> I always thought of you as a guy who’d say, “Well, copy me if you can, because you’re copying what I did years ago, and what I’m working on now is EVEN cooler!” I like it when competitors copy me because it means they aren’t about to leapfrog me: they’ll always be playing catch-up.
>
> If Apple becomes a company that uses its might to quash competition instead of using its brains, it’s going to find the brainiest people will slowly stop working there. You know this, you watched it happen at Microsoft. Enforcing patents isn’t a good long-term play: it’s the beginning of the end of the creative Apple we both love.
via [wilshipley.com](http://wilshipley.com/blog/2010/03/open-letter-to-steve-jobs-concerning.html)
This is all nice, Hippy sentiment. But Apple lives in the real world, with lawyers and stockholders.
I’m not a fan of Apple stifling competition via litigation, either. But I’m not naive enough to think that these things are never necessary. And I don’t presume to understand all the legal implications. Apple needed to go down this route at this particular time for some reason. Otherwise, it wouldn’t risk the obvious negative PR.
Our patent system is definitely broken. But that doesn’t mean that Apple should have to play with one arm tied behind its back while everyone else stomps all over them.
