Tom, do you remember the iconic bluebird photo 10-15 years ago? It showed up in calendars, posters, postcards, etc. I remember an interview with the photographer - he earned enough from that one shot to build a home in the woods, full studio and darkroom, etc. What if Kodak early on had said "that shot has great moneymaking potential; we'll copy it and use our superior marketing (and lower pricing) to compete with you for sales of that image. And oh by the way, if you don't like it, then our film division won't sell you any more film.
I think that is a close analogy to what you are suggesting that Samsung should do. Yes, copyright and patent rights are not identical, but the principle is the same; theft of intellectual property is not a good thing. stan On Aug 27, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Tom C wrote: >> From: John Francis <[email protected]> >> What Apple's strategy is toaday may be debatable. But Steve Jobs made it >> very clear that his intention was to do everything he could to bury Google. >> >> I see the suit against Samusung as just part of this overall objective. > > I agree with William Robb's sentiment regarding Apple. I can't > remember the exact post, and haven't read many in this thread. > > I have an iPod Touch for music, but this whole thing with Apple > disgusts me. I have no intention of buying another Apple product > unless something happens to change my mind. > > I recently bought a Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 10.1 and frankly I find it > hard to imagine there's much I'd want to do on an iPad that I couldn't > do on the Samsung. For me the tablet is a consumption device and if I > can't edit RAW's on it at present I have no interest in using it for > photo-editing (and I might not anyway). Granted the iPad's display > resolution is higher, but in a device of this size I tend to sense a > case of diminishing returns. At some point increased resolution only > really counts if it allows me to view the image both larger and > crisper. > > If I understand correctly Samsung is the supplier of many of Apple's > displays. If true, where would Apple get them from if not from > Samsung? If I were Samsung, I'd consider raising the price of a > display panel to cover Apples's lawsuit if they don't win on appeal. > In that case Apple would be paying the $1B penalty themselves instead > of Samsung, or passing it along to their customers. Samsung could > laugh all the way to the bank. > > Apple appears like a rabid dog in some sense, biting the hand that > feeds it. Granted Samsung also profits because of the popularity of > Apple products which use Samsung components. Still if I were; Samsung > I'd stick it to Apple cost-wise. I'm sure they're already considering > it. > > Tom C. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
