Mark Cuban chastises U.S. patent system following Apple v. Samsung verdict

Mark Cuban has taken to Twitter to chastise the U.S. patent system in wake of the verdict in the Apple v. Samsung trial late last week. Cuban used his account on the social networking site to respond to the trial by criticizing Apple's lawsuit and its decision to sue Samsung.

In his tweets, Cuban began by criticizing Apple's decision to sue Samsung while noting he was an Apple customer himself. Cuban then went on to imply that Apple has a history of copying other companies, such as Xerox. Samsung's interface similarities in its Android products compared to Apple's iOS interface were, of course, at the heart of the two companies' recent lawsuit.

Following these statements, Cuban went on to chastise the current U.S. patent system, implying it's created an environment where only slightly original interfaces and designs can be patented, unlike previous decades. Shortly thereafter, Cuban left Apple with a slight parting shot for its use of the patent system.

Cuban had also responded to other Twitter users who disagreed with his stance on the lawsuit, but those tweets appear to have been removed from his profile.

While Cuban is best known as the owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks, he’s also an entrepreneur who made his fortune selling dot-com startup Broadcast.com to Yahoo! for approximately $5.7 billion in 1999. Additionally, Cuban invests in many technology-centric startups and is the founder and owner of AXS TV (formerly known as HDNet).

Source: Mark Cuban (Twitter)

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows 8/Phone 7 cross platform play for Air Soccer Fever

Next Story

Amazon Cloud Drive finally available in the UK

85 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

S3P€hR said,
In Case of Samsung and Apple, Samsung Copied but their phones are not as awesome as apple's so They are Losers anyway
That why Samsung sold 45M smartphons last quarter vs Apple only selling about 30M. That's why Samsung has a 40% market, whil Apple only has 28%. That's why Samsung ships and sells more phones than any phone maker on the planet. They sold 90M phones last quarter with 50% of them being of the "smart" variety.

As only one of mean Android device makers, they have beat makers like HTC and Motorola who were original on top at some point. The Galaxy S family of devices are the biggest sellers, showing someone other than pple can sell a single model in high quanities.

The Galaxy S is but one phone, that has country ot carrier variants, come in various sizes and shapes too. Still one phone, avail in more countries.

That's why Apple chose Samsung to make their shyt, because Samsugn makes better shyt too.
So not as awesome?

The Samsung Galaxy S 3 had a 10M unit preorder, that's more than any other phone as a single model.

Samsung sold over 10M of them in just one month of a single quarter. Suppose they had released thwm in the beginnign of the quarter?

So who really is the loser...looks like you as per usual..iFan...

TechieXP said,
That why Samsung sold 45M smartphons last quarter vs Apple only selling about 30M. That's why Samsung has a 40% market, whil Apple only has 28%. That's why Samsung ships and sells more phones than any phone maker on the planet. They sold 90M phones last quarter with 50% of them being of the "smart" variety.

As only one of mean Android device makers, they have beat makers like HTC and Motorola who were original on top at some point. The Galaxy S family of devices are the biggest sellers, showing someone other than pple can sell a single model in high quanities.

The Galaxy S is but one phone, that has country ot carrier variants, come in various sizes and shapes too. Still one phone, avail in more countries.

That's why Apple chose Samsung to make their shyt, because Samsugn makes better shyt too.
So not as awesome?

The Samsung Galaxy S 3 had a 10M unit preorder, that's more than any other phone as a single model.

Samsung sold over 10M of them in just one month of a single quarter. Suppose they had released thwm in the beginnign of the quarter?

So who really is the loser...looks like you as per usual..iFan...

Typical Quantity over quality play...flood the market with low quality devices confusing the unknowing consumer.

People, Apple is not running a charity, this is big business. Any company in Apple's shoes would act in that manner. , and in general they all do. They are playing by the rules as defined by patent and legal system. I doubt that Mr. Cuban would act any different if he was in that position.

and for the grammar police out there, here is something for you:
The patient sistem are brooken, you neither use or loose it.

