7 ms·
From what we know this far it’s quite easy to be on Apples side in this particular question, right?
by plufz 2mo ago
From what we know this far it’s quite easy to be on Apples side in this particular question, right?
- JKCalhoun 2mo agoEspecially since Apple has no history of doing this—suggests this is on another level of theft. (I worked at Apple and am aware of little "theft" incidents that came and went. Obviously those little incidents never made the news cycle.)
- nba456_ 2mo agoHow could you have worked at Apple during the entire Samsung lawsuit and say Apple has no history of suing competitors over IP theft?
- EPWN3D 2mo agoBecause Apple didn't sue Samsung over IP theft. They sued them over copyright infringement.
- bradyd 2mo agoIt was actually patent infringement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Samsung_Electronics_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Samsung_Electron....
- inigyou 2mo agoCopyright infringement is a sub-category of IP theft. Other types of IP theft include trademark infringement, and patent infringement.
- EPWN3D 2mo agoSure, I guess. But I think people reading this thread are drawing a line between "Copying the publicly-visible IP" and "Inducing employees to walk out with trade secrets in hand." No one at Samsung was facing prison time. People at OpenAI very well could.
- JKCalhoun 2mo agoYou're right—I didn't mean to suggest they've never sued competitors. Some companies are just known to be litigious—I've never put Apple in that bucket. (And maybe I have blinders on. It's certainly fair to blame me for being biased.)
- khalic 2mo agoYes it was more of a jest than a critique, the comment didn't explicitly say which one it was. In this case, it seems quite clear that Apple has a case.