Why Apple might be better off losing its patent lawsuit against Samsung

“Could it be in Apple’s self-interest to lose its bitter court battle with Samsung?” Steve Lohr wonders for The New York Times.

“Yes, it could. That is the contrarian point made in a research note from Steve Milunovich, a veteran computer analyst who joined UBS as a managing director in May,” Lohr reports. “‘It could hurt Apple,’ he writes, ‘because the real threat is not a competitor beating Apple at its own game but instead changing the game. The likelihood of Apple being leapfrogged or a rival creating a new category is greater if they have to think outside the box. If they just copy Apple, like Coke, Apple can claim to be ‘the real thing.’”

Read more in the full article here.

29 Comments

  1. If other companies could “think outside the box” (a clichéd phrase that should be banned, especially from a so-called journalist) wouldn’t they have done so by now?

    1. I agree, also Apple needs to show that it will defend its patents or else other company’s will do the same. Samsung specifically needs to understand that what they are doing is wrong and will not be tolerated.

  2. It’s unlikely, but it could maybe happen someday. It’s a stretch, though.

    What’s not a stretch or maybe-could-happen-someday is this: Samsung is stealing from Apple, profiting from their rivals research & development, without taking any of the risks Apple did, not paying for it, breaking the law doing it, and disrupting Apple’s entire business model (which is selling unique electronics based on innovations from private research & development).

    Apple is right for going after the parasite currently siphoning its livelihood. The possibility of legitimate competition in the future is a dumb reason to let the bloodsuckers keep going.

  3. That is silly. If you lose the case, it set a standard to copy another’s hard work and profit by it. Where is the incentive to produce ground breaking designs if you know it will be on the market in a few months. Why invest the money, hire engineers, or even promote people with unique abilities. All because Apple can stay on top? Plain stupid for a journalist to promote such an idea. The patent office was setup to provide a reward for the work and money it takes to risk a market changing device, method, or design.

    Steve Lohr must wake up in the morning and ask what dumb idea can he written for the mindless and lacking of critical thought lemmings

    1. The also reported on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So their misinformation is not always slanted in the same direction (except maybe pro-whoever-is-currently-president.)

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.