7 ms·

Google Acquires Over 1,000 IBM Patents

142 points by rmrm 15y ago

andrewljohnson 15y ago
Anything in there acquired to defend themselves against Oracle?
- zizee 15y ago
  Or perhaps Apple.
- nextparadigms 15y ago
  Those object oriented programming and relational database ones perhaps.
- dredmorbius 15y ago
  You fail to understand. Patents are a mass weapon. You pursue an infringement claim against some small random sampling of patents in your portfolio. Challengee has the option of 1) paying your fee or 2) challenging the patents. Your average patent case cost is $3-$10 million. http://www.inventionstatistics.com/Patent_Litigation_Costs.html http://www.inventionstatistics.com/Patent_Litigation_Costs.h... Supposing you can invalidate the patents, challenger returns with another random sampling of patents.... Eventually you 1) go broke or 2) pay up. If the companies are evenly matched (or at least sufficiently that they could drain one another bloodless), they enter into a cross-licensing agreement. I don't see any mention of what Google paid for the 1000 patents, but this suggests a very friendly relationship between Mountain View and Armonk.
- rbanffy 15y ago
  And Apple, and Microsoft. I also see a couple things that could affect IDEs (Xcode and VS), SharePoint, Bing... "Now, Microsoft, about that racket you are running against Android phone manufacturers..."
51Cards 15y ago
Good for them. As much as I hate the software patent system, until it is fixed or eliminated it is a necessary evil for a large tech corporation. Tech patents are the nuclear arsenal of big tech business. I have my stockpile, you have your stockpile, and if we're relatively balanced we'll all just sit here because it's too dangerous to start throwing heat around. Google just picked up a nice set of silos for their defense.
- chocopuff 15y ago
  oh so it's good if Google's buying the patents? the hypocrisy.
  - glassx 15y ago
    I might get some down votes for that, but I really wonder when people will realize that Google is just a company, not a religion of sorts. (same applies to everyone else btw)
    - MrUnknown 15y ago
      I don't think people are taking them as a religion (at least I hope not). It is more along the lines that it seems the people at Google are still mostly trying to make the Internet and technology a better place rather than only worrying about profits. Of course, they do care about profits, but it isn't their only agenda. This is why Google owning the patents isn't a major deal. There is no history of using the patents to get rid of competitors or to make a quick buck. They pull them out of the closet to defend themselves from other patent lawsuits. I am certain that if Google started going after various companies over mundane patents, the view of them will change very quickly and you wouldn't see very many people defending them.
      - technoslut 15y ago
        Google, Apple & MS have all done good and bad. I'm still wondering why Google sided with Verizon against net neutrality. It certainly didn't seem like they were looking out for the best interests of the consumer. These companies are still businesses and, when faced with the choice of what is better for them or for the greater good, I expect them to choose themselves.
namank 15y ago
Not much they could have done after that Nortel incident. I do appreciate their sentiment: “We buy companies all the time — for both people and interesting technologies. This would have been north of $4 billion for none of those things. We were bidding on the right to stop people from innovating"
TheEskimo 15y ago
At this point software patents are broken beyond repair. The express purpose of patents is to encourage innovation. They're being used only to dampen innovation now. Why is that? The main reason is that patents, when created, are absurdly broad and often obvious and still accepted. Well over 90% of the existing software patents should have been denied as they're obvious ideas. There's a patent on backing up data online for heaven's sake. It's now to the point that anything you do on a computer will violate a patent somewhere. What's even worse than stupid patents is the money being paid for them. A collection of patents, most of which are useless, being bought for billions of dollars is stupid. That money could have gone into R&D, employee salary, etc any of which would have been better. And the worst part? The reason you should be able to buy a patent is so that you can produce new technology and software with the unique idea contained in it. Unfortunately, the patents don't see the light of day as software because they're bought; nothing in those patents is new to google. They're simple a defense against other patents. In the US the patent system is one of the most stupid and broken systems still functioning. Either patents need to be done in with altogether for software or the acceptance of them needs to only happen after significantly stricter review.
- zizee 15y ago
  And not only is it broken, but the US government insists on trying to spread the poison to other countries via the wonder of trade agreements.
- bad_user 15y ago
  No, what's even worse is that when a company pays billions of dollars for patents, they have to use them otherwise the investment is worthless. Google may have a no-evil policy on patents for the time being, but the future will be quite different. Microsoft also used to acquire patents for defensive purposes only. Look at them now.
  - SkyMarshal 15y ago
    Not necessarily. It's impossible to measure things like lawsuits that didn't happen as a result of buying a patent portfolio, but that doesn't mean the investment is worthless.
shmageggy 15y ago
"that has me wondering if Google has an interest in pursuing some new interests and innovations." The author should have presented some more compelling examples, then. The patents listed are incredibly far from new innovations, but rather just the same overly-broad and generic defensive fare.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
mrich 15y ago
This is huge for them, and also explains why they chose to stop bidding on the Nortel patents. This gives them big leverage against Oracle, who probably violate quite some patents with their hardware and also database business now, so cross licensing becomes possible. Same for Apple. IBM is happy to give some weapons to the Google "underdog" so that the "small" companies are busy fighting amongst themselves, while they themselves can't lose much. As others have noted, the patent system still sucks. But it is nice to see someone score a point who doesn't abuse it for maximum monetary gain and market share protection (hello Oracle, Apple).
fpgeek 15y ago
Am I correctly remembering that (prior to this) Google had something like 900 patents? If so, this more than doubling their patent portfolio, which sounds significant (though naturally patent quality from both technical and legal perspectives plays a much bigger role than the raw number of patents regardless).
- smackfu 15y ago
  For reference, IBM was awarded almost 6000 patents. In 2010. http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/33341.wss http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/33341.wss
known 15y ago
Is this acquisition related to Oracle's Java suit against Google?
- dredmorbius 15y ago
  The answer to that question would almost certainly be "yes". Or: duh.
beej71 15y ago
sigh Inevitable, of course, but I've always secretly hoped that Google would try to take the more risky high road and work to invalidate the whole software patent system, or at least hugely correct it (e.g. 2-year patent lifespan, or something). Maybe they still will, but their impetus to do so is diminished with every patent they acquire.
thorwawy99 15y ago
everyone knows patent reform will -likely- not happen/is not easy. sooo here's a _naive_ idea... why doesn't google take these patents, and offer them up for FREE to ANYONE as long as they are used IN DEFENSE of a patent attack? ...with the hope of others contributing patents to this pool for the same purpose? i would donate/license the patents i have to this pool... over time there could be enough patents in the pool to deter against almost any aggressor, effectively rendering the patent system useless and "reformed".

