Apple, RIM, Samsung, HTC Sued Over Mobile Displays

At first I thought Apple was the one suing, not the one being sued

I wonder if SGI would have gone bankrupt if it put 1/10th of the effort that GPH puts into enforcing patents.

W. T. F. You can really sue for "Large Area Wide Aspect Ratio Flat Panel Display Having High Resolution For High Information Content Display"???. What has the world come to...

This is yet another abusive tactic taken by "job creators" to game the system. American capitalism has become a system in which profits are made via every scheme possible except actual innovation and/or production. The very idea that concepts so vague as those detailed above should be considered intellectual property protected by patent(s) is nauseating. The collective supply side of our economy is in dire need of a colonic.

IN YO FACE APPLE

Sadly this kind of behavior was ushered in by that well known parasite that threatens the march of technology-- Apple. This is precisely why Apple and its technologically preliterate moronic fanboys must be trashed whenever possible.

We don't want this conduct to become an impediment to innovation. Imagine all laptops and smartphones being drm infested and having no replaceable batteries, little connectivity, and no expandability beyond the narrow proprietary domain of some greedy company, and you can see the reality that Apple is creating in the world of technology.

Yes this news is quite disgusting, even if Apple is now being sued. As the saying goes, "What goes around comes around".

might as well patent the ability to breath

eye for an eye and the world goes blind come to mind. In the end its the consumer that suffers. I thought the laws where changing that the company holding a patent had to show a reasonable attempt to actually have a "working product" for it to be awarded?

time to change the patent law
happy to see lawsuit against apple though

What damages? These patent trolls disrupt innovation. They should burn in hell with their stupid, nonsensical patents.

Have you ever heard of Roberto Landell? He was a Brazilian Priest who is actually the father of all wireless communication, including wireless phone. Most of his patents in the US were filled in 1904. Wonder what would happen if he were to sue everyone who attempted to improve his projects or turn them into commercial produts...

Are u saying Apple invented trivial patents and patent trolling? Apple is not that old.
Even the Wright brothers did that more than 100 years ago.

The problem is not the behavior of Apple, Intel, Microsoft, IBM or whoever actually patents all this stuff. If those companies don't patent what they develop, somebody else will patent it before they do. Try proving that you invented something first if you haven't made it public yet.

The problem is the patent system itself. Trivial, overly broad patents and 20 year long patents for technology that is outdated after 10 years and worthless after 15 years is just not what the patent system is meant to be.

GPH didn't create or invent anything. They are just picking pieces from a corpse.

Sigh...another patent lawsuit. I'm thinking of filing 2 patents myself.

Patent 1. I'm going to patent patents. Anyone who tries to file a patent will be sued for trying to patent something.

Patent 2. I'm going to patent ideas which could achieve monetary gain. If you have an idea which could in some way, shape, or form make money, I will sue you.

@molo9000

naw apple didn't invent it, but they sure as hell refined and mastered it lol

the patent system is not a completely flawed system, seriously folks 100 years ago weren't any less shrewd then folks today, if they could game the system they would off, the flaw lies in the addition to the patent system which allows for abuse (software patents, innovative patents, which allow for the patent of generic and vague ideas and concepts). The original system was never designed to be a defensive or offensive weapon, it was not envisage as a tool to deny technology it was not about who got there first but rather to protect the financial investment incurred during the development of new technologies, it was an involved processed which required very specific and well formed ideas and documentation

cutting edge technology cost millions to research, refine and bring to market, it is rarely ever a eureka moment and can take years to reach market and even long to gain market acceptance, the majority of profit can only be attained near the end of the products life cycle, if the patent expired too early, companies that had not invested in developing and ensuring market adoption can quickly bring to market cheaper products (because they do not need to offset research and marketing cost) thus penalizing the company who originally developed the technology

And here I thought that patents were to support innovation.
I want to patent a system to monetize patents without producing a product.

I smell PATENT LAWYERS CONSPIRACY!!! made decades ago..!!!!

Guys.... These are the titles of the patents and do NOT define the monopoly afforded by same. The monopoly is defined by the CLAIMS included in the patent. Please get informed before bashing the patent system.

Would you judge the content of a book based on its title???

I would if the title included the name Justin Bieber.

The focus of my rant was the supply-side welfare state in which we live. Corporations and their political cronies extol the virtues of the unrestrained free market when it comes to fighting regulation and dodging taxes, yet who do they always run to in order to protect their ridiculous monopolies? The patent system is a joke, as is the "justice" system used to enforce it.

I think historically SGI played a huge role, and we wouldn't be where we are now with technology without them. That their successor is taking stabs at Apple and the rest is unsurprising.

But I very much agree with Del35. Apple zealots should be scorned, singled out, and humiliated at every opportunity. Not that "they started it", but Apple has sure fueled all kinds of BS patent-trolling in the past decade. They haven't made a single innovation since Day 1, and yet the zealots just love pretending they are in some way unique, instead of the lowest common denominator of consumer.

De Moura demonstrated wireless communication in 1900, whole 6 years after Tesla did the same. But Tesla was notorious for not patenting his works.

Took the words out of my mouth.. lol

I wonder if I can patent this:
The extension of a person's middle finger and directing it towards the patent office

GPH a patent troll? Sure sounds like it.

I've heard rumors of such tactics becoming outlawed, but when corporate money greases the right hands and wheels, you can expect such legislation to never survive long enough to be made into law. (You only need a few key people for that task.)

This might be a bit worrisome as this organization has a previous win under their belt, against ATI.

i see no problem with some one enforcing the patents of a dead company who did invent and patent their stuff and let others steal it and get away with it.
just criminal prosecution for murder by theft/swindle by the wife of the deceased the way i see it.
not very accurate, but more funny then stealing the social security/pension check of a granny so she can't afford her living expenses.

Dude, his putative patent(s) would be unenforceable now because it (they) would be expired...