5 ms·

I'm not sure how to say this without coming across as incendiary, but what the hell? Is Gruber utterly oblivious to the horrible state of software patents and t

by cheald 15y ago

I'm not sure how to say this without coming across as incendiary, but what the hell? Is Gruber utterly oblivious to the horrible state of software patents and their abuses? Is he actually condoning the abominable software patents that every other sane developer despises? Yes, Google is trying to ward off being picked to death by a myriad of utterly worthless (in the market, not legal sense) patents. Yes, Google is likely in violation of several thousand patents with Android, and all of its other software products. Guess what? So is damn near every other developer on the face of the planet, but Google has a big fat target painted on their back because of Android's success. They would be crazy to not try to acquire a defensive patent portfolio. I'll guarantee you that I violated a good half-dozen patents in the course of my absolutely routine work today. That doesn't mean that I'm a mean nasty violator out to undermine free enterprise, it means that software patents suck. Apple and Microsoft have both proven that they will use these garbage patents offensively to drive competitors out of the market, and Google is left in the position of "acquire means of mutually assured destruction to protect ourselves with or die by horribly broken patent law". Which do you think is the sane and responsible course of action?

bonch 15y ago
Brad Smith of Microsoft posted this on Twitter: "Google says we bought Novell patents to keep them from Google. Really? We asked them to bid jointly with us. They said no." I think this is just more of Google's double-standards. I think they use issues like this to drum up support from the techie crowds, just like when they talk about openness in spite of bundling Adobe Flash in Chrome or withholding Android source. They know software patents are a big issue on sites like this, and so portraying themselves as the underdog victim is very convenient and beneficial for them. Literally the only thing Google supporters have in response is to say that they haven't seen Google sue anybody yet, and so therefore Google never will and their motives are benign. I guess if you're willing to put all your trust into gigantic advertising corporations, that feels like a valid viewpoint to take, but not for me.
fpgeek 15y ago
You're absolutely right. Here's (yet another) example of Hacker News violating one of Apple's patents (as asserted against HTC): http://www.google.com http://www.google.com
ddrmaxgt37 15y ago
i think you missed the point.
pkamb 15y ago
"No one other than Nathan Myrvold and his cronies sees the U.S. patent system as functioning properly, but Google’s hypocrisy here is absurd. Google isn’t arguing against a handful of never-should-have-been-issued software patents. They’re not arguing against patent trolls like Myrvold and his shell companies like Lodsys — companies that have no products of their own, no actual inventions, just patents for ideas for products." - Gruber
- cheald 15y ago
  That one line doesn't really discount the tone of the whole rest of the post. Google supporters claim that Google only wants to use patents defensively. But what exactly does Google need to defend against, if not actual patents Android actually violates? - Also Gruber. The implication is that these are legitimate, unassailable patents that Google has ripped off in some nefarious scheme to steal Apple's good ol' homegrown American hard work. Software patents are a severe problem that are retarding innovation and progress, not helping it, and to imply that Google is hypocritical because they wanted the patents, then railed against them is intellectually dishonest. Google's extremely obvious goal is to protect itself and its products from the abuses of the patent system. For Gruber to pooh-pooh their actions like that is effectively a means of condoning those patents - and software patents as a whole - as legitimate and worth protecting. I'll guarantee you that if it were Google holding the patent gun to Apple's head, and Apple were to post a similar PR statement after a failed bid to acquire said patents, he wouldn't be singing the same tune.