142 points by rmrm 15y ago

andrewljohnson 15y ago

Anything in there acquired to defend themselves against Oracle?

zizee 15y ago
Or perhaps Apple.
nextparadigms 15y ago
Those object oriented programming and relational database ones perhaps.
dredmorbius 15y ago
You fail to understand. Patents are a mass weapon. You pursue an infringement claim against some small random sampling of patents in your portfolio. Challengee has the option of 1) paying your fee or 2) challenging the patents. Your average patent case cost is $3-$10 million. http://www.inventionstatistics.com/Patent_Litigation_Costs.html http://www.inventionstatistics.com/Patent_Litigation_Costs.h... Supposing you can invalidate the patents, challenger returns with another random sampling of patents.... Eventually you 1) go broke or 2) pay up. If the companies are evenly matched (or at least sufficiently that they could drain one another bloodless), they enter into a cross-licensing agreement. I don't see any mention of what Google paid for the 1000 patents, but this suggests a very friendly relationship between Mountain View and Armonk.
rbanffy 15y ago
And Apple, and Microsoft. I also see a couple things that could affect IDEs (Xcode and VS), SharePoint, Bing... "Now, Microsoft, about that racket you are running against Android phone manufacturers..."

51Cards 15y ago

Good for them. As much as I hate the software patent system, until it is fixed or eliminated it is a necessary evil for a large tech corporation. Tech patents are the nuclear arsenal of big tech business. I have my stockpile, you have your stockpile, and if we're relatively balanced we'll all just sit here because it's too dangerous to start throwing heat around. Google just picked up a nice set of silos for their defense.

chocopuff 15y ago
oh so it's good if Google's buying the patents? the hypocrisy.
- glassx 15y ago
  I might get some down votes for that, but I really wonder when people will realize that Google is just a company, not a religion of sorts. (same applies to everyone else btw)
  - MrUnknown 15y ago
    I don't think people are taking them as a religion (at least I hope not). It is more along the lines that it seems the people at Google are still mostly trying to make the Internet and technology a better place rather than only worrying about profits. Of course, they do care about profits, but it isn't their only agenda. This is why Google owning the patents isn't a major deal. There is no history of using the patents to get rid of competitors or to make a quick buck. They pull them out of the closet to defend themselves from other patent lawsuits. I am certain that if Google started going after various companies over mundane patents, the view of them will change very quickly and you wouldn't see very many people defending them.
    - technoslut 15y ago
      Google, Apple & MS have all done good and bad. I'm still wondering why Google sided with Verizon against net neutrality. It certainly didn't seem like they were looking out for the best interests of the consumer. These companies are still businesses and, when faced with the choice of what is better for them or for the greater good, I expect them to choose themselves.

