Name a few things you consider to be inventions first to get the ball rolling.
For example, you could claim that nothing new in CMOS manufacturing exists because it’s all just the existing idea of a transistor. Or the transistor is just a quantum mechanic version of the vacuum tube. Or the vacuum tube just an electric version of the Babbage machine. Repeat for Internet vs packet switching.
Basically come up with a definition that doesn’t require a “I know it when I see it step” and I’ll easily fit many things Apple did in there unless it’s such a restrictive definition that no one invents anything.
“If I have seen futher, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants”
On some level, all invention is a novel arrangement of existing components. All the way down to the physics, if you're willing. So, does anyone "invent" anything?
But if we accept "patentable" as a proxy for "invented", then obviously Apple invents a lot.
But those of us who think the entire idea of "patentability" is a joke in and of itself.
All these fuzzy lines behind this "who invented what" is a major reason I consider patents to be evil -- the entire system sets up artificial and harmful barriers keeping ideas from fertilizing each other and growing beyond our wildest imaginations.
(And as someone who strongly dislikes all things Apple -- but not quite as much as all things Windows -- I cannot help but observe that both Apple and Microsoft simultaneously deserve both more and less acknowledgement, all depending on how one looks at things, for their inventiveness).
The alternative isn't some utopian free sharing of inventions. The alternative is tightly held trade secrets and lots of inventions dying with their inventors.
We had this system for most of human history. It sucked. A decade and a half of exclusivity is a fair trade to avoid it.
Software patents maybe shouldn’t exist as it didn’t for a very long time. Indeed, the way patents are actually written for software ends up with a convoluted mess trying to remain as generic as possible to cover all possible extensions of a core idea (and you can’t patent ideas). So while patents show a benefit, it’s pretty clear the current system in the US has a lot of flaws that need attention.
For example, you could claim that nothing new in CMOS manufacturing exists because it’s all just the existing idea of a transistor. Or the transistor is just a quantum mechanic version of the vacuum tube. Or the vacuum tube just an electric version of the Babbage machine. Repeat for Internet vs packet switching.
Basically come up with a definition that doesn’t require a “I know it when I see it step” and I’ll easily fit many things Apple did in there unless it’s such a restrictive definition that no one invents anything.
“If I have seen futher, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants”