Shared publicly  - 
Jake Weisz's profile photoMini Mansell's profile photoNic Gillespie's profile photoChris McIntosh's profile photo
I'd go back to a nokia brick before being forced to go to apple
This is the BEST reason I have seen yet to boycott Apple
Is this a bad time to say I'm starting to miss my iPhone 4S?! hehe
Modern business eh,  if your  company  is losing  sales to another  dont produce an astounding product  just  litigate the competitor out of the market
like i said +Andy Nicolaides make a break, the more you hold onto (like tones and skins) the harder it'll be to break away - find something new but different!
I would think if it came down to it the government would say 'hell no' as Android has good economic potential,

I'm surprised they haven't dug up a patent for an icon, or a mouse cursor, or pixels.
I hear they're trying to patent fingers and winks
I would think if apple tried suing them out of existence the ITC would press an anti-trust lawsuit against apple. Or because some of the Patents are so generic and widely used a judge could rule that it a public domain and the patents are invalid.
Apple: first they steal, then they patent and finally they sue. Can't someone slam those assclowns?
+Jake Weisz Actually, it's the US patent system. It's patently (ha ha) absurd....

Someone in power over there needs to rediscover their spine and make software and aesthetic design unpatentable. Copyright covers the need when it comes to software, and trademarks covers the need when it comes to aesthetics.
+Frode Hauge The problem with them getting a spine is its bad for business, they make more money if they approve patents, and best part is (as history shows) just because you patent it doesn't mean you own the idea. Look at Google vs. Oracle, There Oracle had patents for java, then the judged ruled against Oracle because their patents had to do with API's and as the judge stated you cannot patent something so basic because if allowed would destroy the integrity of all API's. I am not saying it is right what they are doing I am with you, aesthetic design should be unpatentable. however there is money involved so sadly little will be done. 
Likely they'd get that money back in the form of higher level of competition leading to more players in the field. Which would mean more employees and more products. And that translates to income in the form of taxes off of those employees and from product purchases. Not to mention US inventions strengthens the US position globally.

But I suppose that's too complicated a chain of events for politicians to follow. It would also be impossible to empirically measure. And it would probably be equally impossible to make any politician in the US not base all decisions solely on money.
Add a comment...