EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

10.29.12

Appalling Apple Apology

Posted in Apple, Free/Libre Software, FUD, GNU/Linux, Google at 11:39 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Apple gets yet more flak for retracting none of the FUD it spreads against Linux-based and Open Source rivals

Apple refuses to issue a real apology for lying about Android devices [1, 2]. Humility is a weakness — not a merit — at Apple. Apology is only Apple mythology. The company continues to be criticised for this. See the following:

  • Does Apple’s website notice satisfy the court order?

    For a company (and whose website) known for simplicity and brevity, the notice is surprisingly cluttered.

  • What Apple Gets Wrong In Its Samsung Apology

    That Apple statement is something of a masterpiece actually. Absolutely true in each and every word and sentence and rather misleading as a whole.

  • Apple turns U.K. legal loss into new Samsung attack

    A week after Apple lost an appeal at the U.K. High Court, the iPhone and iPad maker has followed the court’s requirement to publish a notice its U.K. home page stating the court’s finding that Samsung didn’t infringe its patents.

    But not in a way that shows any contrition. Instead, Apple used the notice as a new opportunity to make its case against its tablet rival.

What will the British court have to say?

Here in the UK, Dr. Glyn Moody highlights an “excellent historical summary” of what has been happening with software patents in the EU. It comes from a pro-software patents blogs run by lawyers in London, but it is based on Engelfreit’s understanding and opens as follows:

Whatever happened to all those unending and vitriolic arguments over patent protection for software in Europe? The following is a special treat for those readers who yearn for those far-off days when anonymous and occasionally even named commentators could hurl abuse at one another, armed mainly with a battery of unsupported assertions, religiously-held beliefs and appeals to self-evident truth. It is a guest post by Arnoud Engelfriet — a man who, by qualification and technical skill — is at least as well qualified…

For Apple to stop hurling abuse at Linux outside the US it is essential that software patents are kept out of Europe (and beyond). It’s only the US where Apple is treated favourably.

We are satisfied to see many who cease buying Apple. Voting with one’s wallet can be effective. The OSI’s president recently dumped his Apple gear as well. Apple is not a friend of FOSS; not even close.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

3 Comments

  1. Michael said,

    October 29, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    Gravatar

    Apple did wrong and claimed that the U.S. courts found the Android tablets to be infringing when they were not found as such (the phones were). Shame on Apple for this and they should be heavily “dinged” by the courts. No excuse at all for this from Apple.

    With that said, the idea Apple was ordered to issue an *apology* is a complete misrepresentation of the truth – Apple was not ordered to do anything of the sort. You are telling lies on the level that Apple did with their claims… but there will be no court reprimand against you. Maybe their should be – would love to see Apple sue you for repeatedly lying about them.

  2. mcinsand said,

    October 31, 2012 at 11:52 am

    Gravatar

    Apple needs to stop drinking its own Kool-aid, especially as they are starting to learn the hard way that Jobs’ reality distortion field only works on cultmembers. Marketing someone else’s innovation may count as an ‘innovation’ among the lemmings, but those that think know better. Copying others’ features may be ‘innovation’ in the Apple manual, but people that have been around tech know better. What Apple does do well is to repackage and make shiny, but they go too far when they try to claim drastically, insanely above and beyond just being marketers. In the US, they only won because the jury foreman failed to apply actual patent law in what is becoming very apparent as a vindictive move against Seagate through Samsung; when the objective jury was leaning towards finding for Samsung, he swung into action to make arguments that were 180° against both the law and the judge’s jury instructions. Then, there was the judge, where at least one Appeals court ruling (so far) has ruled that she ‘abused her discretion.’

    Apple needs to stick to what it does best, to take others’ creations, assemble and make shiny, and then sell to the cult. Claiming to actually participate in technical innovation and, far worse, to try to claim that others copied what Apple first copied, is only getting them mired more deeply in staining their own name.

    The judge ordered Apple to show some contrition in their lying, and Apple raised the digitus impudicus (reference the books by Julian May’s Saga of the Pliocene Exile) to Samsung, the European Court, and people that objectively pay attention to tech developments and trends. Do you think the judge will let this contempt go unaddressed?

    Michael Reply:

    Apple needs to stop drinking its own Kool-aid, especially as they are starting to learn the hard way that Jobs’ reality distortion field only works on cultmembers.

    Empty of any content… just spewing bizarre insults to please the Stallman cult. Got it.

    Marketing someone else’s innovation may count as an ‘innovation’ among the lemmings, but those that think know better.

    That is what Apple has been saying: it is not right to "slavishly copy" someone else, to use their term, and market it as your own. You are agreeing with Apple here.

    Copying others’ features may be ‘innovation’ in the Apple manual, but people that have been around tech know better.

    Apple has never said that copying others is "innovation". To the contrary, they have been very clear that are *against* companies copying each other’s products.

