4 ms·

They're "the victim" of patents only because they have chosen to pursue a pattern of willfully infringing on competing companies patents.

by Steko 15y ago

slackerIII 15y ago
How do you know it is willful? That is an important word when it comes to patent infringement.
- kenjackson 15y ago
  I think willful infringement will play a large role in this Oracle case. For that case, we'll probably know over the next year if it was willful.
- Steko 15y ago
  I don't claim to know anything. I assumed it's willful because it's been a repeated pattern of behavior and because of the full court propaganda press they have been making against patents.
  - hn_decay 15y ago
    This is an incredible claim. Do you realize that Apple and Microsoft are being sued constantly as well?
    - Steko 15y ago
      I don't know what's incredible about it. That a company that copies things might infringe patents? Do I realize that Apple infringes patents? Yes. Are you aware that Apple doesn't cry about how it's the end of the world and we're all going to have to pay more for the next iphone because they had to write Nokia a check for Nokia's previous and substantial innovations to mobile?
      - kelnos 15y ago
        That a company that copies things might infringe patents? Wow, seems like you have a pretty big bias here. That hurts your argument quite a bit. Are you aware that Apple doesn't cry about how it's the end of the world and we're all going to have to pay more for the next iphone because they had to write Nokia a check for Nokia's previous and substantial innovations to mobile? It's one thing to license a patent filed and wielded in good faith. Google already does that as well for lots of patents. It's quite another to collude with other companies to buy up huge patent portfolios for the sole purpose of extorting your competitors and stifling competition. That's what Apple/MS/etc. appear to be doing here. Obviously I can't speak to their motivations with authority, but that's how it looks from the outside.
        Steko 15y ago
        "It's quite another to collude with other companies to buy up huge patent portfolios for the sole purpose of extorting your competitors and stifling competition.." Wait I'm biased but according to you, Apple is using this for the sole purpose of extortion? Come off of it. Back here in the real world Apple has probably paid out many times more in patent suits then it has or will collect any time soon. Why can't Apple be using these defensively as well?
        kelnos 15y ago
        Maybe they are, but I'm more concerned with their primary purpose, and the "everyone vs. Google" setup of the bid-teaming seems to point to the offensive nature as primary.
ori_b 15y ago
I'd like to challenge you to point to a single nontrivial piece of software that doesn't infringe on someone's patents. I'd submit that it's nearly impossible.
- Steko 15y ago
  Untrue by inspection. Patents have a life of 20 years, software written over 20 years ago not all trivial. Totally irrelevant to the current conversation. No one thinks all patents are good or valid. Contrast with what Google does: (1) copy exactly what the leader does as close as possible, (2) not license any of the innovations we're copying and (3) push propoganda that any patents we might walk over are "bogus".
  - ori_b 15y ago
    Sorry, what is untrue by inspection? It is a fact that nearly all software infringes at least some patents. I do not believe I could write any significant program that was entirely patent free. As a result, I would say that I believe every software company is "willfully infringing patents". After all, they chose to ship software instead of spending years and thousands of dollars in a combination of patent discovery and crippling their software to avoid patents. As far as walking over patents -- Google is being sued less than many other major players at this point: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/5061246255_45a015568b.jpg http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/5061246255_45a015568b.jp...
    - Steko 15y ago
      "I do not believe I could write any significant program that was entirely patent free." Well that's a different claim then you made earlier. At any rate as I said above I don't think Google is just infringing on silly, obvious and clearly invalid patents. I think they willfully infringe on clear, major innovations.
      - ori_b 15y ago
        Can you point to a clear, major innovation software innovation that they are currently being sued for? I can't think of any. I'm also not seeing the difference between "It's nearly impossible to write a nontrivial program that doesn't infringe patents" and "I do not believe I could write any significant program that was entirely patent free."

They're "the victim" of patents only because they have chosen to pursue a pattern of willfully infringing on competing companies patents.

by Steko 15y ago

They're "the victim" of patents only because they have chosen to pursue a pattern of willfully infringing on competing companies patents.

slackerIII 15y ago

How do you know it is willful? That is an important word when it comes to patent infringement.

kenjackson 15y ago
I think willful infringement will play a large role in this Oracle case. For that case, we'll probably know over the next year if it was willful.
Steko 15y ago
I don't claim to know anything. I assumed it's willful because it's been a repeated pattern of behavior and because of the full court propaganda press they have been making against patents.
- hn_decay 15y ago
  This is an incredible claim. Do you realize that Apple and Microsoft are being sued constantly as well?
  - Steko 15y ago
    I don't know what's incredible about it. That a company that copies things might infringe patents? Do I realize that Apple infringes patents? Yes. Are you aware that Apple doesn't cry about how it's the end of the world and we're all going to have to pay more for the next iphone because they had to write Nokia a check for Nokia's previous and substantial innovations to mobile?
    - kelnos 15y ago
      That a company that copies things might infringe patents? Wow, seems like you have a pretty big bias here. That hurts your argument quite a bit. Are you aware that Apple doesn't cry about how it's the end of the world and we're all going to have to pay more for the next iphone because they had to write Nokia a check for Nokia's previous and substantial innovations to mobile? It's one thing to license a patent filed and wielded in good faith. Google already does that as well for lots of patents. It's quite another to collude with other companies to buy up huge patent portfolios for the sole purpose of extorting your competitors and stifling competition. That's what Apple/MS/etc. appear to be doing here. Obviously I can't speak to their motivations with authority, but that's how it looks from the outside.
      - Steko 15y ago
        "It's quite another to collude with other companies to buy up huge patent portfolios for the sole purpose of extorting your competitors and stifling competition.." Wait I'm biased but according to you, Apple is using this for the sole purpose of extortion? Come off of it. Back here in the real world Apple has probably paid out many times more in patent suits then it has or will collect any time soon. Why can't Apple be using these defensively as well?
        kelnos 15y ago
        Maybe they are, but I'm more concerned with their primary purpose, and the "everyone vs. Google" setup of the bid-teaming seems to point to the offensive nature as primary.

ori_b 15y ago

I'd like to challenge you to point to a single nontrivial piece of software that doesn't infringe on someone's patents. I'd submit that it's nearly impossible.

Steko 15y ago
Untrue by inspection. Patents have a life of 20 years, software written over 20 years ago not all trivial. Totally irrelevant to the current conversation. No one thinks all patents are good or valid. Contrast with what Google does: (1) copy exactly what the leader does as close as possible, (2) not license any of the innovations we're copying and (3) push propoganda that any patents we might walk over are "bogus".
- ori_b 15y ago
  Sorry, what is untrue by inspection? It is a fact that nearly all software infringes at least some patents. I do not believe I could write any significant program that was entirely patent free. As a result, I would say that I believe every software company is "willfully infringing patents". After all, they chose to ship software instead of spending years and thousands of dollars in a combination of patent discovery and crippling their software to avoid patents. As far as walking over patents -- Google is being sued less than many other major players at this point: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/5061246255_45a015568b.jpg http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/5061246255_45a015568b.jp...
  - Steko 15y ago
    "I do not believe I could write any significant program that was entirely patent free." Well that's a different claim then you made earlier. At any rate as I said above I don't think Google is just infringing on silly, obvious and clearly invalid patents. I think they willfully infringe on clear, major innovations.
    - ori_b 15y ago
      Can you point to a clear, major innovation software innovation that they are currently being sued for? I can't think of any. I'm also not seeing the difference between "It's nearly impossible to write a nontrivial program that doesn't infringe patents" and "I do not believe I could write any significant program that was entirely patent free."