4 ms·

By now the blogosphere, twitterverse, and even mainstream media is abuzz with the absurd decision that Yahoo has made to sue Facebook over ten software patents

by grellas 15y ago

By now the blogosphere, twitterverse, and even mainstream media is abuzz with the absurd decision that Yahoo has made to sue Facebook over ten software patents with the assertion that Facebook’s entire business is based on Yahoo’s patented inventions. What is the potentially depressive effect on Facebook's IPO price come this May (or whenever) if it has a lawsuit hanging over it claiming that its entire business model is based on Yahoo's patented inventions and that it would face a ruinous liability should Yahoo prevail? I suppose the timing could be coincidental but I doubt it. After all, the problem for Facebook can easily go away if it is just willing to be "reasonable" in resolving this quickly. Truly a new low in patent trolling.

jpdoctor 15y ago
> I suppose the timing could be coincidental but I doubt it. I don't. FB is much more vulnerable now than after the IPO shares have been sold. (That probably translates to a bigger settlement.)
- chc 15y ago
  That's what grellas was saying — he doubts the timing is a coincidence.
  - jpdoctor 15y ago
    Sorry, I was snarking: I don't doubt the timing at all. I also won't be surprised if other lawsuits materialize soon. There's a lot of money in FB, and if they don't have good patent protection, then it's open season.
    - recursive 15y ago
      So if you don't doubt the timing is a coincidence, that would mean you think it is a coincidence?
      - jpdoctor 15y ago
        No, it means there's no doubt. I in fact believe the opposite of what you wrote wrt it being a coincidence. And I don't doubt it. Got it now?
        recursive 15y ago
        I understand your intention. But you are using the word differently from most people understand it. If you are convinced that something is not true, most people would say that you doubt that thing a lot. I'm not trying to stir up an argument, just explain why people seem to be having problems with your statement.
ChuckMcM 15y ago
Why mess with a winning strategy, see this quote: Google and Yahoo settled the '361 patent dispute in August 2004. Google disclosed the settlement in an SEC filing just before its initial public offering (IPO). The relevant excerpt from Google's SEC filing states: Overture will dismiss its patent lawsuit against us and has granted us a fully-paid, perpetual license to the patent that was the subject of the lawsuit and several related patent applications held by Overture. The parties also mutually released any claims against each other concerning the warrant dispute. In connection with the settlement of these two disputes, we issued to Yahoo 2,700,000 shares of Class A common stock. From this article: http://www.techuser.net/gcoverup.html http://www.techuser.net/gcoverup.html Of course the case isn't as strong this time, but it is a period of time when a troll has more than the usual leverage on the victim.

by grellas 15y ago

jpdoctor 15y ago

> I suppose the timing could be coincidental but I doubt it. I don't. FB is much more vulnerable now than after the IPO shares have been sold. (That probably translates to a bigger settlement.)

chc 15y ago
That's what grellas was saying — he doubts the timing is a coincidence.
- jpdoctor 15y ago
  Sorry, I was snarking: I don't doubt the timing at all. I also won't be surprised if other lawsuits materialize soon. There's a lot of money in FB, and if they don't have good patent protection, then it's open season.
  - recursive 15y ago
    So if you don't doubt the timing is a coincidence, that would mean you think it is a coincidence?
    - jpdoctor 15y ago
      No, it means there's no doubt. I in fact believe the opposite of what you wrote wrt it being a coincidence. And I don't doubt it. Got it now?
      - recursive 15y ago
        I understand your intention. But you are using the word differently from most people understand it. If you are convinced that something is not true, most people would say that you doubt that thing a lot. I'm not trying to stir up an argument, just explain why people seem to be having problems with your statement.

ChuckMcM 15y ago

Why mess with a winning strategy, see this quote: Google and Yahoo settled the '361 patent dispute in August 2004. Google disclosed the settlement in an SEC filing just before its initial public offering (IPO). The relevant excerpt from Google's SEC filing states: Overture will dismiss its patent lawsuit against us and has granted us a fully-paid, perpetual license to the patent that was the subject of the lawsuit and several related patent applications held by Overture. The parties also mutually released any claims against each other concerning the warrant dispute. In connection with the settlement of these two disputes, we issued to Yahoo 2,700,000 shares of Class A common stock. From this article: http://www.techuser.net/gcoverup.html http://www.techuser.net/gcoverup.html Of course the case isn't as strong this time, but it is a period of time when a troll has more than the usual leverage on the victim.