    What Apple does do well is to repackage and make shiny,

    This shows a complete lack of understanding of how Apple has heavily alterned multiple markets: the music market, the desktop computing market, the tablet market, and the smart phone market. There is a valid reason Apple is seen as one of the most innovative companies in the world – and why they have the highest user satisfaction ratings in each of those markets. This is something you clearly do not understand. Your lack of understanding, however, is your own challenge, not Apple’s.

    but they go too far when they try to claim drastically, insanely above and beyond just being marketers. In the US, they only won because the jury foreman failed to apply actual patent law in what is becoming very apparent as a vindictive move against Seagate through Samsung; when the objective jury was leaning towards finding for Samsung, he swung into action to make arguments that were 180° against both the law and the judge’s jury instructions. Then, there was the judge, where at least one Appeals court ruling (so far) has ruled that she ‘abused her discretion.’

    Both companies were saying the other had used their patents illegally. Each argued their cases. The evidence against Samsung was massive even before the trial (I have linked to some of it in comments on this site) and more came out in the trial.

    Apple needs to stick to what it does best, to take others’ creations, assemble and make shiny, and then sell to the cult. Claiming to actually participate in technical innovation and, far worse, to try to claim that others copied what Apple first copied, is only getting them mired more deeply in staining their own name.

    Again: you are demonstrating your own ignorance of the tech industry. Apple is far from perfect and there are many honest accusations and problems you could point out – but to do so you would have to drop your bias and work toward becoming educated and honest. I do not think that is likely. I am sure you think you are right, but keep in mind it is 100% predictable you will never back any of your claims that Apple merely takes others creations and assembles them. You cannot back this because it is completely absurd.
    For that matter, you are trying to make Samsung look like the good guys here. This shows you know nothing of Samsung. Apple is no more evil than Samsung Electronics who has been:

    convicted of willfully copying others and fined over 1 billion dollars
    fined the second largest US anti-trust fine for price fixing DRAM chips
    found guilty in the EU for the same price fixing scheme
    was involved in a price fixing scheme on LCD screens

    They are hardly the "good guys" in the silly battles going on.

    The judge ordered Apple to show some contrition in their lying, and Apple raised the digitus impudicus (reference the books by Julian May’s Saga of the Pliocene Exile) to Samsung, the European Court, and people that objectively pay attention to tech developments and trends. Do you think the judge will let this contempt go unaddressed?

    Apple did wrong in giving statements which were false about other court cases and for that they should be punished. But they were never told to apologize. That is a fiction made up by Roy.

What Else is New


  1. IAM is Wrong, the Narrative Isn't Changing, Except in the Battistelli-Funded (at EPO's Expense) Financial Times

    The desperate attempts to change the narrative in the press culminate in nothing more than yet another misleading article from Rana Foroohar and some rants from Watchtroll



  2. The Federal Circuit Continues Squashing Software Patents

    Under the leadership of Sharon Prost the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) continues its war on software patents, making it very hard to remember the last time it tolerated any



  3. SUEPO Representatives Like Elizabeth Hardon Vindicated as Battistelli's Detrimental Effect on Patent Quality is Widely Confirmed

    Feedback regarding the awful refusal to acknowledge patent quality crisis at the EPO as well as the appointment of a President so close to Battistelli (who most likely assures continuation of his policies)



  4. Links 17/10/2017: KDE Frameworks 5.39.0, Safe Browsing in Epiphany

    Links for the day



  5. Judge Bryson Rules Against Allergan After It Used Native American Tribes to Dodge Scrutiny of Patents (IPRs); Senator Hatch Does Not Understand IPRs

    Having attempted to dodge inter partes reviews (IPRs) by latching onto sovereign immunity, Allergan loses a key case and Senator Hatch is meanwhile attempting to water down IPRs albeit at the same time bemoaning patent trolls (which IPRs help neutralise)



  6. Rumours That António Campinos Initially Had No Competition at All (for Battistelli's Succession) Are Confirmed

    Succession at the EPO (mostly French) shows that there's little room for optimism and Battistelli's people are too deeply entrenched in the upper echelons of the EPO



  7. EPO Stakeholders Complain That the New Chairman Does Not Grasp the Issues at the EPO (or Denies These)

    Some information from inside the EPO’s Administrative Council, whose Chairman is denying (at least to himself) some of the core issues that render the EPO less competitive in the international market



  8. Another Misleading Article Regarding Patents From Rana Foroohar at the Financial Times

    In an effort to promote the agenda of patent maximalists, many of whom are connected to the Financial Times, another deceiving report comes out



  9. Monika Ermert's Reports About the Crisis at the EPO and IP Kat's Uncharacteristically Shallow Coverage

    News from inside the Council shows conflict regarding the quality of European Patents (granted by the EPO under pressure from top-level management)



