

Apple to patent CSS transformations and animations - wallflower
http://robertnyman.com/2009/10/29/apple-to-patent-css-transformations-and-animations/

======
wallflower
From the comments (it's might not be what it appear to be)

"Let me explain this again. Apple promises not to use these patents against
MS, Mozilla, Opera, et.al. because that would ba against W3C rules. But by
having the patents they make it impossible for someone else to claim
'ownership' of the technologies and patent troll anyone!"

~~~
willwagner
Does this line of argument really make any sense? Isn't "prior art" just as
easy to defend against in a lawsuit?

I'm not sure I really feel good about a big brother corporation creating bogus
patents with the promise of doing it for the good of mankind. Even if there
are good intentions, it just adds more burden to an overtaxed patent system
and makes the bogus patent problem worse.

I love Apple products but I also think as a company, they seem very closed and
litigious so I'm a bit skeptical.

~~~
jamesbritt
" ... as a company, they seem very closed and litigious so I'm a bit
skeptical."

Besides, this is not Steve Jobs giving his word as a man, Scout's honor, and
all that.

At some point management changes, but the company lives on, and the new owners
may decide otherwise.

