Best. Patent. Argument. Ever.
If you’re following tech, you’ll know that the entire industry–Apple, Google, Microsoft, Samsung, Motorola, HTC, etc.–are engaged in a giant fustercluck of patent suits and countersuits.
“Innovation be damned! I’m suing for patent infringement.” Great.
One of the more high-profile suits is Apple vs. Samsung over their Galaxy tablet. “It looks too much like an iPad, the design WE came up with!”
Er, hold on, Apple.
Foss Patents reveals that Samsung has invoked something called “prior art,” pointing to Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 movie, 2001: A Space Odyssey. Look at the following clip. Are David Bowman and Frank Poole not watching the news on iPad-like tablets?
And if we’re gonna go there, what about Moses and his tablets?
And as we see in this still taken from historical surveillance footage from the Stone Age, Fred was using tablets long before Moses.
You guys can all suck it. Settle your differences and get back to making your devices better.
I agree Alan. If electronics manufacturers (and I use the term manufacturers lightly, maybe "providers" would be a better term) spent as much money in R&D as they did on lawyers fees, we would have some pretty cool and unique products out there!
I've been watching the case a bit, and while I think Samsung's arguments of prior art are valid (not to mention the image manipulation ones), I think the better question is "Why on Earth is the system designed to allow this money-wasting, energy-wasting, time-wasting farce in the first place?"
The system is in place to protect against abuses. Of course, as a result, it itself becomes abused. If patents are ludicrously broad they're unlikely to be enforced. It becomes a big money dance for the players involved. Some of Apple's submissions are a little suspect, but then it can't be denied that Samsung has copied the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad completely. Apple got hung out to dry on a similar case with Microsoft over Mac OS vs. Windows back in the 90s, and Apple doesn't care to lose its intellectual property this time around to copycats. If competitors want to come up with their own bonafide innovations, good on 'em. RIM's trying, **cough**. But a slavish recreation is pushing it.
Oh, and about those 2001: A Space Odyssey "tablets". They're televisions.
What about innovation? If these companies do not copy and steal from each other, won't they create something new and perhaps more innovative than the competition? Before the iPod, mp3 players (while still new) were kind of crappy. While development may be more expensive than just waiting for someone else to do it, it seems to work out better in the long run for the original company.