Free R&D?
Patently Stupid
Apple’s multitouch lawsuit is both dumb and dangerous. ...
[T]his isn’t just about Apple vs. Google. This lawsuit could apply to just about every one of Apple’s tech rivals, including Microsoft, Motorola, Palm, and Research in Motion, the BlackBerry’s manufacturer.
Yes, one company’s patents do limit what all other companies can do. What part of “patent” don’t you understand?
[T]ouch-screen devices will play a major role in the future of computing. With this lawsuit, Apple is standing in the way of that future.
Except that people can buy Apple’s products, of course. Or is that unthinkable?
Apple’s move is terrible for consumers and businesses that rely on smartphones, it’s bad for mobile-software developers, and it’s obviously not great for Apple’s competitors.
Except ... that people can buy, and develop software for, Apple’s products of course. I thought I was kidding when I said “unthinkable” — guess not.
The suit can’t do much to help Apple, either...
Oh, really?
Apple’s competitors also hold a wide portfolio of mobile-device patents, and I’m sure that they all have their legal departments working overtime to search for any claims that the iPhone and iPad might be violating.
Or might not be violating.
You might argue that none of this is Apple’s problem — if it holds patents covering the multitouch interface, why shouldn’t it protect its invention?
Duh.
But Jobs’ position ignores a deeper problem, one that many in the industry have long lamented: The system for patenting software is broken.
So let’s be sure to “fix” it just in time to royally screw Apple.
The multitouch patents are a prime example. Neither Apple nor any other company should be able to claim ownership of such a basic and far-ranging tech concept.
Especially not Apple.
The fact that a company can hold up the entire industry over something as fundamental as an improved user interface is the best argument yet that the patent system is in desperate need of reform.
Where by “entire industry” he means “entire industry but Apple,” and by “hold up” he means “force them to innovate instead of ripping off another company that innovated.”
Apple did not come up with the concept of multitouch.
So point that out in court and get the patent invalidated.
The obvious problem with allowing firms to claim ownership over concepts is that it limits competition.
Allowing a prime innovator to be ripped off at will doesn’t hurt competition at all, I suppose.
[T]he worst part of the Apple suit: It’s a distraction. Apple and the rest of the industry should be coming up with the next great phones, not litigating over the current models.
So the solution to having the fruits of your R&D copied at will is to go back to the drawing board and do more R&D? Which will also be copied? And Apple (and the “rest of the industry”) will be able to provide all this free R&D because...Farhad Manjoo said they “should?”
Yeah. That’ll happen.
© 2010 Darel Rex Finley | design by