Companies design water pistols and patent the designs. Apple spends millions rethinking the design of the laptop and is promptly imitated (badly) by every other company in the business and gets no benefit.

I think that innovators feel they are entitled to protect their ideas from thieves. (Just as Nokia probably feels about all the GSM innovation it has done that Google and Apple take for granted.) Sometimes the law backs Apple up, sometimes not. But I don't think it's "panic" so much as an emotional, visceral response (insofar as corporations are capable of such) to doing brilliant work and having it simply copied or stolen.

I can appreciate that point of view. Evolution of technology, to me, as a consumer, is much more important.

Apple is one of few companies that are worth copying. I feel that we all benefit in the long term when manufacturers of technology must one-up each other, especially if in order to compete they are forced to raise the bar. You can kinda think of Apple as an incubator of evolutionary technology and design, if you will.

Google is probably Apple's only real competitor when we talk about quality and design. Others may try to copy Apple's designs or technology but I've yet to see the same quality.

Look at the iPhone, for example. Multitasking done right. Folders done right. While other manufacturers were adding these features immediately and doing things status quo, Apple had real-world examples of what to avoid and made those features better while highlighting why they were better.

I think getting involved with these lawsuits serve only as a distraction to their core philosophies. I'm concerned that Apple's shareholders will start seeing these lawsuits as personal victories and demand they are carried out as they see fit.