Apple granted injunction halting EU Galaxy phone sales

[HotelUser]

Why do you taint all these legitimate threads with illegitimate Apple tripe?

Tom
dont take my last post seriously
12:55 it was funny on skype
12:55 LOL

If you didn't say this I would have been furious because I wasn't complimenting Apple and you did your usual blow up

[Apolva]

Software patents really ought to be scrapped!

[Chippiewill]

Software patents really ought to be scrapped!

Someone who doesn't understand the point.

a) This is a design/hardware dispute
b) Without patents there would be no innovation from individuals because they can't get paid for their work and software companies would effectively be robbed of money because they can't have a unique but successful idea.

Scrapping them would be pointless since you'd be destroying half the technology industry, they do however, need to be reworked.

[Apolva]

Someone who doesn't understand the point.

a) This is a design/hardware dispute
b) Without patents there would be no innovation from individuals because they can't get paid for their work and software companies would effectively be robbed of money because they can't have a unique but successful idea.

Scrapping them would be pointless since you'd be destroying half the technology industry, they do however, need to be reworked.

a) The patent is referred to as a "European software patent" in the second article linked to by the OP. It concerns the way in which photographs are navigated using touch-screen gestures.

As FOSS Patents points out, the injunction only applies to countries where one specific European software patent applies.

b)

1. Patents are handed out too readily - basic ideas, many of which are co-discovered - are awarded exclusively to one person/company.
2. They curb innovation (esp. the basic ones) - nobody but the patent holder can freely build upon ideas or incorporate them into their own products - result: intentionally inferior products to avoid lawsuits
3. Small businesses which cannot afford to pay larger companies to make use of their "ideas" end up suffering.

[Chippiewill]

1. Patents are handed out too readily - basic ideas, many of which are co-discovered - are awarded exclusively to one person/company.
2. They curb innovation (esp. the basic ones) - nobody but the patent holder can freely build upon ideas or incorporate them into their own products - result: intentionally inferior products to avoid lawsuits
3. Small businesses which cannot afford to pay larger companies to make use of their "ideas" end up suffering.

If you get spoon fed rather than understanding the issues you would know it's not so simple. Patents stifle innovation because people cannot improve on previous innovation, but without patents there is no motivation for innovation from an individual because they cannot make money from it short of launching a product to market which won't be successful because other companies can copy it within days. Patents drive and stifle innovation at the same time, no small company could launch a product without patents nor can they compete against large companies with patents. It needs to be fixed, not removed. Here's an interesting podcast I was listening to yesterday on the topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nis0K...edded#t=10m30s

[RyRy]

To be fair Apple have a point, they're near enough identical. :S

[xxMATTGxx]

To be fair Apple have a point, they're near enough identical. :S

A district court in the Hague upheld Apple's claim concerning one specific patent - EP 2059868 - which outlines an interface for viewing and navigating photographs on a touchscreen phone.

However, the judge rejected several other patent issues, as well as Apple's claim that Samsung had stolen many of its design ideas.

It was the way of viewing and navigating photographs, not the the identical homescreen design I believe.

[Casanova]

it won't affect retail for a few months.

[RyRy]

It was the way of viewing and navigating photographs, not the the identical homescreen design I believe.

They rejected the design idea?! Holy derp the judge is blind.

[GommeInc]

Ah another stupid legal matter that should not exist. What's shocking is that this infringes so many European by-laws about trading in the EU - one of which is revolves around trade, it should NOT be banned in the UK or any other EU country because it's not an illegal substance and the product is not harmful to consumers. It's completely stupid. I would make the usual "Hope Jobs gets shot" remarks, but he's left as CEO. Still, one can only hope. Or at least, the judges and Apple people who created such a ridiculous legal matter in the first place. Technology should never have so many cases in the legal system, especially when cases like this are just the evolution of technology showing the natural course of technological advancements. It' should not be about "oh this is how our pictures show on our product, we want it to stay that way", it should be about "it's on this product and this one tiny feature is just a ripple in the ocean on what the product as a single entity can do". Consumers only care about names and a product in general, they do not give a crap about small, insignificant features like this.

But of course, imbreeding is a terrible thing these days.

/rant