3 ms·

First of all, these patent purchase articles pinning Apple and Microsoft as the bad guy and Google and Android as the good guy are getting ridiculous. Google s

First of all, these patent purchase articles pinning Apple and Microsoft as the bad guy and Google and Android as the good guy are getting ridiculous. Google spent $12 billion dollars to buy Motorola for their patents. Google did NOT invent anything Motorola has done. They BOUGHT Moto and their patents. So, now Microsoft and Apple are buying patents and they're the bad guys for doing so? Just because Google talks about how evil the patent system is doesn't mean their some kind of white knight for buying "defensive" patents. None of this would be a problem if Google actually had been building and inventing their own stuff for the last decade in the mobile space, instead they bought Android and got a bunch of handset makers to use it. Then they bought Moto for patents. Google refused to license Java from Sun, they didn't patent their own innovations early enough and they took good ideas from Apple and Apple happens to have patents on some of them. Google has enough money to survive this so called "patent war", but most of this could easily be avoided if Google just invented and patented their own stuff instead of trying to copy and use other people's ideas an inventions without paying a reasonable fee to use them. It's not like Google couldn't afford to license Java and various patents from Apple, Microsoft, Kodak, Nortel, etc... I realize as an engineer spending millions on a patent or license agreement seems ridiculous, but when your company has billions, you look like a cheapskate by trying to weasel out of licensing technology.

Goronmon 14y ago
So, now Microsoft and Apple are buying patents and they're the bad guys for doing so? Microsoft and Apple use patents to bring forth lengthy and costly lawsuits in an attempt to hurt their competitors. I'd say that's a lot worse than the act of buying up a company for patents in and of itself. Google has enough money to survive this so called "patent war", but most of this could easily be avoided if Google just invented and patented their own stuff instead of trying to copy and use other people's ideas an inventions without paying a reasonable fee to use them. It's not like Google couldn't afford to license Java and various patents from Apple, Microsoft, Kodak, Nortel, etc... You don't have "enough money" if you give it away to anyone with their hands out. As a software developer, I disagree that I should have to pay to "license" an idea that I had, that someone else just happened to come up with before me. Or that it is expected that I should try to patent as many of my "ideas" as possible so I can attempt to milk other people for money down the line.
bryanlarsen 14y ago
There's a big difference between Rockstar's purchase of Nortel's patents and Google's purchase of Motorola's patents. Rockstar is an NPE (non-practising entity, aka patent troll). If Google were to assert its Motorola patents, they can be hit with counter-suits. Rockstar as an NPE cannot, and thus can be much more aggressive with enforcement. It's whole raison d'etre is to pursue patent claims, so of course it's going to be.
notatoad 14y ago
Your comment only makes sense if we accept the assertion that most of the patents in question are for real inventions, and not for trivial design decisions that never should have been patentable in the first place.

Goronmon 14y ago

So, now Microsoft and Apple are buying patents and they're the bad guys for doing so? Microsoft and Apple use patents to bring forth lengthy and costly lawsuits in an attempt to hurt their competitors. I'd say that's a lot worse than the act of buying up a company for patents in and of itself. Google has enough money to survive this so called "patent war", but most of this could easily be avoided if Google just invented and patented their own stuff instead of trying to copy and use other people's ideas an inventions without paying a reasonable fee to use them. It's not like Google couldn't afford to license Java and various patents from Apple, Microsoft, Kodak, Nortel, etc... You don't have "enough money" if you give it away to anyone with their hands out. As a software developer, I disagree that I should have to pay to "license" an idea that I had, that someone else just happened to come up with before me. Or that it is expected that I should try to patent as many of my "ideas" as possible so I can attempt to milk other people for money down the line.

bryanlarsen 14y ago

There's a big difference between Rockstar's purchase of Nortel's patents and Google's purchase of Motorola's patents. Rockstar is an NPE (non-practising entity, aka patent troll). If Google were to assert its Motorola patents, they can be hit with counter-suits. Rockstar as an NPE cannot, and thus can be much more aggressive with enforcement. It's whole raison d'etre is to pursue patent claims, so of course it's going to be.

notatoad 14y ago

Your comment only makes sense if we accept the assertion that most of the patents in question are for real inventions, and not for trivial design decisions that never should have been patentable in the first place.