  10. Patent Troll VirnetX a Reminder to Apple That Software Patents Are a Threat to Apple Too

    VirnetX, a notorious patent troll, is poised to receive a huge sum of money from Apple and Qualcomm is trying to ban Apple products, serving to remind Apple of the detrimental impact of patents on Apple itself



  11. Links 16/10/2017: Linux 4.14 RC5, Debian 9.2.1, End of LibreOffice Conference 2017

    Links for the day



  12. The Systematic Erosion of Workers' Rights and Holidays at the EPO Goes Years Back

    The legitimacy of the staff's concerns at the EPO, having seen basic labour safeguards being shredded to pieces by Battistelli for a number of years (predating even the escalation of the conflict)



  13. Articles in English and German Speak About the Decline in Quality of European Patents (Granted by the EPO)

    Heise and The Register, two sites that have closely watched EPO affairs for a number of years, speak about the real problem which is declining patent quality (or rushed examination) -- a recipe for frivolous litigation in Europe



  14. Software Patents and Patent Trolls Not a Solved Issue, But the US is Getting There

    A media survey regarding software patents, which are being rejected in the US in spite of all the spin from law firms and bullies such as IBM



  15. US Patent Trolls Are Leaving and the Eastern District of Texas Sees Patent Cases Falling by More Than Half

    The decline of patent aggression in the US and the patent microcosm's response to Justices, having ruled in TC Heartland, curtailing patent trolls



  16. Qualcomm's Nightmares Are Getting Worse as Antitrust Questions Are Raised and Assessed

    Qualcomm is getting itself deeper in trouble as fines pile up and its multi-billion dollar dispute with Apple isn't getting it anywhere



  17. Forget About Apple; Two of the Leading Phone Makers (Samsung and Huawei) Are Bickering Over Patents

    Massive Android OEMs, Huawei and Samsung, are in a big patent dispute and this time, for a change, China is a legal battleground



  18. Tim Heberden From the Glasshouse Advisory is Throwing Stones in a Glasshouse to Create Patent Litigation

    IAM's latest lobbying, aided by the patent microcosm, for a climate of feuds and disputes (to line the pockets of the litigation 'industry')



  19. Access to Medicine is More Important Than Patents

    Some of the latest news about patents that impede/deny access to crucial medication; strategic litigation from the generics sector, seeking to invalidate patents and then offer low-cost alternatives



  20. Links 14/10/2017: Windows Breaks Dutch Law, Wine 2.19 Released

    Links for the day



  21. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Supported by Congress, a Federal Judge, Soon to be Supported by the Supreme Court Too?

    The Patent Trial and Appeal Board is still widely defended, except by the patent microcosm which likes (and profits from) patent trolls and litigation Armageddon



  22. Patents Are Turning BlackBerry and Nokia, Which Used Android, Into Anti-Android Fronts That Tax Android OEMs

    The Canadian BlackBerry has sued BLU in the US only to compel it to pay 'protection' money; Nokia's patents are being scattered to trolls, which are doing something similar (without risking litigation themselves)



  23. The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is Rotting Like the European Patent Office

    The Unitary Patent litigation pipe dreams (or prosecution/trolling fast lane), which Battistelli's EPO long relied on, turn out to be the road to nowhere



  24. Lying and Faking Now a Standard Procedure at the European Patent Office

    The European Patent Organisation (EPO) under the leadership (or chairmanship) of Christoph Ernst continues to relay lies from Battistelli's Office, SUEPO rejects these, the Office lies about SMEs, prioritises Microsoft (again), and probably buys fake Twitter "followers"



  25. Links 13/10/2017: X.Org Server 1.19.5, pfSense 2.4, Final Stages of Ubuntu 17.10

    Links for the day



  26. Truly Terrible 'Journalism' About António Campinos Boils Down to Lobbying and Agenda-Pushing

    The expectedly shallow coverage of the appointment (succession) of Battistelli's French pick, which will likely change nothing of significance at the European Patent Office (EPO)



  27. Under Christoph Ernst, the Council is Just a Megaphone of Battistelli's EPO, Including on Patent Quality

    The Administrative Council of the EPO does not appear to be interested in a serious, adult, scientific debate about the quality of European Patents (EPs) and is instead relaying lies from Benoît Battistelli



  28. Links 12/10/2017: Cutelyst 1.9.0, Qt Creator 4.5 Beta

    Links for the day



  29. The Hogwash Begins: Patent Microcosm's Media Pretends Campinos is Anything But Battistelli's French Succession Plan

    A survey of media coverage regarding António Campinos, the French person whom Benoît Battistelli selected as his successor at the EPO



  30. Patent Quality at the EPO (European Patents) is Slipping While Battistelli's Office Boasts “Expansion of Early Certainty” (Even Worse)

    The EPO is staring down the abyss as high-level EPO management, quite frankly as usual, looks for new ways to further exacerbate patent quality (for superficial gains in the number of granted patents) rather than improve it


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts