08.15.12
Gemini version available ♊︎Apple and Microsoft in the Same Patents Team
Not just CPTN
Summary: Realisation that when it comes to patent monopolies Apple and Microsoft are hardly any different
APPLE and Microsoft continue to act as though they are more than patent allies — something that we wrote about several years ago to explain Apple’s support of patent-encumbered Microsoft pseudo ‘standards’ (OOXML, FAT, etc.). In terms of their patent litigation, there is some overlap and the Microsoft booster helps the Microsoft/Apple litigation against Android by echoing their talking points. As we showed some days ago, Apple and Microsoft want Kodak‘s patents and they are willing to buy it together with Intellectual Ventures, a massive patent troll. Apple and Microsoft increasingly behave like patent trolls themselves, seeking to make money by doing no work.
“Apple’s patents are outrageous. The company’s designs are not even original.”Groklaw has been tracking Apple’s legal battles against Linux/Android, noting more latterly that “The Apple v. Samsung trial begins again Monday. Samsung has filed its witness list [PDF], because Apple should be finishing up its case this coming week early and then Samsung presents its side of the story to the jury. We get a peek in advance, because the parties have filed the graphics [PDF], or as the law calls them the demonstratives, that each used in opening statements (and with witnesses), so we can see in advance what Samsung will be showing and explaining to the jury. The first seven witnesses will be: Markus Paltian (by deposition; see page 64 of Samsung’s demonstratives used in its opening statement), Andre Zorn of Intel (by deposition; see page 72 of Samsung’s demonstratives used in its opening statement), Tim Williams, Ph.D., Benjamin Bederson, Adam Bogue, Clifton Forlines, Ph.D. , and Woodward Yang, Ph.D. The links are my best guesses in some cases.”
A contributing writer in the site, Michael Risch [1, 2], provides an explanation of the patents in question: “Summing Up: What to Look For. Here’s what to look for, then. To what extent does the product design get driven by actual function? Does the dock provide function that you can’t protect, even if you were the first? For that matter, is it even distinctive? When you see 4 icons across, do you think of Apple only? Or is that a “generic” or “functional” feature? If Android implemented the four icons right away, then that aspect might well have never been associated exclusively with Apple, and secondary meaning never formed. That’s why Apple is relying on its design patent for that as well, because the patent doesn’t require secondary meaning.”
Apple’s patents are outrageous. The company’s designs are not even original. In the past we saw that Microsoft too uses outrageous patents to extort Linux/Android. People who care about technology should boycott this abusive duopoly. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
mcinsand said,
August 15, 2012 at 11:48 am
>>“Apple’s patents are outrageous. The company’s designs are not even
>>original.”
If you’re talking about tech, you’re dead on. Apple will buy something like LG’s display that LG is developing for phone/tablet/computer applications, put it into their devices, and lemmings will call it Apple’s innovation. That’s what Apple is all about; take bits and pieces that others innovate, and then rebrand and market.
However, where Apple does innovate and where they might deserve a patent, if we allow business method patents, is a process of building a cult and getting cultmembers to shut off any logical or freedom-valuing parts of their brains.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
August 15th, 2012 at 12:12 pm
Even Apple’s logo is a ripoff (of nature).
mcinsand Reply:
August 15th, 2012 at 12:27 pm
Apple also ripped off their thuggish, anticompetitive behavior from 1950′s-1960′s era IBM, as well as the mafia, of course. Then, MS watered it down a bit when they stole from Apple.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
August 15th, 2012 at 12:31 pm
It’s not fair to say “stole from Apple” when Apple in fact “stole” from countless others. The problem is that they claim too much credit.
mcinsand said,
August 15, 2012 at 12:36 pm
Apple claims credit for others’ inventions, but they do push the envelope when it comes to opposing freedom, being legal bullies, and even ripping off their customers (remember the retroactive downgrades of the 1990′s?). I will disagree to some extent, because I do think Apple is a pioneer in bring evil behavior to tech. When it comes to anticompetitive behavior, Microsoft is a cheap wannabe, which I think is why MS has a monopoly. MS was never so staunch at completely eliminating freedom and choice in the early days, which is why it was a slamdunk choice over Apple in the ’80′s and ’90′s. Redmond did learn better and, while their evil may not stoop to as low of a level as Apple, they are working on it.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
August 15th, 2012 at 12:44 pm
Microsoft also learned to use proxies like SCO for aggressive actions; Apple just fights without front groups a la BSA, RIAA, MPAA.