|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 07 2012 @ 10:21 AM EDT |
Companies used to compete on the strengths of their products?
Since when?
Look up the use of the crankshaft in the steam engine. Or possibly the sun and
planet gear.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: complex_number on Thursday, June 07 2012 @ 10:50 AM EDT |
It is not as simple as that.
The whole system is broken. If you are Company A and buy something from Company
B that included legally licensed IP from company C then Company C can sue
Company A for 'loads-a-money'.
Company C licenses their IP Only to 'B' for the purpose of making something. If
'A' buys this widget and included it in something else (ie not the end user)
then 'A' is (in many cases) within its rights to sue 'C'.
This is what is happening in the area of 3g and WiFi.
If the system is fixed, then a lot of this madness will stop.
Until then (and because the shareholders expect it) it is sue or be sued.
Yes it is wrong but until the borked system gets fixed then there is not going
to be a resolution.
---
Ubuntu & 'apt-get' are not the answer to Life, The Universe & Everything which
is of course, "42" or is it 1.618?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 08 2012 @ 01:01 PM EDT |
It's got to be the Jobs Legacy (a very Microsoft-like
approach). I can see MS doing it, since they have no
innovations to compete with, but Apple? It make no sense.
I remember years ago, MITI, Japans Ministry of International
Trade & Industry, IIRC, funded a research project to create
a new power transistor. A large electronic firm was given
the contract, did the R & D, and manufactured the product.
The technology was 'owned' by the gov't. The company was
allowed 18 months to market the product. It used the
transistors in a new line of products, and was very
successful. After the 18 month period expired, ALL other
Japanese companies were allowed to manufacture the
transistor with out royalties. The transistor was patented
for international protection, and licensed to overseas
manufacturers. This is simpler, cheaper, and more equitable
than using a patent system for encouraging innovation.
I AM against software patents. Rather than trying to
eliminate them, why not put a 1 year limit on them? It
seems to me to be the best solution.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 09 2012 @ 03:45 PM EDT |
Or Oracle. Or [Insert Litigants Name Here].
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
