What I would really like to see is more information on who the aggressors are in all the cases. While I can find who is suing whom, I can't find who started suits in the cases of counter-suits having been filed.
There is no doubt Apple is in the middle of things and they are being extremely aggressive, and this particular suit seems over the top. However, I can't judge all of Apple's lawsuits with the current information I have. They are too prominent in the press and too little real information is being presented there.
Put another way, if we assume all the patents were valid (which is the lawyerly assumption) and companies really are infringing, is Apple wrong? If we were talking about people stealing the core of Mr. Fusion and putting out Mrs. Fusors, would Mr. Fusion be in the wrong to sue?
I would love nothing more than for all software patents to get dumped, but until that day comes, they are part of the rules of business. Apple could choose not to fight, but I don't think that would be keeping with fiduciary responsibility.
(Re-reading this, I realized it kind of turned into a stream of consciousness thing. Hopefully there is something to follow here).
That is awesome, and better than the other one I found (though slightly out of date), but it still doesn't identify the instigators. I would love to see an interactive graph like this, with the arrows drawing out over time.
Interesting to note at that point, Apple was being sued over twice as much as it was suing. Patents are so screwed up right now.
Yep, while I love and use apple products, I'll drop them like a rock like I dropped Windows for Linux in 1999-2000 if things get too bad with them.
What I find annoying with the patent situation is the fact that people seem to think this is something new with Apple for example. If they would compare the situation with other businesses they would note that patent suits are really common. Just on design patents alone car companies make the computer industry look like a kiddy playbox. The major auto manufacturers seem to love suing for the most basic of similarities. Which might explain why almost all cars are universally ugly in some way. But I digress.
There is no doubt Apple is in the middle of things and they are being extremely aggressive, and this particular suit seems over the top. However, I can't judge all of Apple's lawsuits with the current information I have. They are too prominent in the press and too little real information is being presented there.
Put another way, if we assume all the patents were valid (which is the lawyerly assumption) and companies really are infringing, is Apple wrong? If we were talking about people stealing the core of Mr. Fusion and putting out Mrs. Fusors, would Mr. Fusion be in the wrong to sue?
I would love nothing more than for all software patents to get dumped, but until that day comes, they are part of the rules of business. Apple could choose not to fight, but I don't think that would be keeping with fiduciary responsibility.
(Re-reading this, I realized it kind of turned into a stream of consciousness thing. Hopefully there is something to follow here).