Opinion: Google Allo's whisper/shout feature needs to be stolen by everyone

Exactly:http://www.phonearena.com/news/Its-not-stealing-when-Apple-does-it-because-it-wasnt-stealing-when-Google-did-it-either_id44030

For a website that doesn't care about who did things first (according to your post) your history of articles show something else. http://www.phonearena.com/news/Galaxy-S6-to-look-a-lot-like-iPhone-6-come-with-5.1-display-and-sealed-polymer-battery_id65573 http://www.phonearena.com/news/Oppos-latest-iPhone-clone-packs-a-hi-spec-selfie-camera_id79939/comments/page/2 http://www.phonearena.com/image.php?m=Articles.Images&f=name&id=68873 http://www.phonearena.com/news/Heres-how-Samsung-never-copies-Apple...-Not_id22518 Ohhhh i can go on for hours. You guys are so butt hurt when it's the other way around. You see in my world it would be totally okay. I just find it amazing that it's only OK when it's not apple who is being copied....

Hello, Michael? What do you say about these?

Beautifully worded. +1 to you good sir.

I agree 90% with you and that is why I find it funny that I can read all these articles about others using apple stuff and how they get copied. If iphonearena really think that great ideas should be on all devices, why all these articles saying that this or that brand copied apple.....

All this is right bruh! But then people still say apple and ONLY apple innovates, others just copy from them which is pure BS! The fact is that all these years, it is being doing catching up business from Android and Sammy. The first time that a lawsuit has been filed by Apple on Sammy is when the layman thought apple innovates and that opinion has still remained as such. This needs to be changed, wonder if Android/Sammy haven't filed any patents as there have been many cases of Apple copying features from both of them causing a potential infringement.

But Apple was the only company on earth that tied to sue peopel over things they copied from someone else. This is afact you simply can't deny. Or you can, and you would be foolish to do so. What you said is correct within itself. But you are still leaving out the most important difference. Stealing vs copying. Copying is not illegal, unless it is OWNED by someone else. Then it becomes STEALING. Copying and idea and making it better, doesn't give you a right to ry to won it. After all if it could be owned, it would have been. Apple's trade-dresss has been seen on a multitude of products. Including Samsung's own Photo Frame. http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/21773_Samsung_Picture_Frame_v_iPad.png The concept of usage is not relevant. The concept of the look is what is relevant. Cover the iPad's home button with black take and it looks nearly 100% identical. As does the original Galaxy S to the iPhone. But anyone who claims that any other Galaxy S looks like an iPhone is purely blind and stupid. ON PURPOSE! Copying is not required for progress, it simply makes progression faster. To make the wheel better, you don't have to reinvent the wheel and the fact is you can't. But you can improve the concept much easier and faster because you don't have to re-invent. But that doesn't mean though, that in making YOUR wheel, that you have the right to steal someone owns. Example. Look At Apple's Wireless Sync. Wireless Sync is not a new technology. In fact wireless sync has been done on smartphones for years. Read this artuce -http://www.pcworld.com/article/229993/Did_Apple_Steal_Cydia_Developer_Wi_Fi_Sync_App.html What this kid made, could not be patented because his concept was not novel or non-obvious. He simply made it so you can do it with iTunes over WiFi which was a feature Apple did not have. Now the kid took it to Apple and offered it to them and they said no. So he made his app available on Cydia. Because it can't be patented, Apple stole it and use it. Even stole it down to using the same icon. They stole, this isn't copying. Copying would be making somethign similar. This was pure theft. Look at these photos (since the video is now gone) of XiAO i Robothttps://www.google.com/search?q=xiao+i+robot&biw=1920&bih=955&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi7ybu3v-bMAhWF7CYKHXr3ClEQ_AUICCgD#imgdii=BLHGqKrH8mObvM%3A%3BBLHGqKrH8mObvM%3A%3BwqO9siPw4CO9wM%3A&imgrc=BLHGqKrH8mObvM%3A It looks a lot like Siri? Why? Because Apple stole their UI for the I Robot and made Siri look just like it. If you saw Siri as an App, it was not quite like what the end results was of Apple's end product. Until YOU and other understand the true difference of STEALING and COPYING, then you just won't get it. I cannot walk into a library and just copy all the pages out of a book and then just make minor changes to the book and sell it under my own name. Why? Because the material in books is COPYRIGHTED...

cont'd - If I use it in such a way, then that makes it STEALING, even though I did copy it. Copying is making something look like something else. Hwoever, it si not copying is the design is require for function. All car tires look the same, because it is a required design for its function. Sure you can make some cosmetic changes, but the concept is what it is. Its why all computers and phones look the same because the form factor controls the identity as something that will look and feel this way. All you can do is make some cosmetic changes so they aren't 100% identical. The original Galaxy S yes looks a-lot like the original iPhone. But it isn't 100% identical. But even if it was, it wouldn't be stealing because Apple doesn't own that design of shape or look. It is a design that has existed on other products. All Apple did was make it smaller. That doesn't make it theirs. This is what all Apple-Fanatics and PA writers have it wrong. None of them understand the difference of copying and stealing. Copy is not illegal nor is it a crime. Stealing is both. Apple did both. They copied and they stole.