Ad Man Gamer said,
Is it me, or have the comments seemed to of flip flopped towards defending apple after apples court victory?

Also... Has Apple Really Ever "Invented" Anything?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFeC25BM9E0

I have a blind hatred towards all things apple. I think the iPhone is a joke, but in this case Samsung had it coming. They didn't do things the right way and this is the outcome. Microsoft and Apple do things the right way and license each others technologies to each other, but Samsung didn't do this because the strait up mimmicked the iPhones interface and there was no way apple would agree yo allow this.

btw **** apple , WINDOWS PHONE FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lamebo said,
He sounds like a little bitch
Oh like Jobs?
Apple: You're stealing from us!
Samung: No we're not Steve, so don't tell me that.
Apple: Then what do I hear about this Epic 4Gyou're making? You stealing the look of out iPhone prototypes, I trusted you.
Samsung: if you wanna see what we're working on, we'll show you.
Apple: So that's al you're working on?
Samsung: you know were like family Steve, you know that. Don't family members look alike Steve?

It's clear that Mark Cuban doesn't know what he's talking about with the Xerox thing.

I'd have thought that by now everyone would know that Xerox received financial compensation from Apple. The compensation for the Xerox PARC technology sharing deal with Apple was in form of $1 million dollars pre-IPO Apple stock / investment.

So much for "stealing."

a0me said,
It's clear that Mark Cuban doesn't know what he's talking about with the Xerox thing.

I'd have thought that by now everyone would know that Xerox received financial compensation from Apple. The compensation for the Xerox PARC technology sharing deal with Apple was in form of $1 million dollars pre-IPO Apple stock / investment.

So much for "stealing."

They stole it without permission first then offered a lousy million bucks to shut them up. Steve Jobs himself said that Apple was not afraid to steal ideas (and that this was a good thing) which is hypocritical, now that they are suing people over the theft of their ideas.

ingramator said,

They stole it without permission first then offered a lousy million bucks to shut them up.


Anything to back that up or did you just pull that out of your hat?
Secondly, about the "lousy" million bucks, 1) Xerox are the only one to blame if they were too 'blind' to realize what they were sitting on and 2) $1 million dollars of pre-IPO Apple stock is worth how much today? $50 million? More?

a0me said,

Anything to back that up or did you just pull that out of your hat?
I'd say the two 'likes' for him and none for you is plenty however, you know how to type Google into your browser.

KCRic said,
I'd say the two 'likes' for him and none for you is plenty however, you know how to type Google into your browser.

I don't know where you're from, but usually smart people don't judge facts on the popularity of who's talking.
And yeah, nothing in Google about your made up lies, while you can easily double check my claims: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A....80.931980:_The_early_years

At least you tried...

a0me said,
It's clear that Mark Cuban doesn't know what he's talking about with the Xerox thing.

I'd have thought that by now everyone would know that Xerox received financial compensation from Apple. The compensation for the Xerox PARC technology sharing deal with Apple was in form of $1 million dollars pre-IPO Apple stock / investment.

So much for "stealing."

Sring and stealing are not the same thing. If I show you my baseball card collection, that's sharing.

Stop spreading that same lie. Apple paid for a VISIT to XEROX PARC to see the work that was done, not to steal itor borrow or copy. Tey paid for a visit. If you pay to visit Bill Gaes house ,he isnt expecting you to walk out with the toaster.

a0me said,

I don't know where you're from, but usually smart people don't judge facts on the popularity of who's talking.
And yeah, nothing in Google about your made up lies, while you can easily double check my claims: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A....80.931980:_The_early_years

At least you tried...

Well since I'm not the one that originally stated it, I can only assume that the 'your' that you refer to is the OP and not me.

Now, I am intelligent and if you claim to be also then you'd understand the point I was trying to make. This is the internet - if you want to know something, look it up yourself. Don't claim a person is false and expect most to back up their statement. Prove it yourself.

TechieXP said,
Sring and stealing are not the same thing. If I show you my baseball card collection, that's sharing.

