... calling into question the validity of Apple's expert witness.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/mobility/smart_phones/240005067

And I didn't see anyone question the article in post 69, with the pre-iphone concepts that look a lot like the iphone *before* the iphone.

There are a lot of factors on either side. Personally, I feel the Galaxy S was the most egregious imitator of the iPhone. The packaging, plug and certain other elements are definitely cringe-worthy.

And, not everything that Apple claims infringes is infringing. Like trying to pass the app drawer as the primary home screen. Or that "scrolling at the same pace of a finger moving" is innovation.

And seriously? Who doesn't look at a competitor's successful product and find ways to hit those same notes? It happened with televisions, the Walkman, the iPod, the Wii, and tons of other products. Imagine if Nintendo had just outright sued Sony for blatantly copying the Wii... that hurts *consumers* by limiting competition. That's been my whole position this entire time. The massive boom of the tech industry in general this past decade+ has been innovators building on top of other innovators. Software is especially tricky since, in the eyes of patent issuers/enforcers, it's a far more "nebulous" concept than hardware.

The point is... think for yourself, people. I didn't post the article you just linked nor the article I just linked here (as rebuttal) because nothing's concrete yet.

That, and people here didn't seem to want to talk about the issue. But if you're willing to have a measured, objective debate about it I'm more than game.

Edit: Adding Judge Posner's position on patents here, because it's highly relevant to this discussion:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/07/why-there-are-too-many-patents-in-america/259725/