Reply interspersed.
On 10/25/2012 3:33 AM, Tom C wrote:
From: Boris Liberman <[email protected]>
I think that what's moral for individual human beings does not
necessarily apply to corporations. Specifically, I think that the so
called grey area is much broader for corporations than it is for you and me.
In theory that's correct. In practice it's wrong. I know it. You know
it. The CEO's know it. (I'm not implying you didn't) :)
Absolutely, Tom. I wasn't speaking specifically of Samsung-Apple series
of trials all over the planet. It very well may be that Samsung did
steal. And I am not being a fanboy of any of these two, although I do
have Samsung cell phone, but it is one issued by my company anyway. And
trust me, Samsung Galaxy S II pretty much sucks.
(Frank wrote:)
Doesn't mean they should stop making money from on of their biggest
clients, does it? This is a simple ongoing commodity transaction that
is completely divorced from the intellectual property departments
duking it out.
(Boris wrote:)
Well, no. In fact, there is nothing immoral in stopping dealing with
Apple. Like it is always said - "nothing personal, just business"...
Someone up the ladder came up with the power point presentation that
appears to support the idea that in terms of profit this would be the
best move for Samsung and hence the decision was eventually made.
I am surprised it wasn't made way earlier, in fact.
There's several ways to look at it. I'm not a Samsung fanboy or
necessarily anti-Apple.
Likewise.
On the one hand, if you go suing your supplier who's also a
competitor... well I don't know how much profit Samsung makes on their
business with Apple, but $1B probably covers what they made on A LOT
of iPad displays and other chips. So it sort of looks like, in a way,
that Apple would be, in essence, getting Samsung's product for less
than the agreed upon price. Score for Apple. If I were Samsung would I
want to do business with a company that was essentially getting my
product at a cut-rate price via litigation? Rumor has it Apple was
already looking for lower cost displays. If I were Samsung I'd tell
Apple to shove it, which they may have done. All businesses have a
legitimate interest in making a fair and honest profit.
On the other hand I read that $1B is only a day or two's worth of
revenue for Samsung, and that the lawsuit may have elevated Samsung in
the eyes of some as a worthy Apple competitor. If so, a possible
misstep by Apple.
I don't think it is that much important really, Tom. You see, I don't
really think it can hurt the consumers one way or another. It is not as
if Samsung will be prohibited from making and selling cell phones,
period. It is not as if iPhone is going away. Even Nokia, being in dire
straits now (as it seems from the press) still produces bloody lot of
their units.
I don't think that either outcome will seriously affect either company.
I don't think it is a publicity stunt because it is taking far too long
for that - mass memory does not have that long a term.
I sincerely think that what we're seeing today is a number of people who
hold positions of immense power that have climbed up some rather tall
ladders that grew to be trees and they cannot be made to climb down.
However in my original message I was trying to be more theoretical. In
principle, Samsung should have sat down, looked at the numbers and made
the optimal decision in terms of their business going. It well may be
that they *chose* to do what is being done now just like I described.
I don't countenance the theft of intellectual property via Samsung or
Apple and I don't know where the truth is there. I certainly don't
agree with 'you cant make a product that's slim, rectangular, has
rounded corners and uses icons or gestures that are meaningful'.
I do remember the story about Palm Pilot creators who carried a wooden
block of the form of Palm Pilot in their pocket to see if it is
convenient. I reckon if late Steve Jobs or whomever else did it, they
would be emotionally pissed to know that someone did not have to do this
but the other person's company is producing slim, rectangular smart
blocks of plastic and silicon...
I think we talked about patent system few threads ago and it is indeed
one of the more contorted creations of human mind, at least as of nowadays.
It seems that corporations, like governments, once in power, do
everything possible to stay in power and suppress contenders.
Absolutely. It is animal instinct taken to the power of human mind taken
to the power of size of the corporation.
The actions of a corporation are the deliberate actions of thinking
human beings. Those actions are either fair and legitimate or they are
not, regardless of how the legal profession wishes to spin it.
I have to beg to differ here. The actions of corporations are sequences
of deliberate actions of human beings, some of which are not really
thinking. As such, they are representation of mass psychology and mass
behavior (though stock market represents far greater masses of human
beings). We don't seem to have worldwide global laws and courts that
uphold that laws and police that enforces them. That by the way can be
seen in the multitude of trials that Samsung and Apple are having in
different countries.
Got my mind up in gear this morning. Thanks, Tom!
Boris
--
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.
