My Steve Jobs remark was inspired by the criticism of Musk’s lack of patents with his name on them. But it turns out the iPhone patent has two names on it, and one of them is Steve Jobs. So yes, I guess Jobs would fare better under some of these criticisms.
For some reason I thought Jobs was just an idea guy, not the actual engineer. I even watched both movies about him, even the shitty one, so I’m not sure why I had that impression. (Not that I remember either movie.)
No, that guy was, as we’d say in South Africa, a chop. If anything, that bit of wasteful, self-aggrandizing performance was a great indicator of the real Elon. Nothing cool about it.
Cite for that patent please? I’d think the iPhone has many, many dozens of patents.
I would bet it is a design patent: for the shape of the device or somesuch. Not a utility patent. Design patents are kind of jokes - they carry little weight and are easily overturned.
*son of patent lawyer
Let’s be fair here. Elon is probably responsible for how the Cybertruck looks.
…yeah, I didn’t really know where that was going when I wrote it, either.
That was the Google answer, but now it’s not giving me that answer anymore. It says there’s 14 other names, but Jobs is one of them.
I can’t remember the exact wording I searched for; something like “does Steve Jobs have the patent on the original iPhone.”
Your point is sound, though. I have no idea if it’s a technical patent or a design patent. I am completely ignorant of patent law.
EDIT: Found it, the Google answer was quoting the beginning of this article, which discourse will also now do, and which I misinterpreted:
I misread that as there being only two inventors. The “just” threw me.
Thanks for digging!!
You’ll note that it was a design patent, not utility, right? It’s still an accomplishment to get that sort of recognition from the US patent office. And… there’s bazillions of non-Apple devices that look like an iPhone 
There’s probably highly technical to-the-millimeter non-infringing answers to that patent!
I do now, actually, but I didn’t at the time. When I said ignorant, I meant that I was not even aware there was a distinction between design and technical patents. Ignorance successfully fought.
It even says right there in what was my Google answer that it’s talking about a patent for “design.” I didn’t realize the word had a specific meaning in this context.
Don’t be shamed, intellectual property isn’t that complex but there are a lot subtleties!
(Insert “shocked” / “not shocked” poll here.)
My one patent application had my name on it (as the designer), the person who did a lot of directed technical work for me, and the company executive who came up with and funded the idea. Hard to say what that means.
My thoughts regarding space X is that given that it is a private company with no oversight and no insight into the financial’s, people are putting a lot more into it in terms of belief than is necessarily justified.
The idea that space X is somehow immune from the same managerial problems that are besetting Tesla, Twitter and other Nusk properties… I don’t necessarily know if that’s more reality or hope… but I feel it’s hope.
Eh, I believe it’s more a matter of: the rockets do go up, the booster stages mostly land, the orbiters do orbit and do ferry crews regularly, and the stupid car is somewhere in deep nowhere. Meanwhile both SLS/Orion and Boeing Starliner went past schedule and budget, and Bezos and Branson had short joyrides. So even if only by comparison that looks like success to the outside observer.
Those Apple design patents are rather infamous and gained design patents in general a little more respect because they ultimately resulted in a judgment against Samsung of hundreds of millions of dollars. (After many court cases including a Supreme Court decision).
The Soviet Union stated a no first use policy in 1982 but no one took is seriously. The US has never had any such policy.
It means the patent is on shaky ground. If the list of inventors on a patent is not correct, it can invalidate the patent.
Patents: The Difference Between Ownership vs Inventorship (kaufholdpatentgroup.com)
Ok, granted. And perhaps SpaceX has one or more walls of management which shield the larger firm from their tempestuous boss. And, of all the Musk companies, it’s the one I would invest in (more of a “I want this to work” investment, tbf), but I would breathe easier as an investor when he finally walks away/retires/sells/whatever.
Investing wise, I’m pretty much a Graham and Dodd guy* who likes to read the financials. However I also don’t discount the effectiveness of good, proper management. Unfortunately, I can’t find out the first, and have reservations about the guy on top, so I’m just going to hope it works and, if the stock goes public, I might throw $10k at a block of SpaceX, which I would never do for Twitter or Tesla.
*Which is hard to do in a world where equity valuations have little to do with corporate financials.
You’re right, I’d forgotten that Apple really broke new ground for defending their design patents on the iPhone.
Please forgive me if this is an inappropriate post for this thread but I very much want to like and use Post as a twitter alternative. But that site is maddening to use with all of its current bugs. Too many to list in an Elmo-bashing thread.
That is nuts! I wonder how long it will be before enough people have left the platform to turn it into nothing but troll central?
If it’s trolls all the way down, what happens after that? Trolls go where the victims are. If there’s no one to troll except other trolls, what then?
Although the function of Twitter as a publishing platform on the wider internet probably would allow Twitter to continue for the sole function of trolling the media and the public, like 4chan with none of the charm.