  - tomerico 15y ago
    The implication is that these are legitimate, unassailable patents that Google has ripped off in some nefarious scheme to steal Apple's good ol' homegrown American hard work I would argue that android "borrowed" a lot from Apple, and that the iPhone was truly innovative in many ways. The question whether they copied too much, or whether Apple's idea were innovative in the first place is what the Patent system is trying to answer. There is little doubt the current patent system is a big mess. But I see opposing the idea software patents in the same light as opposing patents in general. It is likely that allowing companies to copy everything is good for consumers (at least in the short term), and increases competition. The question is where you put the line, for example - if Android was an exact copy of iOS, would you still say that it should be permitted?
petervandijck 15y ago
Amen. EVERYONE violates patents when writing software, even a simple web app. Be sure of it. The best defense (I've been told by laywers) is NOT to look up possible patents, so at least you can say you didn't know if you ever get sued. It's a strange world. Google is totally doing the right thing.
technoslut 15y ago
I don't think that Gruber was making a case for software patents. He has said in the past that he doesn't believe in them. His argument seemed to be that instead of Google lobbying to rid the world of software patents, they seemed to be playing the same game as MS, Apple & Oracle by bidding on the Nortel patents. It doesn't help Google's case that they're an investor in Intellectual Ventures as well. He makes an interesting point that if software patents are valid then why should these other companies allow Google to use it and give away Android for free to undermine their own business. It's all the more reason that the patent system needs to be reformed but it will never happen because there are too many powerful people involved that don't want to see it happen.
- hn_decay 15y ago
  I don't think that Gruber was making a case for software patents. But he was. He is arguing that only a small handful of patents -- those used to attack Apple and/or app store developers -- are the problem with the patent system. That is directly in the section quoted. His argument seemed to be that instead of Google lobbying to rid the world of software patents, they seemed to be playing the same game as MS, Apple & Oracle by bidding on the Nortel patents. Google is essentially the bitch of the patent world right now, simply because they're a younger company and a land claim occurred. They can both appeal for changes -- which that very blog entry does in droves -- while preparing for the reality that nothing is going to change overnight. Google will likely acquire a lot of ammunition (the IBM purchase puts them in a very interesting position relative to Oracle, threatening Oracle's entire platform), make life painful for its competitors, and then will be in a position to call for change without everyone declaring, as they are now, that it is merely convenience.
  - kenjackson 15y ago
    Google is essentially the bitch of the patent world right now, simply because they're a younger company and a land claim occurred. I think the real problem with Google is they're using open source technology. This makes yout a lot more susceptible to patent lawsuits. Back when I used to control patent budgets one of our rules was that things we patented had to be discoverable. That is, if someone infringed, but it was hard to prove, it wasn't worth spending the money on a patent. Just keep it a trade secret. With Android everything is available by just looking at the source code repository. With iOS, WebOS, WP, and RIM, you have to do a fair bit more sleuthing to see if they're actually infringing.
shabble 15y ago
I'll give a cookie to the first person to find me a patent that Markdown infringes :p

by cheald 15y ago

bonch 15y ago

Brad Smith of Microsoft posted this on Twitter: "Google says we bought Novell patents to keep them from Google. Really? We asked them to bid jointly with us. They said no." I think this is just more of Google's double-standards. I think they use issues like this to drum up support from the techie crowds, just like when they talk about openness in spite of bundling Adobe Flash in Chrome or withholding Android source. They know software patents are a big issue on sites like this, and so portraying themselves as the underdog victim is very convenient and beneficial for them. Literally the only thing Google supporters have in response is to say that they haven't seen Google sue anybody yet, and so therefore Google never will and their motives are benign. I guess if you're willing to put all your trust into gigantic advertising corporations, that feels like a valid viewpoint to take, but not for me.

fpgeek 15y ago

You're absolutely right. Here's (yet another) example of Hacker News violating one of Apple's patents (as asserted against HTC): http://www.google.com http://www.google.com

ddrmaxgt37 15y ago

i think you missed the point.

pkamb 15y ago

"No one other than Nathan Myrvold and his cronies sees the U.S. patent system as functioning properly, but Google’s hypocrisy here is absurd. Google isn’t arguing against a handful of never-should-have-been-issued software patents. They’re not arguing against patent trolls like Myrvold and his shell companies like Lodsys — companies that have no products of their own, no actual inventions, just patents for ideas for products." - Gruber

cheald 15y ago
That one line doesn't really discount the tone of the whole rest of the post. Google supporters claim that Google only wants to use patents defensively. But what exactly does Google need to defend against, if not actual patents Android actually violates? - Also Gruber. The implication is that these are legitimate, unassailable patents that Google has ripped off in some nefarious scheme to steal Apple's good ol' homegrown American hard work. Software patents are a severe problem that are retarding innovation and progress, not helping it, and to imply that Google is hypocritical because they wanted the patents, then railed against them is intellectually dishonest. Google's extremely obvious goal is to protect itself and its products from the abuses of the patent system. For Gruber to pooh-pooh their actions like that is effectively a means of condoning those patents - and software patents as a whole - as legitimate and worth protecting. I'll guarantee you that if it were Google holding the patent gun to Apple's head, and Apple were to post a similar PR statement after a failed bid to acquire said patents, he wouldn't be singing the same tune.
- tomerico 15y ago
  The implication is that these are legitimate, unassailable patents that Google has ripped off in some nefarious scheme to steal Apple's good ol' homegrown American hard work I would argue that android "borrowed" a lot from Apple, and that the iPhone was truly innovative in many ways. The question whether they copied too much, or whether Apple's idea were innovative in the first place is what the Patent system is trying to answer. There is little doubt the current patent system is a big mess. But I see opposing the idea software patents in the same light as opposing patents in general. It is likely that allowing companies to copy everything is good for consumers (at least in the short term), and increases competition. The question is where you put the line, for example - if Android was an exact copy of iOS, would you still say that it should be permitted?

petervandijck 15y ago

Amen. EVERYONE violates patents when writing software, even a simple web app. Be sure of it. The best defense (I've been told by laywers) is NOT to look up possible patents, so at least you can say you didn't know if you ever get sued. It's a strange world. Google is totally doing the right thing.

technoslut 15y ago

I don't think that Gruber was making a case for software patents. He has said in the past that he doesn't believe in them. His argument seemed to be that instead of Google lobbying to rid the world of software patents, they seemed to be playing the same game as MS, Apple & Oracle by bidding on the Nortel patents. It doesn't help Google's case that they're an investor in Intellectual Ventures as well. He makes an interesting point that if software patents are valid then why should these other companies allow Google to use it and give away Android for free to undermine their own business. It's all the more reason that the patent system needs to be reformed but it will never happen because there are too many powerful people involved that don't want to see it happen.

hn_decay 15y ago
I don't think that Gruber was making a case for software patents. But he was. He is arguing that only a small handful of patents -- those used to attack Apple and/or app store developers -- are the problem with the patent system. That is directly in the section quoted. His argument seemed to be that instead of Google lobbying to rid the world of software patents, they seemed to be playing the same game as MS, Apple & Oracle by bidding on the Nortel patents. Google is essentially the bitch of the patent world right now, simply because they're a younger company and a land claim occurred. They can both appeal for changes -- which that very blog entry does in droves -- while preparing for the reality that nothing is going to change overnight. Google will likely acquire a lot of ammunition (the IBM purchase puts them in a very interesting position relative to Oracle, threatening Oracle's entire platform), make life painful for its competitors, and then will be in a position to call for change without everyone declaring, as they are now, that it is merely convenience.
- kenjackson 15y ago
  Google is essentially the bitch of the patent world right now, simply because they're a younger company and a land claim occurred. I think the real problem with Google is they're using open source technology. This makes yout a lot more susceptible to patent lawsuits. Back when I used to control patent budgets one of our rules was that things we patented had to be discoverable. That is, if someone infringed, but it was hard to prove, it wasn't worth spending the money on a patent. Just keep it a trade secret. With Android everything is available by just looking at the source code repository. With iOS, WebOS, WP, and RIM, you have to do a fair bit more sleuthing to see if they're actually infringing.

shabble 15y ago

I'll give a cookie to the first person to find me a patent that Markdown infringes :p