in filings yesterday that companies should be limited in their ability to win orders blocking imports of competitors’ products over the use of patents built into industrywide standards.

Motorola Mobility is citing its standard-essential patents to persuade the ITC to stop imports of Apple and Microsoft devices made in Asia. The ITC is gathering comments on whether such an import ban would be in the public interest. Final decisions in the cases are scheduled for August.

Microsoft and Apple like to pretend to be victims, but it is them which started it all. Another CPTN member, Oracle, lost its best known (in my assessment) Linux developer and he is quick to deny that the company's attack on Android had something to do with it:

Got an email from Chris Mason today clarifying the situation. Turns out my speculation is off the mark. Here's what Chris wrote to me:

Oracle has strongly supported my GPL projects over the years, and I was in no way implying that Oracle does not believe in open source.

Oracle always encouraged and rewarded my contributions to open source projects.

Regardless, Oracle and Apple both deserve no business for their patent attacks on Android. It's a matter of practicality and people can vote with their wallet. Those who buy Apple don't seem to mind the wallet because as one contributor showed us some hours ago, Apple charges 54% more to replace Retina MacBook Pro's battery. He quoted: "Apple's price for replacing the Retina MacBook Pro's battery is $199" (then adding, "[d]isposable computers are not very green"). Greenpeace often slams Apple and Microsoft for harming the environment more than other companies. ⬆