Does that make you angry?

No. Why do you ask?

it makes me angry, just bs on all levels, apple gets away with way worse and Microsoft gets this drama.

Well he does make a good point, budget. You have a lot of free reign on the PC vs. Apple.

It is complete BS, that is true, and I don't understand why Apple is not brought up on this same issue. Most likely it's because Windows is a lot more prominent compared to Mac OS, so it makes them a bigger target,

lol Gosh you folk think your selves techy experts.

Lets go why Microsoft were dealt such a bill.

1. Microsoft is not Apple.
2. Microsoft is open platform with no limits with who develops for it. (Though it is not an open source OS)
3. Microsoft has the largest percentage of the PC market still.
4. Microsoft signed licences, deals and treaties ensuring that they would not monopolies the PC market in front of the EU board and many other governments.
5. Microsoft products are too well engrained into the computer world to be ban or limited by the EU.
6. Microsoft complies with EU to ensure their products are not banned.
7. Microsoft OS are for is used in medical, military, scientific, personnel, government e.t.c. uses.

Why doesn't Apple get the boot up the backside?

1. Apple software and hardware are sold under Apple trademark name.
2. Apple is closed system OS. Allowing only developers to create content for their systems.
3. Apple DO NOT SELL their hardware or software to other parties.
4. Apple legal documentation states that the companies position with its built-in software are part of the Mac core experience.
5. Apple is sold for its experience, professional and high quality built in software.
6. PC to Mac definitions between each have existed since the 70's.
7. Apple computers are for personnel use and not for medical, military, scientific use e.t.c.

You add these all up you get.

= Apple are completely fine with their layout because its what you paid for.

= Microsoft hold no ground to back track on deals and treaties they have signed into.

Breaking the rules result in the above article.

You were kind of ranting there, I may have misread though.

I was ranting, yes. But I'm not angry. More like I just dont understand how law can pick and choose whom the rules are for.

on a side note:I had written another rant but deleted it and just wrote this side note, lol

Fair enough.

they just want to make money off of spilled milk.
I want to know where this money would go.

it would probably line the pocket of the corrupt and not a cent would go to the people who were "victims".

Irony in the patents is Apple still has every right to peruse individual companies who breach the rounded corners and coloured shapes with pic in them.

Why?

If it hasn't occurred to you as yet. Some words, characters combinations, colours, typography, art and objects are some of the items patented by companies.

What's your proof? Your talking rubbish.

Here's a few examples.

AT&T = Character combination
MacDonald = Typography, Colour and word.
Sony = Typography and word
Coke Cola = Colour, typography and word.
Virgin = Word.
Starbucks = Typography, image and layout.
Audi = Image or four rings interlinked.
Olympics = 5 rings interlinked
Visa = Colours and word.
World Wildlife Fund = Mono panda image
Kitchen Aid Mixture Product = Design, layout and function.
Word = single word patented.

You can say its unfair for Apple to do what they do. You can always go out tomorrow and make products which breach any of the above and expect a lawsuit in the post the next day.

For starters, That was a tongue in cheek comment - ie: A joke. I'm sure you must know what that is.

2ndly those are Logos for companies that DEFINE who they are via color, typography and layout. That DOES NOT, nor SHOULD IT, include making a rectangle and rounding the edges of it or some crappy little music note icon does not define or scream Apple product.

3rdly, I wasn't talking to you anyway.

Someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed. Now I know why u call your self crazay.