Apple, RIM, Samsung, HTC Sued Over Mobile Displays

[txsouthpaw]

[citation][nom]malikxaxu[/nom]Guys.... These are the titles of the patents and do NOT define the monopoly afforded by same. The monopoly is defined by the CLAIMS included in the patent. Please get informed before bashing the patent system.Would you judge the content of a book based on its title???[/citation]

The focus of my rant was the supply-side welfare state in which we live. Corporations and their political cronies extol the virtues of the unrestrained free market when it comes to fighting regulation and dodging taxes, yet who do they always run to in order to protect their ridiculous monopolies? The patent system is a joke, as is the "justice" system used to enforce it.

 

[lordstormdragon]

I think historically SGI played a huge role, and we wouldn't be where we are now with technology without them. That their successor is taking stabs at Apple and the rest is unsurprising.

But I very much agree with Del35. Apple zealots should be scorned, singled out, and humiliated at every opportunity. Not that "they started it", but Apple has sure fueled all kinds of BS patent-trolling in the past decade. They haven't made a single innovation since Day 1, and yet the zealots just love pretending they are in some way unique, instead of the lowest common denominator of consumer.

 

[hetneo]

[citation][nom]K2N hater[/nom]Have you ever heard of Roberto Landell? He was a Brazilian Priest who is actually the father of all wireless communication, including wireless phone. Most of his patents in the US were filled in 1904. Wonder what would happen if he were to sue everyone who attempted to improve his projects or turn them into commercial produts...[/citation]
De Moura demonstrated wireless communication in 1900, whole 6 years after Tesla did the same. But Tesla was notorious for not patenting his works.

 

[jowah]

[citation][nom]longliverock1974[/nom]Sigh...another patent lawsuit. I'm thinking of filing 2 patents myself.Patent 1. I'm going to patent patents. Anyone who tries to file a patent will be sued for trying to patent something.Patent 2. I'm going to patent ideas which could achieve monetary gain. If you have an idea which could in some way, shape, or form make money, I will sue you.[/citation]

Took the words out of my mouth.. lol

 

[pythy]

I wonder if I can patent this:
The extension of a person's middle finger and directing it towards the patent office

 

[shrapnel_indie]

GPH a patent troll? Sure sounds like it.

I've heard rumors of such tactics becoming outlawed, but when corporate money greases the right hands and wheels, you can expect such legislation to never survive long enough to be made into law. (You only need a few key people for that task.)

 

[eddieroolz]

This might be a bit worrisome as this organization has a previous win under their belt, against ATI.

 

[f-14]

i see no problem with some one enforcing the patents of a dead company who did invent and patent their stuff and let others steal it and get away with it.
just criminal prosecution for murder by theft/swindle by the wife of the deceased the way i see it.
not very accurate, but more funny then stealing the social security/pension check of a granny so she can't afford her living expenses.

 

[malikxaxu]

[citation][nom]K2N hater[/nom]Have you ever heard of Roberto Landell? He was a Brazilian Priest who is actually the father of all wireless communication, including wireless phone. Most of his patents in the US were filled in 1904. Wonder what would happen if he were to sue everyone who attempted to improve his projects or turn them into commercial produts...[/citation]

Dude, his putative patent(s) would be unenforceable now because it (they) would be expired...