Stop spreading that same lie. Apple paid for a VISIT to XEROX PARC to see the work that was done, not to steal itor borrow or copy. Tey paid for a visit. If you pay to visit Bill Gaes house ,he isnt expecting you to walk out with the toaster.


Is English your first language?
Do you understand what the word "share" means in the business world?
Are you seriously suggesting that Apple paid 1 million dollar to just take a stroll inside Xerox offices?

Xerox granted access to some of their R&D to Apple in return for 100,000 shares (800,000 split-adjusted shares) of Apple.
Like someone else said, Xerox could have owned the PC revolution, but instead it sat on the technology for years. Apple did something with it, the result was the Apple Macintosh, which Microsoft later copied to create Windows.

KCRic said,
Well since I'm not the one that originally stated it, I can only assume that the 'your' that you refer to is the OP and not me.

Now, I am intelligent and if you claim to be also then you'd understand the point I was trying to make. This is the internet - if you want to know something, look it up yourself. Don't claim a person is false and expect most to back up their statement. Prove it yourself.


Already did. Look at the Wikipedia link.

mark cuban is an idiot. do you see microsoft and apple sueing each other? no, because they do things the right way and dont rip off ideas without paperwork behind it.

nanoware said,
mark cuban is an idiot. do you see microsoft and apple sueing each other? no, because they do things the right way and dont rip off ideas without paperwork behind it.

Actually, it's because they basically have an agreement not to as part of their cross-licensing deal.

nanoware said,
mark cuban is an idiot. do you see microsoft and apple sueing each other? no, because they do things the right way and dont rip off ideas without paperwork behind it.

Considering Microsoft held patents to things such as the arrow keys on the keyboard it wouldn't exactly be the wisest decision.

nanoware said,
mark cuban is an idiot. do you see microsoft and apple sueing each other? no, because they do things the right way and dont rip off ideas without paperwork behind it.

Considering Microsoft held patents to things such as the arrow keys on the keyboard it wouldn't exactly be the wisest decision.

ShareShiz said,
I don't know who Mark Cuban is, but he's my new friend

This is NOT Cuban's first rant against the badly-broken US patent system. The reason that it's broken predates Apple as a major business - or have we forgotten about two other patent cases (the VisiCalc case and the Lotus case) - both involved spreadsheet software and neither involved Apple. Both cases also involved software patents, and defined the rules for them ever since. As much as attempts to reform patent law have been TRIED to be brought up in Congress (by both GOP and Democratic members of Congress), there are plenty of members from patent hotbeds (such as New York, California, and Delaware - including current VP Joe Biden when he was senior Senator from Delaware) that have a lot invested (or at least their corporate constituents do) in keeping the patent system the way it is.

Although I think Samsung did deserve to pay in some form for their infractions against Apple, I do feel the ruling was WAY overboard and excessive. Hindering your competition with a lawsuit is acceptable, but destroying your competition should not be allowed. Innovation and competitive practice are stifled.

Doesnt matter how ridiculous patents they have, but anyone will fight to save their techs and patents. The only people are who are screaming against patents system are tech thieves. ( ehm ehm google )

simrat said,
Doesnt matter how ridiculous patents they have, but anyone will fight to save their techs and patents. The only people are who are screaming against patents system are tech thieves. ( ehm ehm google )

Uhmm you realize Apple "stole" plenty of ideas too.....

andrewbares said,

Uhmm you realize Apple "stole" plenty of ideas too.....

Yes i know, Apple stole ideas like everyone does, and deserved to be sued, but nobody took action. Cant blame Apple on that part now.

simrat said,

Yes i know, Apple stole ideas like everyone does, and deserved to be sued, but nobody took action. Cant blame Apple on that part now.

