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. Links 23/4/2018: Second RC of Linux 4.17 and First RC of Mesa 18.1

    Links for the day



  2. The Good Work of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the Latest Attempts to Undermine It

    A week's roundup of news about PTAB, which is eliminating many bad (wrongly-granted) patents and is therefore becoming "enemy number one" to those who got accustomed to blackmailing real (productive) firms with their questionable patents



  3. District Courts' Patent Cases, Including the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX/TXED), in a Nutshell

    A roundup of patent cases in 'low courts' of the United States, where patents are being reasoned about or objected to while patent law firms make a lot of money



  4. The Federal Circuit's (CAFC) Decisions Are Being Twisted by Patent Propaganda Sites Which Merely Cherry-Pick Cases With Outcomes That Suit Them

    The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) continues to reject the vast majority of software patents, citing Section 101 in many such cases, but the likes of Managing IP, Patently-O, IAM and Watchtroll only selectively cover such cases (instead they’re ‘pulling a Berkheimer’ or some similar name-dropping)



  5. Patents Roundup: Metaswitch, GENBAND, Susman, Cisco, Konami, High 5 Games, HTC, and Nintendo

    A look at existing legal actions, the application of 35 U.S.C. § 101, and questionable patents that are being pursued on software (algorithms or "software infrastructure")



  6. In Maxon v Funai the High 'Patent Court' (CAFC) Reaffirms Disdain for Software Patents, Which Are Nowadays Harder to Get and Then Defend

    With the wealth of decisions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) wherein software patents get discarded (Funai being the latest example), the public needs to ask itself whether patent law firms are honest when they make claims about resurgence of software patents by 'pulling a Berkheimer' or coming up with terms like “Berkheimer Effect”



  7. Today's European Patent Office Works for Patent Extremists and for Team UPC Rather Than for Europe or for Innovation

    The International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) and other patent maximalists who have nothing to do with Europe, helped by a malicious and rather clueless politician called Benoît Battistelli, are turning the EPO into a patent-printing machine rather than an examination office as envisioned by the EPC (founders) and member states



  8. The EPO is Dying and Those Who Have Killed It Are Becoming Very Rich in the Process

    Following the footsteps of Ron Hovsepian at Novell, Battistelli at the EPO (along with Team Battistelli) may mean the end of the EPO as we know it (or the end altogether); one manager and a cabal of confidants make themselves obscenely rich by basically sacrificing the very organisation they were entrusted to serve



  9. Short: Just Keep Repeating the Lie (“Quality”) Until People Might Believe It

    Battistelli’s patent-printing bureau (EPO without quality control) keeps lying about the quality of patents by repeating the word “quality” a lot of times, including no less than twice in the summary alone



  10. Shelston IP Keeps Pressuring IP Australia to Allow Software Patents and Harm Software Development

    Shelston IP wants exactly the opposite of what's good for Australia; it just wants what's good for itself, yet it habitually pretends to speak for a productive industry (nothing could be further from the truth)



  11. Is Andy Ramer's Departure the End of Cantor Fitzgerald's Patent Trolls-Feeding Operations and Ambitions?

    The managing director of the 'IP' group at Cantor Fitzgerald is leaving, but it does not yet mean that patent trolls will be starved/deprived access to patents



  12. EPO Hoards Billions of Euros (Taken From the Public), Decreases Quality to Get More Money, Reduces Payments to Staff

    The EPO continues to collect money from everyone, distributes bogus/dubious patents that usher patent trolls into Europe (to cost European businesses billions in the long run), and staff of the EPO faces more cuts while EPO management swims in cash and perks



  13. Short: Calling Battistelli's Town (Where He Works) “Force for Innovation” to Justify the Funneling of EPO Funds to It

    How the EPO‘s management ‘explained’ (or sought to rationalise) to staff its opaque decision to send a multi-million, one-day ceremony to Battistelli’s own theatre only weeks before he leaves



