

The evil genius - hjortureh
http://blog.14islands.com/post/35974780319/the-evil-genius

======
skrebbel
> _They lock us into buying music and videos from iTunes when using iPods,
> iPhones and iPads._

Um. You _do_ have a choice here, you know. Ranging from choosing products from
slightly-less-evil vendors to pulling a Stallman and refusing to even run
Firefox or touch a computer whose chip designs aren't open source.

I don't disagree with the gist of your post, but I feel that by making it seem
like people are almost forced to buy Apple products, you're undermining your
own argument.

As a simple anecdotal example, I don't own a single Apple product, without
even trying all too hard, and I'm perfectly happy.

~~~
kisielk
It's also simply not true. I have an iPhone and listen to music on it all the
time. I haven't purchased any music from iTunes, ever. I refuse to buy music
with DRM so I don't. I'd rather subscribe to a service like Rdio instead or
get music from the artist via some other means and import it in to my
collection.

~~~
M4v3R
It's worth to note though, that music bought on iTunes Music store doesn't
contain DRM anymore. It used to, but now it's all DRM-free.

------
bpatrianakos
I'm not convinced. Apple's patents haven't stopped me from being creative. No
one has asked me not to design using rounded corners. How about you? I bet
not.

When you buy Apple you're not just buying hardware or software. You're buying
into a ecosystem and that ecosystem works really well! Now if Apple's
ecosystem doesn't suit your needs then you're still free to not use it or
jailbreak your iStuff.

I keep hearing this stuff and I just don't see where we lost freedom. You
don't have to buy music and videos on iTunes to put it into your iStuff.
Jailbreaking, though frowned upon, is completely legal now and no one will
hassle you for it. Cell phome contracts? Well that's not new or specific to
Apple and though it's a bummer I'm happy for it because I don't have $500 for
a phone and this "freedom" everyone keeps yammering about isn't worth the
extra $300 to me.

There's no loss of freedom going on here. Everything is the same as it ever
was in a new form and context. Everyone loves to root for the underdog and
tear down the establishment. I doubt most of us have ever really been truly
stifled by patents and if we have I'm willing to bet that while you're the
little guy you'll rail against them and if/when you "make it" you'll be
hoarding and defending them like it's going out of style.

I'm sure most people won't like what I've said. I'm a pragmatist. Idealism is
great and I get the sentiment but in the end we're just not living in the
world as it "should be", we live in the world as it is.

~~~
Eduard
↑ Apple fanboy logic

~~~
marblar
↑Ad hominem logic

~~~
bpatrianakos
Really? This is no better. How about pedantic logic? Or avoiding making a real
argument logic? Or cheap way to get up votes logic? Piling on logic?
Uncomstructive comment logic? Pedantic logic?

If you want to disagree then do it. What you're doing here is trying to
marginalize me instead of actually making an argument.

This used to be a place where we could share our opinions and have
constructive conversations and debates. Now you just get downvoted if you
don't support the hive mind's opinion and what used to be called an
unconstructive comment is applauded (exceptions are made, however, in cases
where where the herd disagrees).

Edit: Remember what I said about all intelligent discourse going out the
window once the "fanboy" retort has been put out there? Well, here's the
proof.

~~~
olgeni
life←{ ↑1 ⍵∨.^3 4=+/,¯1 0 1∘.⊖¯1 0 1∘.⌽⊂⍵ }

↑ Game of life

------
bediger4000
_systematically taking this freedom away, by taking ownership of common design
patterns_ \- The "ownership" part is what's important, as Western
Civilizations have put private property before just about any other
consideration.

I'm coming to believe that "intellectual property" is about unringing the
Internet bell, stuffing the genie of everybody publishing, and everybody
reading back into the bottle of gatekeeper-enabled censorship.

------
aviswanathan
I think that software patents have worsened to the point that there's really
only two ways to solve the problem: eliminate software patents altogether
(thus introducing enormous competition and innovation in the marketplace) or
be damn explicit about what is protectable and what isn't. Open source has
thrived these past few years because of the reuse and improvement of the
technology, whereas software patents often bar off any competitors or
innovators from improving on the technology. And in Apple's case here, I think
it's just plain crazy to try to patent some of these "aesthetic" elements of
common design (rounded corners, etc.)

------
mefistofele
Apple is just strapping up for the mobile patent wars which have already
begun.

It's an arms race, and it's irrational to place the blame on just one of the
actors. To stop the arms race will take mutual action on the part of three or
four different companies, or outside intervention. The former is likely to
happen eventually, and let's hope that the latter happens sooner rather than
later in the form of patent reform.

~~~
akiselev
Thankfully these patent wars are being settled in a court of law. The system
is over complicated and has a lot of loop holes (i.e. look at Oracles often
unfactual descriptions of common programming terms in Oracle vs Google) but I
think in the end it will eventually balance out where no one has won much more
than others, even with Apples big wins over Samsung.

The USPTO is starting to address the problem (albeit slowly) and there should
be many more decisive rulings in the next decade.

------
mathattack
Are these patents really evil, or just positioning for an endgame where
everyone settles financially based on their portfolio?

~~~
bediger4000
I guess I'd have to ask what difference that makes? Everyone settling
financially is akin to making a patent clearinghouse cartel type of thing,
where only really big companies get to play. The end result? A less than free
market in practice, but not in name, mercantilist policies about who gets to
innovate, and controlled innovation. Do we look back on the 75 years of Bell
System with anything other than mild contempt? No? Well, that's the sort of
thing a "financial settlement" will lead us to.

------
javajosh
This is an important problem. It's fundamentally a problem with the way
patents are granted, and the way they are used, and the way they are
understood. let's address these in turn:

First, you shouldn't be able to patent round corners. That's silly.

Second, you should be able to patent things and then sue people for using your
patent if _you_ are not using your patent in any way shape or form. An unused
idea should be free for the taking.

Third, there's a great deal of ignorance about what patents _are_ , how to get
them, and how to use them. Behind this veil of ignorance, bad things happen.

Unfortunately, this state of affairs means that companies like Apple can and
indeed must violate the spirit of the law symmetrically with it's competitors,
to protect themselves until the system is fixed.

There is no doubt it's a bad scene, but it's not entirely Apple's fault. If
they exercise restraint with these patents, using them purely defensively and
then with great perspicuity, then I don't see how they could do any different.

Let us all direct our feelings toward reforming the patent system perhaps by
joining an organization like "Defend Innovation"[1], the EFF's group pushing
for patent reform.

[1] <https://defendinnovation.org/>

~~~
wissler
Useful idiots call for reform. The patent system is intrinsically evil and
must be abolished.

~~~
javajosh
I see. And what do you call a person who calls names and makes absolute
statements without any support or reasoning?

~~~
wissler
Is it your view that one may not express one's view without substantiating it?
Because that is the premise implied by your remark, and -- guess what? -- it's
an absolute statement you've failed to provide any support or reasoning for,
which would make you a hypocrite. So perhaps you should clarify.

~~~
javajosh
Actually, that's more of a statement of worldview, of what I find beautiful.
It is axiomatic, and you are free to disagree with it if you like, but if you
do, you and I can't (and shouldn't) be friends.

~~~
wissler
So, your assertions are unquestioned axioms, mine need substantiation. Yeah,
we couldn't be friends.