So since only tech thieves are against the patent system, Apple is against it too?

simrat said,
Doesnt matter how ridiculous patents they have, but anyone will fight to save their techs and patents. The only people are who are screaming against patents system are tech thieves. ( ehm ehm google )

I wouldn't call rounded rectangles technology, more like a brick without it's edges. All of Apple's software patents is technology that everyone should be allowed to use; i.e. unified search, bounce back to know you've read the bottom of a page, pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, and app backup software.

If anyone disagrees with what I said, you need to take a lot of time and think to yourself: "would a triangle be a comfortable smartphone? would I get sued for using simple things like slide to unlock?" and the list goes on.

Zeet said,

I wouldn't call rounded rectangles technology, more like a brick without it's edges. All of Apple's software patents is technology that everyone should be allowed to use; i.e. unified search, bounce back to know you've read the bottom of a page, pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, and app backup software.

If anyone disagrees with what I said, you need to take a lot of time and think to yourself: "would a triangle be a comfortable smartphone? would I get sued for using simple things like slide to unlock?" and the list goes on.

That is why i used the word " ridiculous patents ".

simrat said,
Yes i know, Apple stole ideas like everyone does, and deserved to be sued, but nobody took action. Cant blame Apple on that part now.

Doesn't the fact that Apple had to use other people's ideas to come up with their own products kinda defeat the whole point of "defending your tech and patents"?

You can certainly blame Apple: back when they released the first iPhone they obviously did either license patents from third parties and/or infringe (maybe unknowingly) some.
If every owner of all those patents had came as douchebags and asked Apple for $20-$40 per device (as Apple requested from Samsung) you'd bet you'd have no iPhone (that, or it would cost about $2000).

ichi said,

Doesn't the fact that Apple had to use other people's ideas to come up with their own products kinda defeat the whole point of "defending your tech and patents"?

You can certainly blame Apple: back when they released the first iPhone they obviously did either license patents from third parties and/or infringe (maybe unknowingly) some.
If every owner of all those patents had came as douchebags and asked Apple for $20-$40 per device (as Apple requested from Samsung) you'd bet you'd have no iPhone (that, or it would cost about $2000).

Asking royalty for patent is okay in my book, i think it is the best solution. Asking Ridiculous amount of royalty like motorola is doing is wrong. It should be reasonable. But If someone stole your tech and want to use it for free, thn they deserve to be sued.

I've watched enough shark tank to realise that he would probably do the same thing if he was apple, its hard for me to take him seriously.

Dale said,
I've watched enough shark tank to realise that he would probably do the same thing if he was apple, its hard for me to take him seriously.

Yea, always thought he was kind of a douche. But I do agree with him here - this is truly harmful to competition and down the line ends up hurting the consumer.

superconductive said,

Yea, always thought he was kind of a douche. But I do agree with him here - this is truly harmful to competition and down the line ends up hurting the consumer.


On the contrary, I think this is excellent for the consumer... By forcing another company to stop copying their tech and designs, Apple has, in essence, forced Samsung to do what they should've done for YEARS; come up with fresh, innovative technology and interfaces to drive that technology, and make it unique!

Whether you love it or hate it, Microsoft demonstrated there are designs outside of Apple that are good and unique (referring to Windows Phone 7.5/8), and you don't need to copy. Just hire some young creative talent and have at it!

This will only serve to spur on other manufacturers to begin creating new tech that, in the end, the consumer will benefit from the most! And BTW, though all my products are Apple, I want them to have some legitimate competition, and that wasn't Samsung. I believe Microsoft will become their best competitor.

-=MagMan=- said,

On the contrary, I think this is excellent for the consumer... By forcing another company to stop copying their tech and designs, Apple has, in essence, forced Samsung to do what they should've done for YEARS; come up with fresh, innovative technology and interfaces to drive that technology, and make it unique!

Whether you love it or hate it, Microsoft demonstrated there are designs outside of Apple that are good and unique (referring to Windows Phone 7.5/8), and you don't need to copy. Just hire some young creative talent and have at it!

This will only serve to spur on other manufacturers to begin creating new tech that, in the end, the consumer will benefit from the most! And BTW, though all my products are Apple, I want them to have some legitimate competition, and that wasn't Samsung. I believe Microsoft will become their best competitor.