  14. Short: EPO Bribes the Media and Then Brags About the Paid-for Outcome to Staff

    The EPO‘s systematic corruption of the media at the expense of EPO stakeholders — not to mention hiring of lawyers to bully media which exposes EPO corruption — in the EPO’s own words (amended by us)



  15. Short: EPO's “Working Party for Quality” is to Quality What the “Democratic People's Republic of Korea” is to Democracy

    To maintain the perception (illusion) that the EPO still cares about patent quality — and in order to disseminate this lie to EPO staff — a puff piece with the above heading/photograph was distributed to thousands of examiners in glossy paper form



  16. Short: This Spring's Message From the EPO's President (Corrected)

    A corrected preface from the Liar in Chief, the EPO's notoriously crooked and dishonest President



  17. Short: Highly Misleading and Unscientific Graphics From the EPO for an Illusion of Growth

    A look at the brainwash that EPO management is distributing to staff and what's wrong with it



  18. Short: EPO Explains to Examiners Why They Should and Apparently Can Grant Software Patents (in Spite of EPC)

    Whether it calls it "CII" or "ICT" or "Industry 4.0" or "4IR", the EPO's management continues to grant software patents and attempts to justify this to itself (and to staff)



  19. Links 21/4/2018: Linux 4.9.95, FFmpeg 4.0, OpenBSD Foundation 2018 Fundraising Campaign

    Links for the day



  20. As USPTO Director, Andrei Iancu Gives Three Months for Public Comments on 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Software Patenting Impacted)

    Weeks after starting his job as head of the US patent office, to our regret but not to our surprise, Iancu asks whether to limit examiners' ability to reject abstract patent applications citing 35 U.S.C. § 101 (relates to Alice and Mayo)



  21. In Keith Raniere v Microsoft Both Sides Are Evil But for Different Reasons

    Billing for patent lawyers reveals an abusive strategy from Microsoft, which responded to abusive patent litigation (something which Microsoft too has done for well over a decade)



  22. Links 20/4/2018: Atom 1.26, MySQL 8.0

    Links for the day



  23. Links 19/4/2018: Mesa 17.3.9 and 18.0.1, Trisquel 8.0 LTS Flidas, Elections for openSUSE Board

    Links for the day



  24. The Patent Microcosm, Patent Trolls and Their Pressure Groups Incite a USPTO Director Against the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and Section 101/Alice

    As one might expect, the patent extremists continue their witch-hunt and constant manipulation of USPTO officials, whom they hope to compel to become patent extremists themselves (otherwise those officials are defamed, typically until they're fired or decide to resign)



  25. Microsoft's Lobbying for FRAND Pays Off as Microsoft-Connected Patent Troll Conversant (Formerly MOSAID) Goes After Android OEMs in Europe

    The FRAND (or SEP) lobby seems to have caused a lot of monopolistic patent lawsuits; this mostly affects Linux-powered platforms such as Android, Tizen and webOS and there are new legal actions from Microsoft-connected patent trolls



  26. To Understand Why People Say That Lawyers are Liars Look No Further Than Misleading Promotion of Software Patents

    Some of the latest misleading claims from the patent microcosm, which is only interested in lots and lots of patents (its bread and butter is monopolies after all) irrespective of their merit, quality, and desirability



  27. When News About the EPO is Dominated by Sponsored 'Reports' and Press Releases Because Publishers Are Afraid of (or Bribed by) the EPO

    The lack of curiosity and genuine journalism in Europe may mean that serious abuses (if not corruption) will go unreported



  28. The Boards of Appeal at the European Patent Organisation (EPO) Complain That They Are Understaffed, Not Just Lacking the Independence They Depend on

    The Boards of Appeal have released a report and once again they openly complain that they're unable to do their job properly, i.e. patent quality cannot be assured



  29. Links 18/4/2018: New Fedora 27 ISOs, Nextcloud Wins German Government Contract

    Links for the day



  30. Guest Post: Responding to Your Recent Posting “The European Patent Office Will Never Hold Its Destroyers Accountable”

    In France, where Battistelli does not enjoy diplomatic immunity, he can be held accountable like his "padrone" recently was


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