Many, if not a majority of your quotes have come from sources of questionable veracity. But, I am not going to claim that mine have been a great deal better. This conversation has gone completely off the rails. And I am sorry to have wasted so much of our time by keeping it going.
I have learned a great deal from you from our past exchanges. There is no one who is more knowledgeable of Apple products that I am aware of on this forum. Obviously Apple is a trendsetter in the electronic gizmo and computer sector.
One of my hobbies is restoring old cars. My wife and I are currently working on a rare 1942 Cadillac. We also are helping to set up a display at the Lemay Car Museum in Tacoma. Both my wife and I are familiar enough with vintage and antique cars that if we do not recognize a particular automobile we can at least identify fairly closely the year it was manufactured. Cars from the early 1900s look similar; cars from the teens look similar; cars from the twenties, thirties, forties, fifties, sixties, seventies and etc., etc., tend to be fairly easy to identify.
Car manufacturers spend massive amounts coming up with new designs. Strangely, the designs often seem to look fairly similar. Part of this is because of new and evolving technologies becoming available to all manufacturers around the same time. But have you ever heard of the largest car manufacturer suing their competitors claiming that they were the first to come up with say... headlights in front fenders, or tail fins or other cosmetic innovations that have little to do with new technology?
Having owned cell phones since the 1980s; it also is fairly easy to identify within a few years when a cell phone was manufactured. They do tend to look similar and I suppose that when a company comes out with a phone that looks like it is going to sell well... the rest of the manufacturers start making phones that look similar. The features implemented tend to come out about the same time also. Part of this is because the companies try to copy the market leader, but as with cars part of it is because the technologies that each cell phone designer has available tend to be similar.
To me the original iPhone doesn't look a great deal different from some other phones that were developed before it was. The feature set seems to me to be completely evolutionary as well. After it became a success there were a lot of other phones that started looking similar to it. However, after what I have seen with vintage cars this seems to be what one would expect in any competitive enterprise.
Apple was the first to market with a commercially successful cell phone with a multi-touch capacitive screen. How great an accomplishment was that really? As this type of screen became available one would expect that other manufacturers would start using them as well regardless of Apple's implementation. It is kind of a no brainer and this actually is the case. The same can be said of improved cell data technologies. It is hard to prove that phones coming out with evolutionary improvements are copies of one another.
The complicating factor is that unlike automobile manufacturers Apple has established a history of using its money and influence to manipulate the patent system. And they have a history of using teams of hired goon lawyers to intimidate other companies and stifle innovation. I do not have a problem with Apple's products. They are well engineered, quality consumer friendly products. I do have a problem with Apple's predatory abuse of our legal and patent system. I also have a problem with people like you who make excuses and justify this type of behavior.
Strange that you should mention cars in this context because patent trolls often bring up arguments about patents and things like steering wheels and brakes, etc. and how if those things had been patented, all hell would have been out because car makers wouldn't have been able to settle on a standard. But what they DON'T understand is that THEY WERE PATENTED. . . and the patent holders DID prevent the other makers from using the steering wheel and the drum brake, and the disk brake, and other forms of brake during the terms of the patents.
The other makers came up with alternatives such as steering tillers, steering foot pedals, all kinds of creative ideas that did not include a steering wheel. Even FOUR wheels on the corners for an automobile was patented. . . and people tried three wheels, diamond patterned four wheel cars, six wheeled cars, all kinds of patterns, in an attempt to get around the patent, creating and innovation bloomed. Many makers licensed the steering wheel and just went on ahead with their automobiles.
The same thing happened with automobile brakes, headlights, transmissions. . . almost everything you can think of. Most patents expired and went into public domain and those that worked were adopted as standards for the automobile industry. Those that were very creative but were kludges trying to get around the best patents, died out. . . or may have been brought back later because they WERE good ideas just not feasible for the technology of the time.
In other words, the ability to protect a patent by slapping down infringers can spur the creative juices that will, in the long run be beneficial, if it is allowed to work as intended. Very few of the patent suits were appealed like they are today. Most were finished when the jury made its ruling.
Were there abuses? You bet. My own great-great Grandfather, Alexander Graham Bell, probably stole his invention of the Telephone. . . in fact, I have no doubt he did. The evidence is almost overwhelming that he was not the true inventor, contrary to his claims and the myth he carefully constructed. Sad, but there's nothing that can correct that crime today.
The complicating factor is that unlike automobile manufacturers Apple has established a history of using its money and influence to manipulate the patent system.
Why? Because they've both won and lost patent suits?
You make this claim. . . but I doubt you can prove even any of it. Prior to the iPhone suits, Apple was more sued, than the suer. Apple did sue over the theft of its intellectual property by Microsoft. . . a company that did indeed break a contract. They had the bad luck to get a judge who had no clue about software copyrights and how software worked and treated it as if it were something it was not. He assumed that Windows 1.0 which is what the contract was limited to, included all versions of Windows thereafter, regardless of version. And ruled that Microsoft had an unlimited license to Apple's intellectual property, instead of the limited license that had been issued for Windows 1.0 only. . . as the contract explicitly specified. The only thing that judge found that infringed Apple's copyright was the trashcan icon, even though almost every other icon was exactly identical to Apple's icons. He ruled that Microsoft would have to rename the Trashcan, so they called it the Recycle Bin.
The other lawsuit was also against Microsoft. . . and Apple essentially won it. That one had to do with Microsoft, through a third agent, lifting Apple's patented and copyrighted Quicktime code to include in Microsoft's Video Player software. That ultimately resulted in the 1997 settlement that netted Apple a $150 million down payment on future royalties, which, according to forensic accountants, ultimately totaled more than $2 billion. . . plus Apple getting unlimited access to Microsoft's IP for the life of the copyrights and patents, Microsoft's agreement to continue publishing and developing MS Office of Mac for another five years, and all Apple had to do was license the in suit copyrights and patent to Microsoft for five years, agree to include Internet Explorer with all new Macs, and drop all causes of action against Microsoft. Apple won.
Another Apple initiated lawsuit was Apple v. Psystar where a Florida Company was building Mac Clones in violation of the OS X license agreement. Apple won.
Find any other Apple initiated lawsuits that would PROVE your contention. In most instances Patent Trolls sue Apple. Again, Fireman15, this is an area where I know quite a bit. . . having been running the Apple Ping list for over ten years.