Our Weblog
On March 2nd, Apple turned further to the Dark Side and initiated patent litigation against HTC based on an array of sweeping patents (like recognizing phone numbers and unlocking things by visually sliding a graphic of a latch) that could potentially impact web site interfaces and operating systems, casting a dark pall over non-Apple phones, web tablets, and any number of innovative technologies. Given Apple’s own origins lifting the research of Xerox PARC, this is particularly troubling.
Apple already enjoys a tremendous marketing lead with its iPhone and has a strong reputation for creating new functionality. But it also has developed an unquenchable thirst for control that leads it to consistently refuse to meet standing consumer needs in an attempt to insure that its customers are never quite satisfied by always leaving something important out. To sell more phones, it leaves out a built-in microphone and camera from its Touch devices that would let their WiFi capabilities moot the need for a cell contract. To boost App store sales, it denies users the ability to directly install third party software. To insure that developers commit to its native API’s so they can’t port their Apps to other platforms, it prohibits the installation of interpreters for programming languages on its phones.
All of these things you can’t do as a matter of business policy on the Apple platform led to Droid’s successful Droid Does marketing campaign. This is one thing the new Apple can’t bear, real consumer choice.
So rather than relax its strangle hold on its customers so they will freely choose its products and services, Apple has turned to the very dark side tactics of sowing Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt to attack the Android platform. It isn’t the copying of some specific technology that truly scares Apple, it is the fact that Google’s Android Platform is more Open than its own and has enough technical appeal and interface sophistication to hold its own in the market.
In the glory days of Apple Computer, the company embraced competition through technological superiority as it strove to empower its End Users. When the company dropped “Computer” from its corporate name it renounced the promise of End User Computing and sough to transform its once independent customers into mindless drones dependent on Apple for their next entertainment fix.
This new Apple fears competition and evidences utter contempt for consumers as it now turns to the courts in an effort to stave off the loss of customer defections of its own making.
If you hold Apple Stock, now would be a good time to make it known to management that trying to stifle innovation and consumer choice with IP litigation hurts the entire industry, could lead to a flurry of patent litigation by making it socially acceptable for other companies to go after Apple, and threatens to destroy the long term value of your investment. If you were thinking of buying Apple products, hold off and let Apple know that you don’t appreciate its strong handed attempt to gain a monopoly over mobiles devices.
[Obligatory FTC Disclaimer: The Institute and some of its officers, directors, staff & volunteers have made use of free Google Services which might in theory bias us in favor of positions that would advance Google's interests, which in this case run in concert with those of HTC which is being sued by Apple. Some of us also use Apple products and services. We have not canvased everyone to determine whether any of us directly or indirectly own stock in any of these companies, but that possibility no doubt exists. So the reader should assume that potential relationships exist and consider this to be a notice thereof.
That said, our writing is solely motivated by our desire to advocate for the interests of End Users like you and we only include this notice because it is required by the FTC to avoid the risk of running afoul of their regulations and becoming subject to substantial fines. If you are a blogger and have ever received anything of value or have any kind of theoretical relationship with an entity you are blogging about, you should consult with a lawyer to determine your disclaimer obligations under these new rules.]