3 ms·

I doubt the little guy acquiring patents at behest of some corporate initiative from executives actually necessarily gets told the real reason. It would leave

by cma 5y ago

I doubt the little guy acquiring patents at behest of some corporate initiative from executives actually necessarily gets told the real reason. It would leave an paper trail for antitrust. "Would give you a better negotiating position if you were sued" is the exact kind of generic motivation you'd want on something that's real purposes could look worse in an antitrust trial. Especially in light of stuff like "Google training documents advise avoiding monopoly language": https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/7/21358441/google-alphabet-training-documents-antitrust-search-legal https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/7/21358441/google-alphabet-t...

gowld 5y ago
The entire point of the patent system is to provide a legal monopoly, as written in the Constitution. It's not a dirty secret.
- cma 5y ago
  A limited time monopoly on an invention. But antitrust laws are allowed to break up stuff with too much power if they engage in certain practices, and this can split up a patent portfolio amongst the parts.
AlbertCory 5y ago
You and gota both need to read the literature on patent strategy in maturing markets. This is well-known and informed everyone's strategy in the 2010 era, Google's and Microsoft's. The literature says that in mature markets, the major players all have cross-licensing agreements sharing their giant patent portfolios, shutting out the minor players. They form an oligarchy, in other words. I may be a few years behind, having been retired for a few years, but I don't think this has actually happened. It's possible that Google and Apple and Microsoft really do have cross-licenses now, but I kinda doubt it. It would be too complicated to negotiate. What they have is mutually assured destruction.
- webmaven 5y ago
  The difficulty of negotiating cross licensing deals has led to the creation of large patent pools like the Open Invention Network and Allied Security Trust.

by cma 5y ago

gowld 5y ago

The entire point of the patent system is to provide a legal monopoly, as written in the Constitution. It's not a dirty secret.

cma 5y ago
A limited time monopoly on an invention. But antitrust laws are allowed to break up stuff with too much power if they engage in certain practices, and this can split up a patent portfolio amongst the parts.

AlbertCory 5y ago

You and gota both need to read the literature on patent strategy in maturing markets. This is well-known and informed everyone's strategy in the 2010 era, Google's and Microsoft's. The literature says that in mature markets, the major players all have cross-licensing agreements sharing their giant patent portfolios, shutting out the minor players. They form an oligarchy, in other words. I may be a few years behind, having been retired for a few years, but I don't think this has actually happened. It's possible that Google and Apple and Microsoft really do have cross-licenses now, but I kinda doubt it. It would be too complicated to negotiate. What they have is mutually assured destruction.

webmaven 5y ago
The difficulty of negotiating cross licensing deals has led to the creation of large patent pools like the Open Invention Network and Allied Security Trust.