4 ms·

>Consistent attribution of the motives applied to Microsoft would have all the competitors as evil doers. Fixed that. You can apply the same reasoning to ever

by cube13 15y ago

>Consistent attribution of the motives applied to Microsoft would have all the competitors as evil doers. Fixed that. You can apply the same reasoning to every single company that made a bid for the pool, including Google. They shouldn't be singled out as the lone "non-evil" party here. Google was most likely licensing some of the 4G tech from Nortel as well. Getting the patents in their pool, even if Google wouldn't use the patents offensively, would save them a boatload of cash.

brudgers 15y ago
Of course Google shouldn't be singled out, they're just like any other company only more so. And of course there was no substantial evidence in the article that Google would refrain from using the patents offensively had they acquired them. In the context of the article Google's motives for bidding were attributed to nobility of purpose, a disinterest in the offensive use of patents and purity of heart - o.k. maybe not purity of heart.