Maybe... but I see the direct effect of this big blow to Samsung as hampering their ability to put out new products, and as a result less able to compete.
Less competition = worse for consumers (less choice, higher prices etc)
Not saying they didn't deserve some form of litigious action however - they did. Yet the damages may be excessive to the point of limiting their competitive ability, And that's not good as I said.

Humm yes. Blame Apple. They can sit around and do nothing and have their patent yanked right out from under them.

Stop me if I am wrong but if you don't defend your patent can't you have it taken away from you?

necrosis said,
Humm yes. Blame Apple. They can sit around and do nothing and have their patent yanked right out from under them.

Stop me if I am wrong but if you don't defend your patent can't you have it taken away from you?


Indeed. You need to protect your patents or you lose them.

necrosis said,
Humm yes. Blame Apple. They can sit around and do nothing and have their patent yanked right out from under them.

Stop me if I am wrong but if you don't defend your patent can't you have it taken away from you?

They did the same thing to Xerox which is why he brought it up. The issues they are fighting about never should have been a patent to begin with...I mean come on - patent a square with rounded corners, how stupid is that.

sava700 said,

They did the same thing to Xerox which is why he brought it up. The issues they are fighting about never should have been a patent to begin with...I mean come on - patent a square with rounded corners, how stupid is that.


Yes, and who granted them that patent? … Exactly. Don't blame Apple or any other company for enforcing patents that they got from a flawed system. Blame the system, and ask for reforms.

necrosis said,
Humm yes. Blame Apple. They can sit around and do nothing and have their patent yanked right out from under them.

Stop me if I am wrong but if you don't defend your patent can't you have it taken away from you?


Software patents stop innovation and technology from moving forward. It's why the EU doesn't allow them, because software always uses something from another piece of software.

necrosis said,
Stop me if I am wrong but if you don't defend your patent can't you have it taken away from you?

You are wrong there, you are confusing patents with trademarks.

Patents remain yours no matter if you defend them or not.

einsteinbqat said,

Yes, and who granted them that patent? … Exactly. Don't blame Apple or any other company for enforcing patents that they got from a flawed system. Blame the system, and ask for reforms.
Yes, because intelligence and personal responsibility is something too far fetched for this century.

We have the government for that sort of stuff. I mean who really wants to be an adult, sheesh.

ichi said,

You are wrong there, you are confusing patents with trademarks.

Patents remain yours no matter if you defend them or not.


Actually, you don't "lose" them, but you will probably forfeit your right to defend them in the future:

Company A has a patent.
Company B is a small company, and infringes on the patent, but doesn't make a lot of money. Company A decides not to sue.
Company C is a massive corporation, and infringes on the patent. Now Company A doesn't like someone making billions on their invention, and sues. Company C defends with "Well Company A knows about Company B, and did nothing against them, so we thought it was OK." Company A loses, and Company C eventually turns into Apple and takes over the universe.

So you can see why all these companies "have to" defend or they'll "lose" their patent.

KCRic said,
Yes, because intelligence and personal responsibility is something too far fetched for this century.

We have the government for that sort of stuff. I mean who really wants to be an adult, sheesh.


My point exactly. Common sense you made you tell that, and that's expected, I hope. However, patents and those who approve them works with rules, laws, and legislations. And that is what they have to respect. If a patent application respects the rules given by the patent office what choice do you have other than grant the patent? It's not about being an adult or not. It's about rules, laws, and legislations, and whether one as a worker/employee respect them or not. People may agree or disagree with them, but they have to work with them nonetheless. One may completely disagree with those rules, and that is just fine. However, then, one should just give in one's resignation rather that keep working for an organisation that goes against one's common sense and intelligence. Working for an organisation, means that one owes them loyalty and fidelity. If one doesn't agree, one quits.

