This is even more shocking than at first glance - and I would say a rather strong indictment of the current business model. The USA has roughly 310M people and accounts for 9.7% of the pirated downloads cited in the article. On the other hand, Australia has ~22M, accounts for 10.1%. If you take the top 5 countries that are not the USA, (Australia, Canada, the UK, The Netherlands and Norway you account for 1/3 of the pirate copies. However as a population, those countries only represent 140m potential pirates. You are talking a roughly 6 times higher density in pirates per capita in these other 5 countries. Australia is over 15 times more dense!

You're going to have a hard time getting $150k from Rumblefish, exerting copyright over the content is not one of the 6 exclusive rights of copyright. The only IP scehme in the USA that deals with an affirmative right is trademark. Copyright in a work, does not guarantee the creator the right to freely distribute and exploit their own work. You might have an interference or fraud claim but you'll likely be limited to actual damages.

The problem here is with the DMCA scheme and the copyright framework. The incentives are setup to encourage youtube to restrict content and spend no effort refuting or investigating the claims of alleged content holders. If there were a better structure for falsely claiming ownership in cases like this through statutory fines and other penalties along with a better safe haven for the service providers you might get something more rational but as it is from YouTube's perspective once Bumblefish claims it's their content, YouTube has to decide if they want to go against Rumblefish's claims but if they do they are now no longer protected by the safe harbor and are exposed to the DMCA and Copyright statutory damages. Even if the user is right, YouTube is still exposed to costly litigation expenses and it's simply not in their interest to post the content.

This will only get worse with SOPA and it's progeny. Big content owners have clearly taken a shoot first, ask questions later stance online.

I came here to point out the stupid end of the summary, only to find it's the primary discussion point. Good job. Carry on.

Let me know when you find someone under 40 who uses a blackberry that isn't crammed down their throat against their will.

If that's true, why can I buy 100,000 battery cradles, camera add ons, cases, credit card readers, sushi makers and personal massager extensions for my iphone but there are barely any Android specific accessories besides a few cases and some carrier marketed dash/desk mounts. I'll tell you why. The Samsung Galaxy S II HD Prime XD Touch SDHC AMOLED+ Carbon Fibre Edition (tm) doesn't use the same peripherals as the Nexus Prime Squared Factorial 4. The iPhone 4 and 4s have given accessories manufacturers essentially 1 shape/interface with which to build an accessory for a potential market of 100m+ users.

Great Android selling phones do about 10% of a single iPhone model. There are 3 significant iPhone models still in the wild and 2 of them and 90+% of the volume are the same form factor. Is there a Moto Droid RAZR Deli Slicer 7.1 Kevlar port in your car? No, but my Elantra came with an iPhone dock (as does about 70% of US automobiles.)


If we can actually get to TFA! Shocker that a chip that has only been available in engineering samples is outpacing a chip that shipped in a device in March. So in other news, chips get faster over time? Shocked. Even if this were important (and it isn't) this is not a fair fight. All it does is give Apple a benchmark/target to aim for with the A6 or what ever it will be that they ship in the iPad 3 in about 3-4 months, which oh by the way, will be showing up about the same time that a device with this chip in it makes it to market too.

It's not just about chip speed. It's about battery life, user experience, polish, and efficiency. The quicker the Android licensees stops marketing their phones like they are hocking graphics cards in 2004 the sooner one of them will have an individual hit.

We have spent countless resources training people not to stick unknown USB keys they get in the mail into things. Now we have a huge userbase of idiots who are going to get a package in the mail with a USB key and be told to stick it in their car (legitimately). It's not a giant leap of faith or logic until somone repackages this into something that completely fucks with PC's or SmartPhones. Snearknet viruses return!

This actually has a name. Patent Thicket

Your Android phone was made in 1998?! Awesome. Do you have the Mr. Fusion mod for your Delorian or are you still stealing plutonium from the Libyans?

A movie prop is not prophetic enablement.

20 years from filing - earliest filing - even in a reissue.

Therefore, at most Feb 2018 or about 6 more years.

A reissue filed 10 years after issuance is only able to narrow the scope of patents.

You armchair patent lawyers sure love your hysteria in the morning. Switch to coffee.

I use mine incessently. Gaming/browsing/calling/texting both ways on a nearly 2 hour masstransit commute and often several hours at home while in front of the TV. Even with sporatic office usage thrown in, I get about 2 full days of use from an iPhone 4s. My Bluetooth radio is permanently on (though not always in use) and the wifi switches over when it's in range (I don't micromanage the radios). Just because your Dual Core 1.7GHz Samsung Galaxy S Prime Touch II FauxG S Platinum Edition with AMOLED5HD doesn't get the same performance doesn't mean that a phone has to be completely disabled to last more than 8 hours on a charge. This is something I struggled with coming from Android. I look at the spec sheet and see that the iPhone should be inferior, but the biggest advantage you get is that because it's not running extreme hardware it can last through a full day of even the most demanding use. The spec sheet is irrelevant when you are out of juice. I'm actually a little surprised that Apple hasn't gotten Justin Long and John Hodgeman to run an ad campaign on this fact alone.