Lets not get into a conversation about the state of software patents in this country, or the quality and breadth of Apple's patents.

But I think it seems a bit unreasonable to ban the sale of an entire device which is based on hundreds if not thousands of patents just because it MIGHT (keep in mind this case was not won but Apple, this was a preliminary injunction) infringe on one or two software patents.

If you think you have a chance at winning a case about patents then not acting would be foolish.

edit: My point is that this IS a conversation about software patents and competition and not whether or not you are I think this is reasonable. If the system is broken and you, as a multi-billion company, don't take that competitive advantage someone else will.

Can we have a little break where people can make good products and compete fairly? Let's not be so eager to jump into the pit with another brutal monopoly.

edit: "If I don't take advantage, someone else will" is also known as mutually assured destruction. I liked the patent cold war better than what we're seeing now. Companies should shelve the nukes and go back to vying for customers with merits, not missiles.

So using them shows you have no balls to compete freely.

The best patent is the one never enforced. "Apple should focus on competing on the quality of THEIR product" still stands.

I hope you are consistent with that belief.

Because what Samsung is doing with its FRAND patents is 100x worse than what Apple is doing.

And the government granted Kevin Rose the monopoly to vote on things.