3 ms·
Can anyone explain Google's rationale here? As I understand the US patent system, patent trolls can and do make these sorts of patent filings all the time, and
by Cpoll 9y ago
Can anyone explain Google's rationale here?
As I understand the US patent system, patent trolls can and do make these sorts of patent filings all the time, and the legitimacy doesn't matter, because their victims can't afford to defend themselves in court.
Isn't it irrational not to file patents like these?
Or is Google planning to use this patent "offensively?"
- jhall1468 9y agoGoogle has never used a patent offensively. Hell even Waymo was more about theft than patents. But HN turns rabid in these situations rather than understanding Google has to do this to prevent trolls from doing it.
- Sylphine 9y ago>Google has to do this to prevent trolls from doing it. So you believe that a company as powerful as Google deserves more consolidated power. No, thanks.I will stick with the possibility of getting sued by a troll than handing that power to Google.
- jhall1468 9y agoNo, but they've never used that power whereas trolls always use it for bad. The fact that you'd rather have a troll own it than Google is literally retarded. That's like advocating you'd prefer North Korea have nukes than the US, because the US already has too much power. Why would you rather be sued in real life over a theoretical fear? Is absurd.
- Sylphine 9y ago>theoretical fear Profit is always the bottom line. Google isn't some humanitarian project. Get your head out of the clouds.
- xorblurb 9y agoHN turns rabid, rightfully so. Even with so-called good motives, which are not even proven. And to be clear, in no way there can be a good motive here: their pledge is limited to Free and Open Source Software, its not even sure this pledge is binding, and EVEN if they really do limit their use of this patent (would have it been misattributed to Google by error), I don't think they would EVER pay the real inventor the value they gain from obtain from having it in their stockpile, even less if they do want to use it after another giant attack them.
- jhall1468 9y agoTheir history dictates their motives, and having never offensively used a patent as of the moment they clearly have good motives. You are attacking the player, not the game. Software patents shouldn't exist. But in reality they do, and as of this moment I would much rather Google own the patent than a troll.
- xorblurb 9y agoI will never ever buy the "we are forced to do evil things for the greater good" argument. Especially behind real inventors' back. You can't just dictate your own distorted ethical vision just because you are too big. Edit: plus I don't even give a shit if they limit their use of this patent to defend themselves against competitor claims. Clearly even in this limited case this patent still would have (a very good) value, so at least propose the REAL inventor to patent it and sell ultra limited right for that purpose for a few millions. Then this would be kind of ethical.
- puzzle 9y agoOnly Google can explain their rationale, but it's fairly safe to expect that they won't, at least until the whole application process is done. Your interpretation is one of the plausible scenarios here. It's one in which Google wins, whether they are granted the patent or not. The Polish researcher and his university don't agree, but perhaps they have never been on the receiving end of a patent lawsuit. Yes, I'm very, very jaded.
- wang_li 9y agoPeople keep saying defensive patent but it's more likely fattening their video codec patent portfolio. This helps them stay in the game in the future as part of industry patent pools/alliances.