einsteinbqat said,

My point exactly. Common sense you made you tell that, and that's expected, I hope. However, patents and those who approve them works with rules, laws, and legislations. And that is what they have to respect. If a patent application respects the rules given by the patent office what choice do you have other than grant the patent? It's not about being an adult or not. It's about rules, laws, and legislations, and whether one as a worker/employee respect them or not. People may agree or disagree with them, but they have to work with them nonetheless. One may completely disagree with those rules, and that is just fine. However, then, one should just give in one's resignation rather that keep working for an organisation that goes against one's common sense and intelligence. Working for an organisation, means that one owes them loyalty and fidelity. If one doesn't agree, one quits.
For every law there is a loophole. In that case we should all go around murdering and raping. Then when caught, just claim freedom of religion and the government hindering your right to practice.

That may be a bad example but you get the idea. At some point people need to start taking accountability for their own choices and actions. Start using common sense and not be a weasel about the law. Finding loopholes and such. Sure something may "follow the laws and rules" that doesn't make it ok, right, or moral.

No country can ever write enough laws to patch every possible scenario and close every loophole without stripping every right, freedom, and ability to capitalize. At some point they have to just put faith in the fact that people have the ability to naturally know what's correct and what's not. This goes for companies also.

We need this, now how do we go about having someone take a look at it and to start looking at possible solutions?

The patient system just doesn't work well with modern gadgets but it's in Apple's interest to sue as 1 billion dollars isn't to be sneezed at. It's also caused Samsung's stock fall by 7%... Good blow to the competition in their eyes.

I wouldn't criticize Apple, Samsung would do exactly the same thing. It's the system that's flawed, nothing more.

imachip said,
The patient system just doesn't work well with modern gadgets but it's in Apple's interest to sue as 1 billion dollars isn't to be sneezed at. It's also caused Samsung's stock fall by 7%... Good blow to the competition in their eyes.

I wouldn't criticize Apple, Samsung would do exactly the same thing. It's the system that's flawed, nothing more.


True, Apple is not to blame. They are playing the game by the rule, if I may say. If roles were switched, would Samsung or any other company for that matter just gladly let it slide? I doubt it.

The US should just reform the patent system, and people should just stop whining about companies like Apple using all current possible legal means to protect their IP. Their patents, their rights, their decision to protect them whichever way they feel is fit.

After all, what common sense tells you is not something that the patent system understands. It works according to a set of rules. If you don't like the rules, change them, but don't complain that companies are using those rules for their own benefit.

imachip said,
The patient system just doesn't work well with modern gadgets .....

Hospitals for Gadgets? Wouldn't surprise me if that didn't work.

Shiranui said,

Hospitals for Gadgets? Wouldn't surprise me if that didn't work.

This person just doesn't get that it's patent not patient. I've had to tell them before and they obviously didn't get it.

einsteinbqat said,

True, Apple is not to blame. They are playing the game by the rule, if I may say. If roles were switched, would Samsung or any other company for that matter just gladly let it slide? I doubt it.

The US should just reform the patent system, and people should just stop whining about companies like Apple using all current possible legal means to protect their IP. Their patents, their rights, their decision to protect them whichever way they feel is fit.

After all, what common sense tells you is not something that the patent system understands. It works according to a set of rules. If you don't like the rules, change them, but don't complain that companies are using those rules for their own benefit.

Actually Apple is to blame. They abused the system to start with. Yes, in reality you can patent anything however, it was assumed that people were intelligent enough to not try to patent ridiculous things. A completely new type of product or tech, sure. Improve upon something that already exists or simply claim something that exists prior to you 'inventing' it is yours? Well that's pathetic, childish, and multiple other defining words.

No one made Apple go down this path and act so small. They chose to. You know, there are certain counties in Missouri where you can legally hand a black person for simply being black. They never made it illegal, The law just sits there with the understanding that anyone with half a brain knows that it's wrong. I guess if I did it anyway then that's fine? It's not my fault, right? I mean, the government should be telling me what to do and how to do it. God forbid anyone actually takes responsibility and thinks for themselves. Or takes responsibility for their own actions... unlike Apple and their apologists.

