These patent wars don't help anyone but Apple, and directly hurts consumers. I don't think this is what anyone wants. It actually sickens me to see the law enacted in this way.<p>I really hope this comes back to bit Apple in the ass. It seems there has been a story about Apple doing something shitty everyday for the past few days, and the taste it leaves in my mouth is just getting worse and worse.
"A means of detecting and marking up data like a phone number or an e-mail address, and then initiating a phone call or an e-mail when the linked data is clicked" nobody should own a patent on that, what the heck? The patent system is seriously messed up. Don't get me started on the other patent: "A means of searching multiple databases and sources for data." how can anyone be awarded such a generic patent? I'm disgusted.
So wrong. When will we have comprehensive reform on software-related patent law? In this age everything is powered by a computer of some sort, and it's very important to the intellectual future of the nation that we secure the right for individuals and corporations to innovate without fear of a patent lawsuit.
When you work for a company that does this, you owe it to your integrity to resign.<p>The government is too incompetent to fix this mess, and market pressure isn't going to do it either. That leaves us, the actual engineers. It's our job to tell the companies we work for that litigating instead of competing isn't acceptable.
This is a preliminary injunction. It doesn't mean Apple wins against Samsung. From TFA:<p>"Apple was ordered to post a bond of $95 million to enact the injunction, which would be used to pay Samsung damages if the decision is later reversed."
I was here when this all started.<p>When Android surfaced, it did not look blatantly like the iPhone. That is, until the Galaxy appeared. From the moment I saw a Galaxy prototype it was obvious: they were going to get sued.<p>Whether or not the iOS vs Android war makes sense at a high level is an interesting discussion, but this is pretty simple: Samsung practically begged to be the first to get sued. There isn't a lot to say about it after that.
Without the iPhone, there would be no Galaxy series. If you don't get that, you don't get that.<p>It's up to those two companies to work it out. Until that happens, this is what we get -- and Samsung, at least, has little to complain about.
I'm no lawyer. Is this ruling stating that the court believes the patents are valid, or simply that if they are found to be valid that they are being infringed in this case?<p>There's a huge difference between the two, and the article isn't quite clear on what the finding is. The bond makes it sound like it could be the latter, but everybody here seems to be assuming it's the former.