We often discuss platform developments. The APPLE iPod and iTunes platform are a great discussion topic because of the may dimensions of product/service development we can approach.
One of the areas to discuss is protecting innovation. In the article "Apple Fails in Patenting iPod Technology", we can see the hyper-competitive arena these titans are competing in, and how difficult it may be to protect innovation.
What are your thoughts on protecting innovation? What should APPLE have done? Why was MICROSOFT successful? Did APPLE actually "fail"?
Your thoughts are appreciated.
Gene A. Wright
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I thought Kaefer's quote, "Our policy is to allow others to license our patents so they can use our innovative methods in their products," was a nice shot at Apple. I have to think that with as much product in the market as Apple and its ipod, they would have some legal claim.
-CTS
Apple certainly has the market share and mind share for digital players. That along the the fact that Microsoft has very little in this market should count for something.
As Professor Wright points out how much of the iPod is product and how much is service? There is tremendous value in the iTunes store and user base so even if they lose some on the player they still hold that as a valuable asset. Are there any patents in question on that?
My first thought coincides with Joe's question regarding the delayed application filing. Even if Apple was focusing on the design and manufacturing, why did they wait a year after releasing the iPod before filing? Should they have minimally applied for a provisional patent? In attempting to locate the patents discussed, I noticed how generalized and broad the wording and descriptions can be and how easily applications submitted can overlap.
Post a Comment