KCRic said,
Actually Apple is to blame. They abused the system to start with. Yes, in reality you can patent anything however, it was assumed that people were intelligent enough to not try to patent ridiculous things. A completely new type of product or tech, sure. Improve upon something that already exists or simply claim something that exists prior to you 'inventing' it is yours? Well that's pathetic, childish, and multiple other defining words.

No one made Apple go down this path and act so small. They chose to. You know, there are certain counties in Missouri where you can legally hand a black person for simply being black. They never made it illegal, The law just sits there with the understanding that anyone with half a brain knows that it's wrong. I guess if I did it anyway then that's fine? It's not my fault, right? I mean, the government should be telling me what to do and how to do it. God forbid anyone actually takes responsibility and thinks for themselves. Or takes responsibility for their own actions... unlike Apple and their apologists.


So what they abused the system. Healthcare system is abused; the welfare system, too. Numerous other systems are being abused every day. Yet, why is this system abuse any different? Why is it that people don't seem to care about those abuses? What makes this case so different of an abuse? Because it's Apple or because of something else? And the people who elect those who make rules, regulations, legislations, laws, why don't they take their responsibility, as you mention it, to do something about it, and change how things work rather than complain about injustices or abuses that people or organisations make?

Of course, they chose to go down that road. It's their decision, and not anyone else's, whether one likes it or not. It's their patents. They choose the way they want to protect it or not. They can do nothing, sit down and try to work something out, or go to court.

If they get a patent, and do nothing to protect it, why would they get one in the first place? One doesn't simply go through all the paperwork, and pay for a patent simply just to not protect it. That would just be silly. And when they decide to protect it, well things can get ugly just like in this case.

einsteinbqat said,

True, Apple is not to blame. They are playing the game by the rule, if I may say. If roles were switched, would Samsung or any other company for that matter just gladly let it slide? I doubt it.

The US should just reform the patent system, and people should just stop whining about companies like Apple using all current possible legal means to protect their IP. Their patents, their rights, their decision to protect them whichever way they feel is fit.

After all, what common sense tells you is not something that the patent system understands. It works according to a set of rules. If you don't like the rules, change them, but don't complain that companies are using those rules for their own benefit.

Samsung didn;'t sue Apple for copying the F700. Just saing. Tough LG hinted at suing over the design over the LG Prada, they din't sue Apple either.

IBM didn't sue Apple over stealing the look of their PC. Ford isn't suing other automakers because their car looks similar.

einsteinbqat said,

So what they abused the system. Healthcare system is abused; the welfare system, too. Numerous other systems are being abused every day. Yet, why is this system abuse any different? Why is it that people don't seem to care about those abuses? What makes this case so different of an abuse? Because it's Apple or because of something else? And the people who elect those who make rules, regulations, legislations, laws, why don't they take their responsibility, as you mention it, to do something about it, and change how things work rather than complain about injustices or abuses that people or organisations make?

Of course, they chose to go down that road. It's their decision, and not anyone else's, whether one likes it or not. It's their patents. They choose the way they want to protect it or not. They can do nothing, sit down and try to work something out, or go to court.

If they get a patent, and do nothing to protect it, why would they get one in the first place? One doesn't simply go through all the paperwork, and pay for a patent simply just to not protect it. That would just be silly. And when they decide to protect it, well things can get ugly just like in this case.

So you're assuming that I don't care about other systems are being abused? You really know me, huh?

You're basing your judgment of others not caring about other systems being abused off the attention this ordeal has received in the tech world. Yet, in the rest of the world this has received far less attention than the insurance/medical issues, SS, welfare, and numerous other systems being abused. There's actually a huge outcry over these issues however, welcome to America. The government that we the people are supposed to have control over - we've given to the power and money hungry.

Apple wasn't protecting any legit patents in any of these cases. If that were the case I'd side with them. FFS half the arguing was over a shape - a SHAPE. You can patent a shape, sure. However that's just petty beyond reason.

