Apple's patent suits against Google and the mobile computing industry

¶ … Apple is the leading innovator in mobile computing devices, receiving patents for its famous touch-screen technology and Apple iOS mobile operating system. Shortly after the introduction of the iPhone, Google introduced its Android operating system, which it licensed to mobile phone manufacturers free of charge.

The introduction of a free mobile OS that was comparable to Apple's iOS reduced barriers to entry for hardware manufacturers who did not have software development capabilities, such as Samsung and HTC. Thus, Google helped create a number of new competitors for Apple. In response, Apple has filed a series of patent infringement claims against Google, claiming that the Android copies many of the patented iOS features. (Gruman; Harris).

Thesis: Apple's current patent suits against Google threatens to stifle technological in the mobile computing industry by halting open-source software development on the Android OS. More importantly, it threatens to stifle the growth of the mobile computing industry by removing the ability of hardware manufacturers to enter the market without their own software.

Body of Professional Ethics for Computing Professionals.

The Computer Ethics Institute, in its Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics, states that computing professionals "Shalt Not Appropriate Other People's Intellectual Output. (Computer Ethics Institute, 1.8). More specifically, the Association for Computing Machinery's Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct requires computing professionals to "honor property rights including copyrights and patent." (Association for Computing Machinery, 1.5). It first states that "Violation of copyrights, patents, trade secrets and the terms of license agreements is prohibited by law in most circumstances." (ACM, 1.5) However, "Even when software is not so protected, such violations are contrary to professional behavior. Copies of software should be made only with proper authorization. Unauthorized duplication of materials must not be condoned." (ACM, 1.5).

U.S. Intellectual Property Law

Beyond ethical codes, computing professionals must comply with a whole body of Federal law devoted to intellectual property. United States intellectual property law, through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, grants patents to inventions that meet the patentability requirements, meaning they are sufficiently novel, non-obvious, and useful. (United States Patent and Trademark Office). These patents consist of a bundle of exclusive rights, including the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the patented invention for the term of the patent. (Herman v. Youngstown Car Mfg. Co., 191 F. 579, 584-85, 112 CCA 185 (6th Cir. 1911)). A company wishing to use or sell the patented invention would have to get permission from the inventor, usually through a license. A company that uses a patented invention without a license is guilty of patent infringement. (35 U.S.C. § 271).

Apple's Patent War: Stifling Innovation or Promoting Economic Growth?

The gap between the theory of intellectual property patents and the practice of computer software development has created many opportunities for dispute. Nowhere is this gap more visible than in the field of mobile computing devices. Apple, Google, Microsoft, Samsung, and HTC, among many others, are currently involved in a web of costly patent infringement suits. Perhaps it is time to examine whether computer software patents fulfill their intended purpose of promoting technological innovation and economic growth

Through its high-quality, no-cost Android OS, Google allowed mobile phone hardware manufacturers to make a number of different smartphone models at an affordable price. Unlike Apple's iPhone and RIM's Blackberry line, which were up-market and targeted at specific segments, companies like Samsung and HTC, which did not have to recoup software development costs, offered smartphone models for the mid-market and even entry-level market.

The availability of so many different Anroid-based smartphones, one for each consumer segment, led to a very rapid and broad dissemination of smartphone devices in the mobile phone market. This dissemination familiarized the whole consumer base with smartphones and enlarging the mobile computing market considerably. Furthermore, this familiarity has even come back to help Apple by creating broader interest and anticipation for Apple's iPad tablet, which represents the next big growth channel for Apple, and for the mobile computing industry in general. (Newman).

The Android also promotes technological innovation because it is an open source platform. Open-source software means that software's source code, essentially its intellectual property, is freely available to the public. This allows computing professionals and hobbyists to modify the software for different purposes or even to make it more efficient. Such participation not only helps to train potential inventors, it also pushes the limits of the software itself, revealing hidden possibilities within the software.

Conclusion

The current patent law regime, and the intellectual framework in general, does not arise out of ethical considerations. After all, the concept of owning an idea runs counter to the collaborative spirit of science itself. Rather, it arises out of economic considerations, out of a desire for the economic growth created by technological innovation. When those patent rights threaten to inhibit economic growth instead of promoting it, it may be time to reevaluate the patent law regime.