[pcj]

What choice? Oh wait, you mean what kind of Ads you would receive :P?

On a serious note though, assume that you have a sandwich shop and your business is of course to sell sandwich (not free) and people flock to you for your tasty sandwiches. Now, if I open a Sandwich shop that gives away free sandwiches and it also tastes pretty much (close to 85%) like your sandwiches (say, i was inspired by your sandwiches, but i don't acknowledge publicly) and make money out of the numerous solicitors selling all kinds of things (you can decline to buy stuff, but they're always in-your-face) that are in and around my shop. Now, why would customers go to you if I sell the same (pretty much) sandwich for free?

Does it mean that I am a philanthropist because I give away free sandwiches to the people? And because I am doing a charity (technically), does it mean that you should not sue me?

That said, patent troll (like Lordsys) is entirely different issue. However, I don't think Apple has a choice here. It is trying to defend its business, and the only legal way it can do it is through these stupid patents.

Edit - Instead of just down-voting, why not elaborate?

[orangecat]

Does it mean that I am a philanthropist because I give away free sandwiches to the people?

No. It does mean that the people who choose to eat at your place are better off. Those who stay at the first shop probably are too, because competition will force them to improve their sandwiches. That's exactly how the free market is supposed to work.