Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadaCraig
Hi BDF! 
I hope you're OK.
Companies are legally obligated to defend patents and trademarks. If they don't - they can lose that patent or trademark. This is why Ford took Ferrari to court over a proposed new Ferrari model called the F150. The F150 'name' is trademarked by Ford for its pick-up trucks. IF Ford didn't take Ferrari to court - the trademark office could interpret that to mean that Ford no longer cares about the trademark - and take it from them - allowing anyone [Like Ferrari] to assume 'ownership' of the name.
Apple had no choice BUT to take Samsung to court. Companies can not allow so much as one domino to fall when to patents, etc.
GBH - |
You are correct insofar as a company needs to take some identifiable form of action to show they are still using the trademark - however, that need not be ligitation. Had they entered into negotiation with Samsung and other such companies and come to a licensing agreement over the use of said patents (as, indeed, the judge in the U.S. case asked them to prior to closing arguments), that would also count as enforcing ownership. The fact that Apple are instead engaging in a form of "forum shopping" seeking to ban all competitor Android-based products in various jurisdictions suggests that their motive is ulterior and somewhat less salubrious - hence why, like others, I disapprove of it entirely and feel it is bordering on anti-competitive practice. Hence, I will not buy any Apple products so long as this course of action is undertaken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch
Who cares. They're rich, fun and innovative. If they want to rule the world then let them, I'd rather witness them running any type of monopoly than say, Google (Skynet for sure). I'm sure Samsung will deal just fine with the Asian market and if they don't then lesson learned; don't copy others. But besides, the Internet isn't a competitor to Apple, if people want to purchase specific goods, they will find a way and make it happen and given that Samsung possibly won't compete in the US market at least after this, what has Apple got to lose?. They have a right to protect their business, Samsung infringed a law, but more than that, they crushed any respect their was between the two companies. I also find it amusing that even though some of Apple's overseas factories have some of the harshest work conditions in the industry, you're only just now deciding to boycott their products? lol. But, then again, why would you need to own 2 iPods?
|
ANY company having a monopoly position - irrespective of how "fun" they may appear - is a bad deal for consumers. That's why the European Commission took Microsoft to court (twice) over their dominant position with Windows (and won, incidentally), and it's why cases such as these - based on patents of somewhat spurious merit, it should be said - set a worrying precedent. Especially in light of the late Steve Jobs' self-professed "thermonuclear war" against competitors using Android - that suggests consumers' interests are frankly of no interest to Apple, and that is not a position to be advocating. As for what Apple stands to lose, I would say their reputation and sales are two good contenders.