Apple v. Samsung could quash smartphone access for minorities or something

“The surge in the popularity of inexpensive but cutting-edge smartphones is more than just another marketplace success story,” John Burnett writes for FOX News. “It is one with profound social implications, particularly among low-income Black and Hispanic consumers who have long been on the losing end of the digital divide.”

“If there has been any recent development that has helped to bridge that divide in communities like my own here in Harlem, it has been the advent of low-priced smartphones,” Burnett writes. “Indeed, studies have shown that Black and Hispanics access the Internet on a cellphone, tablets or other mobile handheld devices at demonstrably higher rates than whites. ”

“However, the days of inexpensive smart phones may be coming to an abrupt end, due in large part to an ongoing patent dispute playing out in a federal district court in California,” Burnett writes. “Apple, the maker of high-end devices like the iPhone, is suing Samsung, the maker of more inexpensive devices, claiming that Samsung has copied its technology.”

“Apple must stop waging this legal war on its main competitor, Samsung, because it is anti-competitive and could ultimately decimate the smartphone market that is enabling the digitally disenfranchised go online,” Burnett writes. “Some experts note that the legal remedies sought by Apple, which caters to a relatively affluent clientele, could translate into higher costs being passed on to consumers who have come to depend on the inexpensive products offered by competitors, which cost roughly $370 less on average… For all its standing as a model of American ingenuity and success, Apple serves a relatively narrow segment of the market with a limited number of smartphones – 3 – that fetch premium prices.”

Complete stupidity here.

MacDailyNews Take: You know, because protecting your property is wrong. It should instead be freely given to a corrupt South Korean conglomerate and 500 other crapola outfits around the world in order to help U.S. minorities afford smartphones and because $0 for an iPhone 4S is too expensive.

Imagine the melodic stylings of Burnett’s tune if a black person invented and patented the iPhone in Harlem and then, over in California, a bunch of white guys at Apple immediately decided to blatantly and clearly infringe upon these patents in order to mimic the operating system, offer it to every Tom, Dick and Harry handset assembler on earth, churn out their own knockoffs and, oh by the way, grabbing the bulk of smartphone market share in the process?

Somehow we believe that Burnett’s little ditty would have an entirely different sound.

Apple’s products came first, then Samsung’s:

Samsung Galaxy and Galaxy Tab Trade Dress Infringement

Here’s what Google’s Android looked like before and after Apple’s iPhone:

Google Android before and after Apple iPhone

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Edward W.” for the heads up.]

Related articles:
Apple already has its first victory in new $2 billion Samsung patent infringement fight – March 31, 2014
Apple v. Samsung patent infringement trial begins today (link to live blog) – March 31, 2014
How Google reacted when Steve Jobs revealed the revolutionary iPhone – December 19, 2013

27 Comments

    1. Doublethink ©George Orwell

      To know and to not know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy is impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy. To forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself.

      War is Peace
      Freedom is Slavery
      Ignorance is Strength
      Robbery Is Competition

  1. Don’t panic folks, there’s always the Obamaphone for the minorities. It’s made in Kenya with natural tree bark so it won’t pollute the environment.

    That’s right, the government has thought of everything. Everything except get you a job.

    This message was brought to you by the Dept of Labor and supported by your President.

    1. But what if I like my cell plan provider. Can I get an Obamaphone and keep old provider?
      “Listen, I’ll say it again. If you like your provider, you’ll be able to keep your old provider.”
      Oh, Okay if you say so it must be the truth.

      Sorry folks, I couldn’t help myself. hehe

  2. As typical of online journalist they don’t have a clue. The phone are only “low-priced” because of subsides. I am of course assuming the author is comparing Samsung phones that are of similar smartness as the iPhone.

    Also, the article would have been better without the race comments.

  3. This is absurd. If it wasn’t from Fox News I might be mad. MDN has the perfect take, I couldn’t state it better. I would add that any software changes may be Googles problems and since Android is free shouldn’t effect Samsung prices. Did someone pay this guy to write suck nonsense?

  4. Hey, John Burnett, thanks for writing that. I’m going to reuse it on my site and not give you any compensation. And why should I? Fox pays you big bucks and not me, right? Your “Robin Hood” scenario so completely ignores the possibility that Samsung and Google could have created their own ideas rather than copying, without compensation, Apple’s work.

  5. to the idiot author of the article:

    Samsung can STILL sell cheap phones even AFTER paying Apple royalties (like HTC does) if Samsung was willing to CUT the BILLIONS it makes in profits. Why do higher costs have to passed to the CONSUMER, when costs can be covered by Samsung’s billions in profits… ?

    And if Apple refuses to license out certain patents then Samsung can still sell cheap phones with fewer features (why does a cheap need to provide as many features as an expensive phone? The ONLY REASON Samsung can do so : cheap phones with iPhone features is because it is STEALING and not spending millions of $ and years on R&D).

    Besides Samsung has already stated in court nobody buys a phone because of Apple patent features. So since these are valueless features in Samsung’s mind, why do android phones absolutely need to have them?

    1. I read the article. It was so full of holes, bad “facts” and BS that coming to a bad conclusion was easy.

      After all, its fox news, and we know fox has a very slanted focus on news…. ok, well not really news…. just slanted news.

      Just me saying.

Reader Feedback

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