Don't talk to me about doing something to make a change. Congress doesn't listen to the people. Very few in the government do actually. I did my share of security details for these s***s that you want me to ask for change, guess what? They never see those letters or hear those words. In the middle of an active combat zone and these jackasses demand a bottle of water like they've earned it. Then people like you think I should beg them for change? Hell no. This country is burning and I'm going to cook a hotdog in the flames. We don't elect the government anymore, they elect themselves.

The Laughing Man said,
I had to google who he was....

If he was so aganst it, we'd have heard him before with his support.
Now he's just some guy who is butthurt that Apple won... or scared about what he's copied and mis-used from other companies without permission.

The Laughing Man said,
I had to google who he was....

Really? Maybe it's just because I'm from Texas, but he's a pretty big name if you follow sports or technology startups.

The Laughing Man said,
I had to google who he was....

Me too, (actually I didn't bother). The article could at least made some reference as to who he actually is.

Shiranui said,

Me too, (actually I didn't bother). The article could at least made some reference as to who he actually is.


The article does that at the bottom: "While Cuban is best known as the owner of the NBA's Dallas Mavericks, he's also an entrepreneur who made his fortune selling dot-com startup Broadcast.com to Yahoo! for approximately $5.7 billion in 1999. Additionally, Cuban invests in many technology-centric startups and is the founder and owner of AXS TV (formerly known as HDNet)."

The Laughing Man said,
I had to google who he was....

Then you aren't a particularly well informed member of the technology, investment, or investment communities.

excalpius said,

Then you aren't a particularly well informed member of the technology, investment, or investment communities.

Who said I was? I've just never heard of this guy relax people. I can't know all 6 Billion of us.

The Laughing Man said,
Its time for population control....

Don't worry, we can handle 10 billions. Or so they say. It's when we will hit 14 billions that we will be deep in (you know what).

excalpius said,

Then you aren't a particularly well informed member of the technology, investment, or investment communities.

I am as I own a technology based company and I never heard of him either. Again, just because you know who he is, doesn't mean we all do.

nvllsvm said,
I really hope this case leads to more seeing IP for the innovation stifling monster it really is.

Im just glad im not American. Every aspect of that country is making bad decisions over and over for its economy.

nvllsvm said,
I really hope this case leads to more seeing IP for the innovation stifling monster it really is.

You know what would be poetic justice ? Everybody should avoid buying anything from Apple for a while and buy something from Samsung to help them pay for that ridiculous judgement.

Captain555 said,

You know what would be poetic justice ? Everybody should avoid buying anything from Apple for a while and buy something from Samsung to help them pay for that ridiculous judgement.

I don't like samsung because they make cheap and low quality products. I will buy Apple's stuff and I will never ever buy samsung phone's again.

S3P€hR said,
I don't like samsung because they make cheap and low quality products.

I would say that a pretty broad and completely ignorant statement.

- My Galaxy Nexus beat the pant's off any iPhone. I proved it to many of my friend who have switch since then.

- Consumer's report in Canada listed Samsung computer's monitor as the best of the best.

- Go read also the reviews of their Liquid Natural Gas Carriers. (http://www.shi.samsung.co.kr/Eng/Flash/showRoom/2.swf). You will be impress and you will go to bed tonight less ignorant.

- And I could go on, and on, and on, .....

S3P€hR said,

I don't like samsung because they make cheap and low quality products. I will buy Apple's stuff and I will never ever buy samsung phone's again.

Question, did you also own an original iPhone? How about an iPhone 3G or 3GS? They were made of cheap plastics too. #justsayin'

TechieXP said,

Question, did you also own an original iPhone? How about an iPhone 3G or 3GS? They were made of cheap plastics too. #justsayin'

I didnot have those, I just stated my own experience with my previous galaxy s phone. It looked good and worked well for a while and then after a while software crashes. and eventually I sold it for 10% of its original price while not physically damaged after only 1 year of purchase whereas my iPhone 4 still holds at least half of its value after almost 2 yrs