namank 15y ago

Not much they could have done after that Nortel incident. I do appreciate their sentiment: “We buy companies all the time — for both people and interesting technologies. This would have been north of $4 billion for none of those things. We were bidding on the right to stop people from innovating"

TheEskimo 15y ago

At this point software patents are broken beyond repair. The express purpose of patents is to encourage innovation. They're being used only to dampen innovation now. Why is that? The main reason is that patents, when created, are absurdly broad and often obvious and still accepted. Well over 90% of the existing software patents should have been denied as they're obvious ideas. There's a patent on backing up data online for heaven's sake. It's now to the point that anything you do on a computer will violate a patent somewhere. What's even worse than stupid patents is the money being paid for them. A collection of patents, most of which are useless, being bought for billions of dollars is stupid. That money could have gone into R&D, employee salary, etc any of which would have been better. And the worst part? The reason you should be able to buy a patent is so that you can produce new technology and software with the unique idea contained in it. Unfortunately, the patents don't see the light of day as software because they're bought; nothing in those patents is new to google. They're simple a defense against other patents. In the US the patent system is one of the most stupid and broken systems still functioning. Either patents need to be done in with altogether for software or the acceptance of them needs to only happen after significantly stricter review.

zizee 15y ago
And not only is it broken, but the US government insists on trying to spread the poison to other countries via the wonder of trade agreements.
bad_user 15y ago
No, what's even worse is that when a company pays billions of dollars for patents, they have to use them otherwise the investment is worthless. Google may have a no-evil policy on patents for the time being, but the future will be quite different. Microsoft also used to acquire patents for defensive purposes only. Look at them now.
- SkyMarshal 15y ago
  Not necessarily. It's impossible to measure things like lawsuits that didn't happen as a result of buying a patent portfolio, but that doesn't mean the investment is worthless.

shmageggy 15y ago

"that has me wondering if Google has an interest in pursuing some new interests and innovations." The author should have presented some more compelling examples, then. The patents listed are incredibly far from new innovations, but rather just the same overly-broad and generic defensive fare.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

mrich 15y ago

This is huge for them, and also explains why they chose to stop bidding on the Nortel patents. This gives them big leverage against Oracle, who probably violate quite some patents with their hardware and also database business now, so cross licensing becomes possible. Same for Apple. IBM is happy to give some weapons to the Google "underdog" so that the "small" companies are busy fighting amongst themselves, while they themselves can't lose much. As others have noted, the patent system still sucks. But it is nice to see someone score a point who doesn't abuse it for maximum monetary gain and market share protection (hello Oracle, Apple).

fpgeek 15y ago

Am I correctly remembering that (prior to this) Google had something like 900 patents? If so, this more than doubling their patent portfolio, which sounds significant (though naturally patent quality from both technical and legal perspectives plays a much bigger role than the raw number of patents regardless).

smackfu 15y ago
For reference, IBM was awarded almost 6000 patents. In 2010. http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/33341.wss http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/33341.wss

known 15y ago

Is this acquisition related to Oracle's Java suit against Google?

dredmorbius 15y ago
The answer to that question would almost certainly be "yes". Or: duh.

beej71 15y ago

sigh Inevitable, of course, but I've always secretly hoped that Google would try to take the more risky high road and work to invalidate the whole software patent system, or at least hugely correct it (e.g. 2-year patent lifespan, or something). Maybe they still will, but their impetus to do so is diminished with every patent they acquire.

thorwawy99 15y ago

everyone knows patent reform will -likely- not happen/is not easy. sooo here's a _naive_ idea... why doesn't google take these patents, and offer them up for FREE to ANYONE as long as they are used IN DEFENSE of a patent attack? ...with the hope of others contributing patents to this pool for the same purpose? i would donate/license the patents i have to this pool... over time there could be enough patents in the pool to deter against almost any aggressor, effectively rendering the patent system useless and "reformed".