4 ms·

They've got a hefty patent portfolio, but I can't think of a recent example of them using it to freeze everyone else out à la eInk. Of course, the barrier to en

They've got a hefty patent portfolio, but I can't think of a recent example of them using it to freeze everyone else out à la eInk. Of course, the barrier to entry into their market is so incredibly high that there would be only a small number of companies who'd actually be able to test that. The only instance of them really going after someone (over IP) that I can think of was in the 80s when Hitachi was pretty brazen in the way they were stealing source code. Very low effort, like: Step 1 - acquire from a subcontractor the entire source tree for IBM's current mainframe OS; Step 2 - sed s/IBM/Hitachi/g; Step 3 - package the OS with Hitachi mainframes sold in Japan. They got along famously though, after Hitachi lost the legal battle and started paying them a royalty for the rebadged OS. IBM does have a reputation for buying competitors in very niche areas, like process planning software, and then not doing anything with them except maybe parting them out several years later. It looks suspicious, but I think that is more to do with the way they stick to hyper-specialized enterprise solutions... the pickings are naturally very slim.

robinsoh 5y ago
> They've got a hefty patent portfolio, but I can't think of a recent example of them using it to freeze everyone else out à la eInk. I work in the display industry. I've never heard that e-ink "freezes everyone else out" from colleagues, coworkers or even gossip at conferences. Surely, if this was true we would have heard about it. Could you elaborate on your claim and if you experienced this? Please see my comment history to see why I keep asking about this.
- sennight 5y ago
  lol, I'm already familiar with you. I'm not really interested in generating billable hours for someone who behaves exactly as I'd expect a reputation management rep to. But I am curious to know if your script addresses this logical contradiction: Electrophoretic display technology has a barrier to entry that can be vaulted by anyone capable of standing up a moderately sophisticated light industrial facility. Electrophoretic display technology is so useful that E Ink Holdings Inc rationally leverages the legal protection of the USPO through a large number of patents to maximize profits. Electrophoretic display technology is so useless that consumer demand is only able to support a small number of manufacturers (who are able to demand very high prices).
  - robinsoh 5y ago
    Ok, if that's what you want to believe then I can't change your mind. It is pretty clear to me that this is equivalent to me as a display guy claiming Microsoft is blocking progress in operating system development just because they have a lot of patents and they maximize profits. I hope it is clear that I think this is not a valid argument. Also, I'd encourage you to live up to the spirit of HN and try to provide evidence instead of being rude to people who challenge your claims.
    - sennight 5y ago
      > It is pretty clear to me that this is equivalent to me as a display guy claiming Microsoft is blocking progress in operating system development... I'd need to have a very low opinion of a "display guy" to believe he was genuinely arguing in good faith, and in keeping with the spirit of HN (hallowed be its name), that the market forces an OS is subject to (like user training with regard to network effect) have any overlap with display hardware (which is unaffected by prior user uptake). Because anyone arguing that would have to be ignorant of both subjects... but why would such an ignorant person be so invested in white knighting a hardware company? Oh well, doesn't matter - my opinion was already arbitrarily settled upon for completely irrational reasons.
      - robinsoh 5y ago
        > a very low opinion of a "display guy > HN (hallowed be its name > white knighting You clearly have very high opinions of yourself and your belief system. It is clear you are unwilling to respond with facts when simple questions challenge your claims and react with hostility. I don't think there's any beneficial discussion possible going forward. Best of luck in your endeavours.

robinsoh 5y ago

> They've got a hefty patent portfolio, but I can't think of a recent example of them using it to freeze everyone else out à la eInk. I work in the display industry. I've never heard that e-ink "freezes everyone else out" from colleagues, coworkers or even gossip at conferences. Surely, if this was true we would have heard about it. Could you elaborate on your claim and if you experienced this? Please see my comment history to see why I keep asking about this.

sennight 5y ago
lol, I'm already familiar with you. I'm not really interested in generating billable hours for someone who behaves exactly as I'd expect a reputation management rep to. But I am curious to know if your script addresses this logical contradiction: Electrophoretic display technology has a barrier to entry that can be vaulted by anyone capable of standing up a moderately sophisticated light industrial facility. Electrophoretic display technology is so useful that E Ink Holdings Inc rationally leverages the legal protection of the USPO through a large number of patents to maximize profits. Electrophoretic display technology is so useless that consumer demand is only able to support a small number of manufacturers (who are able to demand very high prices).
- robinsoh 5y ago
  Ok, if that's what you want to believe then I can't change your mind. It is pretty clear to me that this is equivalent to me as a display guy claiming Microsoft is blocking progress in operating system development just because they have a lot of patents and they maximize profits. I hope it is clear that I think this is not a valid argument. Also, I'd encourage you to live up to the spirit of HN and try to provide evidence instead of being rude to people who challenge your claims.
  - sennight 5y ago
    > It is pretty clear to me that this is equivalent to me as a display guy claiming Microsoft is blocking progress in operating system development... I'd need to have a very low opinion of a "display guy" to believe he was genuinely arguing in good faith, and in keeping with the spirit of HN (hallowed be its name), that the market forces an OS is subject to (like user training with regard to network effect) have any overlap with display hardware (which is unaffected by prior user uptake). Because anyone arguing that would have to be ignorant of both subjects... but why would such an ignorant person be so invested in white knighting a hardware company? Oh well, doesn't matter - my opinion was already arbitrarily settled upon for completely irrational reasons.
    - robinsoh 5y ago
      > a very low opinion of a "display guy > HN (hallowed be its name > white knighting You clearly have very high opinions of yourself and your belief system. It is clear you are unwilling to respond with facts when simple questions challenge your claims and react with hostility. I don't think there's any beneficial discussion possible going forward. Best of luck in your endeavours.